Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/seta

Original article

A multi-energy scheduling strategy for orderly charging and discharging of

electric vehicles based on multi-objective particle swarm optimization
Ning Wang *, Bo Li , Yan Duan , Shengling Jia
School of Automotive Studies, Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper, a multi-energy scheduling model based on the ordered charging and discharging of EVs in typical
Electric vehicle urban residential areas is established, and the photovoltaic system is introduced into the model. To improve
Ordered charging models with single objective in previous research, the minimum variance of total power load and the minimum
Multi-energy scheduling
scheduling cost are taken as optimization objectives of the model, and the multi-objective particle swarm
Photovoltaic
optimization algorithm is used to solve the problem. To reduce the gap between theoretical results and practical
Multi-objective particle swarm optimization
application, the actual power load data of a distribution area in Shanghai in spring and summer is taken, and in
the case of different number of EVs and weather conditions, the multi-energy scheduling system is simulated. The
results show that: 1) The total power load of the area adopting the scheduling algorithm is significantly less than
that of the area with disordered charging, where the growth rate of peak electricity consumption can be reduced
by up to 127.2%; 2) With the increase of the number of EVs participating in the scheduling, the profitability of
the system increases significantly. When 70 EVs participate in dispatching, the profit is up to 150% higher than
that of 10 EVs.

Introduction
With the dual pressure of energy and environmental protection,
electric vehicles (EVs), which have great clean and environmental
benefits, develop rapidly all over the world. Due to the intermittency,
randomness, and uncertainty of EVs, if a large scale of EVs are charged in
a disordered way (randomly connected to the power grid for charging),
the stability of the grid will be affected, and it will result in the super­
position of peaks, which may threat the operation of the grid [1,2].
Therefore, an ordered charging control strategy of EVs can reduce the
peak-to-valley difference of the load caused by disordered charging
control [3].
Scheduling strategies can be divided into direct control and indirect
control. The direct control is based on the control mode that all or part of
the charging behavior of EVs is controlled by the power grid or the third
party, and can be subdivided into time control [4] and space control [5].
The indirect control guides the charging behavior of EVs through the
electricity price mechanism. The grid or the third party does not directly
interfere with the charging behavior of users, and users make decisions
by themselves and achieve ordered charging by responding to the
electricity price. Electricity price mechanism can be divided into static
pricing and dynamic pricing, and the dynamic pricing is flexible and
adaptive [6,7].
EVs can act as energy storage units for integration of distributed
energy or renewable energy to power grid [8]. The vehicle-to-grid (V2G)
is proposed to integrate EVs into the grid, and under the V2G scenario,
EVs are considered as a distributed generation/storage system and a
dynamic flexible load that could be utilized to balance the electricity
supply and demand [9]. Furthermore, achieving solutions to the envi­
ronmental problems that we face today requires long term actions for
sustainable development, and renewable energy resources appear to be
among the most effective solutions [10]. Shafie-Khah et al. [11]
analyzed the virtual power market with renewable energy and EVs, and
proposed a charging planning model based on multi-agent system
(MAS). A V2G scheduling strategy in the microgrid with “source and
load” characteristics was discussed [12]. The uncertainty of photovol­
taic (PV) and wind power generation was considered in the study, and a
two-stage model to reduce the grid operation cost and pollutant emis­
sion was established. Kam and Sark [13] proposed a model to study the
increase of self-consumption of PV power through smart charging of EVs
and V2G technology. They conducted a one-year simulation using data
for PV power, EV usage, and electricity demand.
At present, there are many studies on power-grid peak dispatching.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: wangning@tongji.edu.cn (N. Wang), 1425024368@qq.com (B. Li), 2031596@tongji.edu.cn (Y. Duan), jslhrb@163.com (S. Jia).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101037
Received 2 September 2020; Received in revised form 29 December 2020; Accepted 21 January 2021
Available online 11 February 2021
2213-1388/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N. Wang et al.
Nomenclature
P = {1, ⋯, t⋯T} The scheduling period of a day is divided into T =
96 time periods with length of dt, assuming that dt = 15
minutes
V = {1, ⋯, k⋯K} Set of number of EVs
C = {1, ⋯, i⋯N} Set of number of commuter vehicles, C∊V
D = {1, ⋯, j⋯M} Set of number of non-commuter vehicles, D∊V
ptk Charging or discharging power of the vehicle k at time t,
kW
( )
Q ptk Variance of the power load in one day
( )
F ptk Scheduling cost in one day, Yuan
ptsystem Total power of scheduling system at time t, kW
μ Mean value of the power load in one day, kW
costbuyt Cost of purchasing electricity or connecting grid from
power grid corporation in period t, Yuan
costEV t Discharge cost paid by the scheduling system operator to
EVs owners in period t, Yuan
Wcom,i Charging demands of commuter vehicle i
Wdcom,j Charging demands of non-commuter vehicle j
In terms of optimization, the operation cost minimization, power pur­
chase cost minimization, or social benefit maximization are usually
taken as the objective function in the traditional peak load dispatching
system [14]. In terms of EV peak scheduling, Lu et al. [15] took the
connected EV battery as an energy storage device, and used the
improved particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm to solve the
optimal scheduling scheme. Kordkheili and Mohamadi [16] proposed a
real-time schedulable capacity evaluation method for EVs based on
customer satisfaction, battery life, and capacity. In order to solve the
peak charging demand of EVs in residential areas, Xu et al. [17] pro­
posed a hierarchical coordinated charging framework for plug-in elec­
tric vehicles (PEVs,) which can achieve electricity cost minimization and
system peak load controlling. The framework completes scheduling
through allocating the charging power, and does not take ordered
charging and discharging of EVs into account. Also, Jian el al. [18]
discussed a scenario of V2G implementation within regional smart grids
and the objective is to minimize the overall load variance, which ignored
the participation of the scheduling system operator.
Some of the above studies [11,17,18] take PEVs as the energy storage
device, which have difference from EVs, and these works take no
Fig. 1. Scope of the multi-energy scheduling system.
2
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037
ptres Basic power load of residents in the LPTA at time t, kW
ptpv Photovoltaic power at time t, kW
pricetgrid Sales price of power grid at time t, Yuan/kWh.
pricetcomgrid Subsidized price of grid connection at time t, Yuan/kWh
pricetcostEV Discharge price of EVs at time t, Yuan/kWh
maxpdch Maximum discharge power of EVs, kW
maxpch Maximum charge power of EVs, kW
SOCtk State of charge of vehicle k
tleave Departure time of commuter vehicles from scheduling
system
tre Settlement time of non-commuter vehicles
ddi Driving distance of commuter vehicle i in one day, km
Wkm Power consumption of EVs per 100 km, kWh/100 km
Ek Total electricity of vehicle k, kWh.
SOCch Charging threshold of non-commuter vehicles
dcom
minSOCtk Minimum SOC of vehicle k in scheduling system
Smax Capacity of distribution transformer in the area
cosφ Power factor
renewable energy into consideration. Other studies [12,13,15,16] deal
with the energy scheduling of EVs in presence of wind or PV power in
microgrids. However, most of the studies only take one objective for the
optimization and the studied microgrids are based on simulation.
Furthermore, some studies [1,2,3] take centralized charging stations as
the basis of the system, or take a large-scale of EVs as the schedulable
objects from a macro perspective, in which the orientation and refine­
ment of the station area, main service objects and charging scenes are
insufficient, resulting in differences between the theoretical results and
the practical application. Therefore, it is necessary to study the sched­
uling strategy of EVs in specific application scenarios in order to form a
more practical ordered charging and discharging scheduling strategy.
In this paper, the low-voltage substation area in a typical urban
residential area is taken as the application scenario, and a multi-energy
scheduling strategy including EVs, distributed energy, and grid load is
constructed. Also, the PV system is introduced into the model. The
minimum variance of total power load and the maximum dispatching
cost are taken as the main optimization objectives of the model, and
multi-objective particle swarm optimization (MOPSO) algorithm, which
has the advantages of few adjustable parameters, easy implementation,
N. Wang et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

Fig. 2. Structure of the multi-energy scheduling system.

fast convergence speed, and strong optimization capability, is used to
solve the problem. Based on the actual power load in spring and summer
in a certain area of Jiading District, Shanghai, the charging and dis­
charging scheduling system is simulated under different number of EVs
and different weather conditions. In the end, the operation of the
scheduling system and the profitability of the operator are analyzed. The
objectives and contributions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
1) A multi-energy scheduling strategy including EVs, distributed energy,
and grid load, which can reduce the adverse effects of EVs connected to
the power grid, is constructed; 2) From the perspective of scheduling
operators, the mode and structure of scheduling system, which can be
applied in practice and have certain profitability, is established.
The paper is organized as follows. The objective functions and the
constraints of the multi-objective optimization model and MOPSO al­
gorithm are introduced in Section 2. Case studies is employed in Section
3 to simulate ordered charging and discharging scheduling of EVs in the
system. Conclusions are drawn in Section 4.
Material and methods
A residential area is divided into distributed power load units by the
Low-voltage Power Transformer Area (LPTA). The power load of each
LPTA is limited by the capacity of distribution transformers and directly
affects the scheduling management of power generation and distribution
in the power grid. The LPTA mentioned above is what we focus and the
scope of the multi-energy scheduling system is shown in Fig. 1. The
scheduling system is constructed to satisfy the increasing charging de­
mand of EVs in the distribution area through the charging demand
scheduling. In addition, the distributed PV system is also introduced to
supplement residential electricity demand and EVs charging demand.
The structure of the multi-energy scheduling system is shown in Fig. 2.
charging can be reduced. For SSO, they provide charging services to
users through V2G equipment and PV system, and control the system to
improve the profitability. The power grid corporation, as a power pro­
vider, is responsible for the demand for charging and residential power
demand, and stabilizing the load is the main purpose. The relationship of
service and remuneration among participants of the multi-energy
scheduling system is shown in Fig. 3. Therefore, in the system with
multiple participants, multi-objective functions need to be constructed
to balance the interests of each participant.
Focus on the main demands of operation enterprises, the minimum
scheduling cost and the minimum variance of power load in the whole
scheduling system are taken as the optimization objectives. It should be
noted that the minimum charging cost of EVs is not taken as the opti­
mization objective because the cost will be reduced due to the partici­
pation of V2G.
- the mean value of power load is given by:
∑T
(pt + ptsystem )
μ = t=1 res (1)
T
- the total power is given by:

Multi-objective optimization model

The participants involved in the multi-energy scheduling system

include EV owners (who are also users in the LPTA consuming electric
energy), the scheduling system operator (SSO, the controller of energy
dispatch), and the power grid corporation. The main related equipment
includes EVs, V2G equipment, PV system, power distribution network
(Low-voltage Power Transformer), etc. For EV owners, they will be
willing to participate in the energy scheduling system if the cost of Fig. 3. Relationship of service and remuneration among participants.

3
N. Wang et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

∑
K
( ) purpose of SSO is to make profits, so they need to reduce the scheduling
ptsystem = ptk − ptpv (2) cost, which includes the cost of purchasing electricity (connecting grid)
and the discharging cost, as shown in (6). The operator purchases
k=1

- when ptsystem ≥ 0, it indicates that the operator needs to purchase electricity from the power grid corporation, and pays discharging cost to
electricity from the power grid corporation; when ptsystem < 0, it indicates some EV owners for participating in the discharging of the scheduling
that the operator can supply extra electricity to the power grid reversely system.
(connect to grid, use for basic power load of residents) from photovoltaic The constraints are as follows:
system or EVs: ptk ∊[− maxpdch , maxpch ] (7)
⎧ t
⎪ 24 × pricetgrid × psystem
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ , ptsystem ≥ 0 ptk = 0 (8)
T
t
costbuy = (3)
⎪
⎪
⎪
t
24 × pricetcomgrid × psystem SOCt=t t=min
com,i = SOC com,i , i∊C
leave
(9)
⎪
⎩ t
, psystem < 0
T
SOCt=t t=min
dcom,j = SOC dcom,j , j∊D
re
(10)
- the discharge cost is given by:
⃒∑K [ ]⃒ ∫ T
⃒ t ⃒ × 24 × pricet ddi × Wkm
costEV t = k=1 min(0, pk ) costEV
(4) Wcom,i = pti dt = × 100%, i∊C (11)
T t=1 100 × Ei

Using the above notations, the model is formulated as follows: ∫

⎧
⎨ 0, SOCt=t ch
dcom,j ≥ SOC dcom
T re

∑T ( t )2 Wdcom,j = ptj = , j∊D (12)

t ⎩ (1 − SOCt=t t=tre ch
dcom,j ) × Ej , SOC dcom,j < SOCdcom
t=1 pres + psystem − μ
re
( t) t=1
minQ pk = (5)
T [ ]
SOCtk ∊ minSOCtk , 1 (13)
( ) ∑
T
minF pk = t t t
(costbuy + costEV ) (6)
t=1
0 ≤ ptres + ptsystem ≤ Smax × cosφ (14)

The variance of the LPTA load is used to measure the load fluctuation The basic constraints of the scheduling system are the operation
in a day, and the smaller the variance is, the more stable the power load mode constraints of PV system, charging demand constraints of EVs, and
is. The load in the LPTA includes PV system, charging and discharging of constraints of transformer capacity. In addition, some factors such as
EVs, and basic power load of residents, as shown in (5). The main users’ behavior and the change of SOC should be considered to establish

Fig. 4. Flow-Chart of the MOPSO algorithm.

4
N. Wang et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

corresponding constraints. Eq. (7) limits the range of charging and dis­ Table 1
charging power of EVs. The charging and discharging power of EVs is Key parameters of vehicles.
limited by whether the vehicle is connected to the scheduling system, Parameters Values
and if the vehicle leaves the system, the constraint is shown in (8). The
ddi Conform to logarithmic normal distribution of μD = 3.20 and σD =
initial SOC of EVs in this system is assumed to obey normal distribution, 0.88 [22]
and (9) indicates that the initial SOC extracted for a commuter vehicle is tleave Conform to normal distribution of μ = 7.5, σ = 0.1 [23]
assigned to the moment when the owner drives the vehicle away from tre 8h
the residence. Eq. (10) indicates that the initial SOC extracted for a non- 50%
SOCch
dcom
commuter vehicle is assigned to the moment when the system refreshes
minSOCtk 30%
the information of non-commuter vehicles and makes settlements of
maxpch 7 kW
transacted electricity quantity (8:00 a.m. every day). The charging de­
maxpdch − 7kW
mand of a commuter vehicle is the electricity consumption caused by
Wkm 15kWh/100 km
commuting in one day, as shown in (11). If the initial SOC of a non-
Ek 45kWh
commuter vehicle is less than the charging threshold (the value of
SOC for judging whether charging is needed), the charging demand is
the difference between the full charge and the initial charge, otherwise
the charging demand is 0, as shown in (12). Eq. (13) limits the SOC of Table 2
EVs. The total power of the whole system including the basic power load Electricity price of Shanghai residents (Yuan/kWh) [24].
at each moment should be greater than 0 and should not exceed the Electricity consumption (kWh/unit*year) 0-3120 3120-4800 Over 4800
distribution transformer capacity of the area, and the influence of power 6:00–22:00 0.617 0.677 0.977
factor on the actual capacity of the transformer should be considered, as 22:00–6:00(+1) 0.307 0.337 0.487
shown in (14).

Multi-objective particle swarm optimization Table 3

Parameter values in MOPSO algorithm.
As a typical intelligence optimization algorithm, particle swarm Parameters Values
optimization (PSO) stems from the behavior simulation of birds foraging
Population size (nPop) 100
[19]. Each bird continuously adjusts its own flight speed and direction to
Capacity of external memory (nRep) 50
fly to optimal position according to the distance to destination and
Maximum number of iterations (MaxIt) 200
shared information of the whole bird flock, which guide the whole flock
Inertia weight (ω) 1
to move to the possible optimal position. Eq. (15) and Eq. (16) shows the
Individual learning factor (c1 ) 2
way to iteratively update the position and velocity of particles in the
Population learning factor (c2 ) 2
algorithm.
Initial velocity of particles (Vel) 0
( )
vij (t) = ωvij (t − 1) + c1 r1 pbestij t − 1 − xij t − 1 maxpch − maxpdch 1.4 kW
Maximum velocity particle (VelMax = )
10
( ) Expansion coefficient of hypercube space (non-dominated solution 0.1
+ c2 r2 gbestj (t − 1) − xij (t − 1) (15) external memory)(α)
The number of grids in each dimension of hypercube space (non- 10
xij t = xij t − 1 + vij (t) (16) dominated solution external memory)(nGrid)

where, vij(t) is the velocity component of particle i in j dimension at time

t (when it evolves to the t generation). xij(t) is the position component of
particle i in j dimension at time t. pbestij(t) is the individual optimal
position component of particlei in j dimension at timet. gbestj(t) is the
optimal position component of the population in j dimension at time t. ω
is the inertia weight, c1, c2 are learning factors, and r1, r2 are random
numbers between zero and one.
In the multi-objective particle swarm optimization (MOPSO) prob­
lem, the optimization objective contains several sub-objectives, which
are contradictory. Different sub-objectives have different judgment
criteria, so it is difficult to use a certain criterion to determine whether
the position of a particle is the optimal position [20]. For example, the
position of a particle is the best (optimal position) for a sub-objective,
but it may difficult be accepted by the other sub-objectives, which is
the essential difference between multi-objective optimization and
single-objective optimization. The solution of multi-objective optimi­
zation problem is a set of independent solutions, which is called Pareto
Front [21], and Pareto Front is defined as follows:
A vector u = [u1 , u2 , ..., uM ] is set to dominate a vector v =
[v1 , v2 , ..., vM ], and for a minimization problem, only if
∀i ∈ {1, 2, ..., M}, ui ≤ vi ⋁∃i ∈ {1, 2, ..., M}, ui < vi (17)
where, M is the dimension of the objective space (i.e. the number of sub-
objectives).
A solution u ∈ U, where U is the universe, is the Pareto Optimal only
if there exists no other solution v ∈ U. Solutions of u are called non-
dominated solutions, and the set of all the non-dominated solutions
constitutes the Pareto Front or non-dominated set. In order to find
Pareto Front, the flow of MOPSO algorithm is shown in Fig. 4.
Results and discussion
Taking a distribution area in Shanghai as an example, a multi-energy
scheduling model is established. The rated capacity of the transformer is
500KVA, which is suitable for 136 households, and the area is equipped
with 115 parking spaces.
Based on the number of households and parking spaces in the dis­
tribution area, it is assumed that the number of EVs participating in the
scheduling system are 10, 30, 50, and 70 respectively, and the propor­
tion of commuter vehicles is 0.8, and the proportion of non-commuter
vehicles is 0.2. The time of non-commuter vehicles accessing the sys­
tem is assumed to be 24 h. The key parameters of vehicles used in the
model are assigned as follows:
The key parameters of price used in the model are assigned in
Table 1.
pricetgrid : Refer to residential electricity price, as shown in Table 2.
pricetcomgrid : 0.3 Yuan/kWh. Refer to the current subsidy price of
photovoltaic power generation in Shanghai.
pricetcostEV : 0.1 Yuan/kWh. The EVs will discharge if participating in
the dispatching, and this part of the electricity will be compensated by
the dispatching operator, which the user does not need to pay for.

5
N. Wang et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

Fig. 5. Results of running MOPSO algorithm (Pareto Front).

Fig. 6. Comparison of peak load in different conditions.

6
N. Wang et al.
Parameter values in MOPSO algorithm are shown in Table 3. It is
found that when 0.8 < ω < 1.2, the performance of the algorithm is the
best, its ability to find the global optimal solution is higher, and it has
moderate convergence speed [25]. Therefore, ω is chosen to be 1.
Furthermore, Kennedy et al. [26] suggested that c1 and c2 should be set
to 2, so that the individual cognition and population part of particles can
be coordinated and balanced. Meanwhile, the particle velocity needs to
be limited to adjust the step size of particle search [26], and when the
search space is [− xmax , xmax ], the maximum velocity particle is usually
set to be kxmax , where k∊[0.1, 1].
Results of running MOPSO algorithm
In Fig. 5, it shows that the operation results of the algorithm under
different number of EVs, and the output of PV system on sunny summer
working days are taken as the input of the algorithm. The Pareto Front in
the graph is uniformly distributed in the corresponding solution space. It
can be seen that with the increase of the load variance, scheduling cost
increases, which reflects the contradiction between different objective
functions in multi-objective optimization problems, and the results are
acceptable. At the same time, with the increase of EVs participating in
the scheduling system, the load variance and scheduling cost corre­
sponding to Pareto Front found by the algorithm increase obviously. The
increase of load variance is mainly due to the rigid growth of charging
demand caused by the increase of EVs. Therefore, the dispersion degree
of power load in the scheduling system increases to some extent, but it is
completely within the acceptable range. The increase of charging de­
mand makes the electricity purchase cost and vehicle discharge cost
increase, but it also brings more charging revenue, so its profitability
still increases.
Optimal scheme selection
Since the particles in MOPSO algorithm find non-dominated solu­
tions (Pareto front formed by “X” in Fig. 5), after obtaining the solution
sets, the optimal scheme can be selected in these non-dominated solu­
tion sets according to the intention and inclination of decision makers.
The operation subject of the scheduling system is SSO, whose main
purpose is to reduce the scheduling cost and increase profitability. At the
same time, due to the limitation of distribution network capacity, the
load variance should not be too large. Therefore, the principle of
selecting the optimal scheme is to select the scheme with the lowest
scheduling cost within the acceptable range of load variance in the
distribution area.
Operation analysis of scheduling system
As shown in Fig. 6, the peak load of different cases is compared. In
the case of disordered charging, the peak value of total load increases
linearly with the increase of EVs. In contrast, the peak value of the
system adopting scheduling algorithm dose not significantly increase. As
shown in the left side of Fig. 6, when the number of EVs in the scheduling
system is 10 and 30, the peak value of the total power load is less than
the peak value of the basic power load in the area (95.5 kW), which are
86.5 kW and 91.4 kW respectively (taking sunny days as an example).
The participation of EVs reduces the total power load of the area by 9.4%
and 4.3%, which indicates that the charging demand of a certain number
of EVs is not only does not increase the peak value of total power load,
but also has the effect of peak shaving. When the number of EVs in­
creases to 50 and 70, the peak value of total power load in the area
increases to 103.7 kW and 131.0 kW and the peak value of power con­
sumption in the area increases by 8.6% and 46.7% respectively. How­
ever, compared with the growth rate of 121.9% and 173.9% in the case
of disordered charging with the same number of EVs, the growth rate is
smaller, which indicates that the scheduling system has a significant
effect on stabilizing the total power load in the area. In addition, it can
7
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037
Table 4
Price standard of scheduling system.
Scheduling Project Price (Yuan/kWh)
expenditure and profit
Expenditure Discharge cost of EVs participating 0.1
in dispatching
Electricity purchase cost of Valley:0.307
dispatching system Peak:0.617
Revenue EV charging revenue 1.0
Subsidy for grid-connected 0.3
photovoltaic power generation
Subsidy for grid connection of EV Valley:0.307
surplus electricity Peak:0.617
Subsidy for photovoltaic power 0.42
generation
be seen that the difference of PV system in sunny days and rainy days has
little impact on stabilizing charging demand of scheduling system and
the basic power load of the area.
Profitability analysis of scheduling system
Table 4 shows the price standard of each part of expenditure and
income based on the electricity price and relevant policies in Shanghai.
Because the EV owners will get extra discharge cost when participating
in the scheduling, the actual charging price paid by users will be further
reduced, which helps to improve the acceptance of EV owners to connect
EVs to the system to participate in scheduling.
According to the price standard in Table 4, the expenditure and
revenue of different number of EVs in sunny and rainy days are calcu­
lated respectively, as shown in Table 5. First of all, it needs to be clear
that according to the scheduling model, the charging demand of EVs will
not change with the change of weather. Therefore, whether in sunny or
rainy days, the charging revenue of EVs is the same and increases with
the increase of the number of EVs. Secondly, the PV system subsidy is
determined by the total photovoltaic power generation under different
weather conditions, and it does not change with the number of EVs.
From the expenditure, it can be seen that the discharging cost of EVs
participating in scheduling increases with the increase of EVs no matter
in sunny or rainy days, because more and more EVs are connected to the
scheduling system and the electricity quantity of charging and dis­
charging behavior will also increase, which is in line with the normal
expectation. Due to the increase of charging demand, the power pur­
chase cost of the system will also increase. In addition, due to the large
amount of PV power generation in sunny days, the electricity purchase
cost is less than that in rainy days. It can be seen from the income that
the PV grid connection subsidy decreases with the increase of EVs, but
the decline is not large, because the number of EVs and non-commuter
vehicles staying in the scheduling system during the day also in­
creases. Therefore, part of the PV power generation is stored in the non-
commuter vehicles. As a result, the grid connected power of PV de­
creases, the subsidy for EV grid connection increases, and the sum of the
two increases. It should be noted that due to the small amount of PV
power generation in cloudy and rainy days, the variation characteristics
of grid connection subsidies for PV and EV under sunny conditions are
not the same in rainy days. Furthermore, the average charging price
actually paid by users under different conditions is calculated according
to the charging cost and the discharging cost obtained by users. It is
possible for EV owners participating in scheduling to reduce the
charging cost or even benefit from discharging, which increases the
acceptance of EV owners to participate in scheduling.
For the discharge cost of EVs participating in scheduling, two sce­
narios are assumed:
Case 1: the power grid corporation bears the discharge cost of EVs
participating in scheduling.
Case 2: the SSO bears the discharge cost of EVs participating in
scheduling.
N. Wang et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

Table 5
Expenditure and revenue under different number of EVs (load of sunny & rainy in spring).
Project Weather 10 EVs 30 EVs 50 EVs 70 EVs

Expenditure (Yuan) Discharge cost of EVs participating in dispatching Sunny 22.5 52.6 95.2 145.2

Rainy 21.4 77.6 119.5 156.8

Electricity purchase cost of dispatching system Sunny 19.9 45.8 60.5 106.5
Rainy 39.5 60.5 66.9 147.0
Revenue (Yuan) Vehicle charging revenue Sunny 59.9 187.4 255.2 397.9
Rainy 59.9 187.4 255.2 397.9
Subsidy for grid-connected photovoltaic Sunny 94.8 91.3 86.1 83.8
Rainy 23.0 15.9 18.0 20.3
Subsidy for vehicle grid connection Sunny 42.5 53.3 60.6 71.1
Rainy 42.0 48.1 45.8 48.0
Subsidy for photovoltaic power generation Sunny 251.2 251.2 251.2 251.2
Rainy 70.52 70.52 70.52 70.52
1)
Average price of electricity actually paid by users (Yuan. kWh− Sunny 0.62 0.72 0.63 0.64
Rainy 0.64 0.59 0.53 0.61

Fig. 7. Expenditure and revenue with different number of EVs (load of sunny days in spring).

The total expenditure and revenue of the scheduling system under
the above two scenarios when the weather or the number of EVs is
different are shown in Figs. 7 and 8. First of all, it can be seen that in
sunny days, the PV power generation capacity is sufficient, and the
expenditure is significantly less than that in rainy days, and its revenue
is also significantly greater than that in rainy days, which shows that PV
system not only plays a positive role in stabilizing the power load of the
scheduling system, but also has a significant role in increasing the
profitability of the system. Secondly, taking Fig. 7 as an example for
further analysis, it can be seen that the expenditure and income of the
scheduling system increase with the increase of the number of EVs, but
the increase of revenue is greater than the increase of expenditure.
Therefore, the sum of revenue and expenditure shows an increasing
trend. In the case 1, in which the power grid corporation bears the
discharge cost caused by EV scheduling, the growth rate of the sum of
revenue and expenditure is significantly higher than that of case 2.
A comparison table with similar studies is shown in Table 6. The
scenario in this paper is chosen to be a residential area in Shanghai,
which is closer to the actual situation and practice compared with
charging stations, large scale EVs, or virtual microgrids. The optimiza­
tion objectives of this paper are different from these studies and MOPSO
algorithm used to solve the problem shows good performance.
Compared with genetic algorithm, the growth rate of peak electricity
consumption can be reduced by up to 127.2%, which is higher than
7.6% [1] and 26.3% [3]. Furthermore, considering the characteristics of
PV system, sunny and rainy days in spring and summer, these four
scenes are respectively taken as simulation scenes, which has practical
reference value.

8
N. Wang et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037

Fig. 8. Expenditure and revenue with different number of EVs (load of rainy days in spring).

Table 6
Comparison with similar studies.
Literature Scenario Objective Algorithm Result

Xiao et al. Large scale EVs Minimum operation cost and the minimum NSGA-II optimization The load peak and valley difference of the
[1] load curve variance algorithm system can be reduced
Eldeeb et al. PV charging station Maximize revenue and minimize battery’s Augmented The coefficients of the open circuit voltage
[2] degradation ε-constrained 2 have the most significant effect on both
algorithm objectives.
Han et al. PV charging station Minimum power sum of station, minimum Genetic algorithm The peak-to-valley difference can be
[3] cost of users, and maximum consumption of reduced and the charging cost of EV users
renewable energy can be reduced
Kam and Microgrid consists of PV installation, an Increase self-consumption of PV power Three control Self-consumption increases and demand
Sark [13] office, internet servers, three households, algorithms peaks decrease
and two EVs
Lu et al. Microgrid include PV array, wind Minimize the total cost PSO The user’s electricity costs and
[15] turbine, diesel engine, micro turbine and environmental pollution can be reduced
EV
This paper A residential area in Shanghai Minimum variance of total power load and MOPSO algorithm The total power load decreases and the
minimum scheduling cost profitability of the system increases

Conclusions
In this paper, a multi-energy scheduling model for ordered charging
and discharging of EVs is established, which is based on typical urban
residential areas to reduce the gap between the theoretical results and
the practical application. PV system is introduced into the model, and
the actual power load in spring and summer is taken as the basic input,
through the simulation, the following conclusions can be obtained:
(1) The power load of the area adopting the scheduling algorithm is
significantly less than that of the area with disordered charging, and the
scheduling algorithm has remarkable effect on stabilizing total load in
the area.
(2) In the case of increasing EVs in the scheduling system, the prof­
itability increases significantly, at the same time, if the power grid
corporation bears the discharge cost of EVs participating in scheduling,
the profitability can be further improved.
The scheduling strategy proposed in this paper has certain effec­
tiveness and reference value, but there are many limitations and defi­
ciency. Users’ sensitivity to electricity price and charging cost is not
taken into account, and the basic input of the scheduling model is based
on the current price standard in Shanghai. In future research, it needs to
introduce dynamic pricing into the scheduling model as a change factor,
which can promote users to participate in the scheduling.

9
N. Wang et al.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Ning Wang: Conceptualization, Methodology. Bo Li: Methodology,
Software, Validation. Yan Duan: Data curation, Writing - original draft.
Shengling Jia: Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This research is supported by the project of the Dynamic Relocation
Model of Electric Car sharing (kx0170020172681) funded by Central
University Basic Scientific Research Business Expenses Special Funds
(CN).
References
[1] Xiao H, Pei W, Kong L. Multi-objective optimization scheduling method for active
distribution network with large scale electric vehicles. Trans China Electrotech Soc
2017;32(S2):183–93.
[2] Eldeeb HH, Samy F, Mohammed OA. Multi-objective optimization technique for
the operation of grid tied PV powered EV charging station. Elec Power Syst Res
2018;164:201–11.
[3] Han XJ, Wei ZX, Hong ZP, Zhao S. Ordered charge control considering the
uncertainty of charging load of electric vehicles based on Markov chain. Renewable
Energy 2020;161:419–34.
[4] Moghbel M, Masoum MAS, Shahnia F. Coordinated charging of PEVs in unbalanced
residential network based on worst node voltage profile. IEEE Power & Energy
Society General Meeting; 2013. 1–5.
[5] Wang XY, Liu JY, Tang XG, Xiang Y, Ma W. Study on Coordinated Charging of
Electric Vehicle Based on Spatial Load Forecasting. Zhejiang Electric Power 2014;
002:21. 7–13.
[6] Galus MD, Andersson G. Demand Management of Grid Connected Plug-In Hybrid
Electric Vehicles (PHEV). Energy 2030 Conference; 2008. 1-8.
[7] Zhou WH, Zhong WF, Yu R. Adaptive price control method for electric vehicle
charging in smart grid. J Univ Electr Sci Technol China 2015;44(4):636–40.
[8] Bräuer S, Monhof M, Klör B, Plenter F. Residential energy storage from repurposed
electric vehicle batteries: market overview and development of a service-centered
business model. Business informatics (CBI), 2016 IEEE 18th conference on; 2016 1,
143–152.
10
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 101037
[9] Mwasilu F, Kim EK, Do TD, Jung JW. Electric vehicles and smart grid interaction: a
review on vehicle to grid and renewable energy sources integration. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2014;34:501–16.
[10] Esen H, Inalli M, Esen M. Technoeconomic appraisal of a ground source heat pump
system for a heating season in eastern Turkey. Energy Convers Manage 2006;47(9/
10):1281–97.
[11] Shafie-Khah M, Moghaddam MP, Sheikh-El-Eslami MK, Rahmani-Andebili M.
Modeling of interactions between market regulations and behavior of plug-in
electric vehicle aggregators in a virtual power market environment. Energy 2012;
40(1):139–50.
[12] Rabiee A, Sadeghi M, Aghaeic J, Heidari A. Optimal operation of microgrids
through simultaneous scheduling of electrical vehicles and responsive loads
considering wind and PV units uncertainties. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;57:
721–39.
[13] Kam MVD, Sark WV. Smart charging of electric vehicles with photovoltaic power
and vehicle-to-grid technology in a microgrid: a case study. Appl Energy 2015;152:
20–30.
[14] Xu GD, Cheng HH, Ma ZL, et al. A method to evaluate probabilistic comprehensive
benefits of joint wind power and storage system considering constraints of peak
load regulation capacity. Power Syst Technol 2015;39:2731–8.
[15] Lu X, Zhou K, Yang S. Multi-objective optimal dispatch of microgrid containing
electric vehicles. J Clean Prod 2017;165:1572–81.
[16] Kordkheili RA, Mohammadi M. Smart scheduling and economic analysis of electric
vehicles for peak load shaving considering renewable energy resources. IEEE Smart
Grid Conf 2017;2017:115–21.
[17] Xu Z, Hu Z, Song Y, Zhao W, Zhang Y. Coordination of PEVs charging across
multiple aggregators. Appl Energy 2014;136:582–9.
[18] Jian L, Zhu X, Shao Z, Niu S, Chan CC. A scenario of vehicle to grid implementation
and its double-layer optimal charging strategy for minimizing load variance within
regional smart grids. Energy Convers Manag 2014;78:508–17.
[19] Wang Z, Wang S. Grid power peak shaving and valley filling using vehicle-to-grid
systems. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2013;28:1822–9.
[20] Alvarez-Benitez JE, Everson RM, Fieldsend JE. A MOPSO Algorithm Based
Exclusively on Pareto Dominance Concepts. Evolutionary Multi-Criterion
Optimization, Third International Conference. DBLP; 2005.
[21] Fdhila R, Elloumi W, Hamdani TM. Distributed MOPSO with dynamic pareto front
driven population analysis for TSP problem. Soft Comp Pattern Recog 2015.
[22] Tian LT, Shi SHL, Jia Z. A statistical model for charging power demand of electric
vehicles. Power System Technol 2010;11:126–30.
[23] Zhang HC, Hu ZCH, Song YH, Xu ZHW, Jia L. Spatial and temporal distribution
prediction of plug-in electric vehicle charging load. Academic exchange seminar of
Power System Automation Committee; 2013. p. 13–20.
[24] National Development and Reform Commission, 2014. Notice on issues related to
electric vehicle electricity price policy.
[25] Shi YH, Eberhart RC. A modified particle swarm optimizer. Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, Piscataway; 1998. 69–73.
[26] Kenndy J, Eberhart RC. Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of IEEE
International Conference on Neural Networks; 1995. 1942-1948.