Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments

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

Original article

Optimal sizing of a grid-independent PV/diesel/pump-hydro hybrid

system: A case study in Bangladesh
Barun K. Das a, *, Mahmudul Hasan b, Fazlur Rashid c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rajshahi University of Engineering and Technology, Rajshahi 6204, Bangladesh
b
School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia
c
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409, USA

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

Keywords: This paper describes a comprehensive analysis of a hybrid energy system (HES) when satisfying the load demand
Renewable energy of an off-grid, rural and hilly community in Bangladesh. Different combinations of HES, such as PV/Pump-hydro
Diesel storage (PHS), Diesel/PHS, and PV/Diesel/Battery, are formulated, analysed, and compared using hybrid opti­
PV module
mization of multiple energy resources (HOMER) software. The system configurations, together with the size and
Pump-hydro system
selection of system components, are suitably modelled and optimised with the least cost of energy (COE), net
Emissions
present cost (NPC), and CO2 emissions. In addition, to illustrate the adaptability and the economic benefits of the
studied systems, the scalability of the system is evaluated by changing the load demand and the size of the
generator. The study is further extended to include a sensitivity analysis on the uncertain parameters in
connection with the climatic data and hardware components. Results indicate that the cost of energy for a
pumped HES with a single diesel generator is higher (0.27$/kWh) than that with two small generators (0.24
$/kWh. The energy cost for the optimised PV/Diesel/PHS system (0.27$/kWh) is found to be significantly lower
than those of both PV/PHS (0.43$/kWh) and Diesel/PHS (0.41$/kWh) options. This research identifies that the
PV/Diesel/PHS system is more cost-effective than the PV/Diesel/Battery-based hybrid system, with cost of en­
ergy at 0.34$/kWh. Results indicate that the genetic algorithm (GA) method provides cost effective and sus­
tainable solution than the HOMER software tool.

50–80% by 2050 [5]. These national and international energy exi­

gencies have prompted a search for optimal and renewable energy (RE)
Introduction
solutions to satisfy the increased load requirements in Bangladesh [6].
Although the development of Bangladesh’s power sector in recent years
Over the last decade, electricity requirements in Bangladesh have
has been remarkable (covering 90% with the grid electricity), its per
been significantly on the rise due to its rapid economic development,
capita electricity consumption is still significantly lower (382kWh/
improving living standards and large population growth with the cur­
capita) than the world’s average (3127 kWh/capita) as well as those of
rent estimate exceeding 165 million in 2019 [1–3]. Unfortunately, the
South Asian countries [7]. In addition, the effective implementation and
rural communities, especially in the hilly areas, still have no or little
configuration of the RE technologies is still far way off the commercial
electricity access in Bangladesh when they have the same rights and
dimension in Bangladesh [8]. Since the country’s economy is in transi­
deserve the same level of respect as the urban communities. To meet this
tion from the low-level to middle-level income and since the energy
growing electricity demand, the reserves of coal and natural gas are
consumption and economic development is closely interrelated, the
being exhausted at an alarming rate in Bangladesh [4]. In the global
current pace of electricity production is inadequate to satisfy its rising
perspective, a major transition to the sustainable energy solutions is
demand [1]. Moreover, the significant share of electricity generated by
already underway due mainly to a gradual decline in the availability of
either natural gas or imported furnace oil or coal contributes to the
conventional energy reserves, the need to ensure a reliable and sus­
environmental damage. In this context, environmental emissions can be
tainable energy supply, and the predicted uncertainty in the energy
significantly decreased by reducing the dependency on the conventional
prices resulting from the unpredictable disparity between demand and
fuels and applying innovative RE technologies [9–11]. However, RE
supply, and the global climate change target to cut the CO2 emissions by

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: barunruet@gmail.com (B.K. Das).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.100997
Received 3 April 2020; Received in revised form 30 December 2020; Accepted 1 January 2021
Available online 11 January 2021
2213-1388/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Nomenclature Pout AC output power (kW)

QP Water flow rate to reservoir (m3/s)
CA_cap Annualised capital cost ($) QT Water flow rate from reservoir (m3/s)
CA_rep Annualised replacement cost ($) RD Rated capacity of diesel generator (kW)
CA_O&M Annualised operation and maintenance costs ($) Tamb Ambient temperature (◦ C)
Es Total energy served (kWh) TPV PV cell temperature (◦ C)
Ebatt Battery capacity (kWh) TPV,NOCT PV cell temperature under standard test condition (25 ◦ C)
EBatt,max Maximum battery capacity (kWh) Tamb,NOCT Atmospheric temperature at NOCT (◦ C)
EBatt,min Minimum battery capacity (kWh) TPV,NOCT Nominal operating cell temperature (◦ C)
EPHS,max Maximum pump-hydro storage capacity (kWh) UL Coefficient of heat transfer to surroundings (kW/m2 ◦ C)
EPHS,min Minimum pump0hydro storage capacity (kWh)
ET Total energy generation (kWh) Greek symbols
FC Fuel consumption rate of diesel generator (l/h) τ Solar transmittance (%)
F1 Fuel curve intercept coefficient (l/h/kWrated) α Solar absorptance (%)
F2 Fuel curve slope (l/h/kWoutput) σ Self-discharge rate
f Annual inflation rate (%) τα Effective transmittance-absorptance of PV array
DF De-rating factor (%) αP Temperature coefficient of power
g Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2) ηinv Efficiency of battery (%)
G Solar irradiation (kW/m2) ηinv Efficiency of inverter (%)
GS Reference solar irradiation (1 kW/m2) ηPV PV panel efficiency (%)
GNOCT Solar irradiation (kW/m2) at NOCT ηP Pump efficiency (%)
h Net water head (m) ηT Turbine efficiency (%)
i Real annual interest rate (%) Abbreviations
Ấ
i Nominal interest rate (%) AC Alternative current (A)
LPSPDesired Desired LPSP (%) COE Cost of Energy ($/kWh)
n Project’s lifetime in years CRF Capital recovery factor
N Number of values DC Direct current (A)
NBatt Number of batteries DF Duty Factor (kWh/start-stop/yr)
NDG Number of diesel generator EE Excess Energy (kWh)
Ninv Number of inverters GA Genetic Algorithm
NPHS Number of pump-hydro storage HOMER Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewables
NPV Number of PV module LPSP Loss of power supply probability
PD Electrical output from generator (kW) NOCT Nominal Operating Cell Temperature (◦ C)
Pin DC power input to inverter (kW) NPC Net Present Cost ($)
PP Power input to pump (kW) PV Photo-voltaic
PT Power delivered by turbine (kW) RF Renewable Fraction (%)
PPV Power generated by PV (kW) SMES Superconducting magnetic energy storage
PPV_rated Rated capacity of PV array (kW)

resources alone in off-grid areas are currently incapable of providing
uninterrupted energy supply due to their unpredictable availability and
heavy reliance on the environmental conditions [12–14]. Thus, HESs
have been the research focus in recent years. For example, integrating
the combustion-based engines or large banks of batteries with the solar
PV-based RE systems have already been reported to be financially
attractive [6,15,16]. While a short literature review in relation to this
research is presented in Section 2 of this paper, it is apparent that the
PV/Diesel/PHS-based hybrid system for the mountainous areas in
Bangladesh has not been investigated or studied yet. Thus, the key ob­
jectives of this paper include:
The study investigates different PV/Diesel/PHS-based HESs for off-
grid area application in Bangladesh based on the various techno-
economic and environmental indicators.
The effects of the scalability of the diesel generator set and load
demand on the size and performance of the studied systems are
examined.
A comparative analysis of battery (lead-acid battery) and PHS op­
tions for a HES to meet a similar dynamic load profile is also conducted.
The study examines the effects of different uncertainties of climatic
data, load profile, hardware component’s costs, and hardware produc­
tion degradation on the COE.
A comparative analysis of the proposed PV/Diesel/PHS-based HES is
carried out using the HOMER software tool and the GA optimisation
technique.
The widely acceptable performance indicators such as annualised
costs, environmental emissions, excess energy generation, renewable
fraction, and duty factors along with the objective function (mini­
misation of COE) are investigated.
Literature review
Because of the availability, easy installation, high energy and power
density, and high efficiency, the electrochemical storage systems are
extensively used in the stand-alone HESs, as presented in Table 1.
However, their limited lifetimes and the requirement of frequent
maintenance are problematic, particularly for areas where access to the
mainland is difficult [17,18]. In addition, the disposal of the chemical
storage systems poses a practical difficulty in the mountainous areas.
Therefore, the mechanical storage systems, such as a pump-hydro op­
tion, could be an alternative to the battery storage systems in the remote
areas if a water supply is available. The use of pump-hydro storage in
stand-alone power generation facility has recently been emerged to
improve the overall sustainability of the low-carbon energy system
[19–22]. Its key benefits include a shorter payback period, faster
response to the load demand, longer lifetime, and lower maintenance

2
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Table 1
Techno-economic characteristics of different storage options [25–27].
Parameters Mechanical storage Chemical storage Electrical storage

PHS Flywheel Compressed air Lead acid Li-ion VRF Supercapacitor SMES

Energy density (Wh/kg) 0.5–1.5 10–30 30–60 24–45 75–200 10–30 2.5–15 0.5–5
Power density (W/kg) – 400–1500 – 180 500–2000 166 500–5000 500–2000
Energy efficiency (%) 65–87 85–95 50–89 70–80 85–90 85–90 90–95 95–98
Lifetime (yr) 40–60 ~15 20–60 3–12 15–20 >20 >20 >20
Lifecycle – 20,000+ – 1500 1000–20,000 10,000 >100,000 >100,000
Discharge time 1–24 h ms–15 min 1–24 h s–h min–h s–10 h ms–h ms–8 s
Technological development Mature Commercial Developed Commercial Demonstration Demonstration Developed Demonstration
Capital cost ($/kW) 600–2000 250–350 400–800 300–600 600–2500 600–1500 100–300 200–300

cost than the other systems [23,24]. economically and environmentally better than a battery-based storage
A summary of some recent studies on different hybrid systems is configuration. Another PV/PHS system was examined using a GA with
presented in Table 2. various PV tracking technologies by Shabani and Mahmoudimehr [24]
While methods vary from study to study, most of the analyses pre­ and the results were compared with those for a PV/Battery option. The
sented in Table 2 are clean-energy-based HESs. The study of sizing findings from their study indicated that the latter had a 76% higher COE
optimisation is paramount before installing a HES, and it plays a sig­ than the former. Ayodele et al. [41] optimally selected a PHS-based PV/
nificant role in making capital investment decision. In this regard, Wind energy system for a stand-alone community using a binary sort-
Kanzumba Kusakana [39] carried out a feasibility study on an off-grid and-search algorithm. They found that a PV/Wind/PHS system had
hydrokinetic system configuration with pump-hydro storage for the the lowest COE out of all the different configurations studied. A grid-
application in a remote area and found that it was more economic (COE integrated PV/PHS system was studied by Li et al. [42] and they
= 0.248$/kWh) than a comparable battery storage option (COE = 0.291 showed that variable renewable energy had significant effects on the
$/kWh) for providing a reliable power supply to the households in the balance of a grid’s supply and demand. They investigated this aspect by
selected zone. However, the author did not examine the load scalability absorbing the surplus PV power by pump-hydro storage system, which
and the uncertainties associated with the meteorological data. Ma et al. greatly reduced the power output from the studied medium-scale power
[18] optimised a PV/PHS-based power generation scheme for a remote generation units. It is evident from these analyses that the hybrid sys­
and stand-alone community using a genetic algorithm (GA) and reported tems supplemented by the diesel generators were not adequately studied
that it was economically feasible (COE = 0.289$/kWh) for reliably and the detailed sensitivity analysis of such systems is scarce in the
satisfying the electricity demand. In another study, Ma et al. [40] literature.
determined that a PV/Wind/PHS system has more economic benefits A few studies have been reported on the PV/Diesel/PHS system. In
than a PV/Wind/Battery system. Unlike these studies, the present study this context, Awan et al. [28] carried out a techno-economic perfor­
investigates the integration of supplementary prime movers, uncertainty mance analysis to assess the feasibility of stand-alone application of a
associated with the meteorological data, and the degradation of the PV/Diesel/PHS system in Saudi Arabia. They found that the system had
hardware systems (PV, and converter). Rathore and Patidar [19] ana­ a COE of 0.19$/kWh with a renewable fraction of only 27%. Although
lysed a PV/Wind/PHS-based stand-alone microgrid system for an off- they investigated PV/Diesel/PHS one, the load scalability, the uncer­
grid community and reported that a PHS-based system was both tainty analysis, and the degradation of the hardware components were
not included in their study. In another study, an optimised hybrid PV/
Table 2 Diesel/PHS option was carried out by Makhdoomi and Askarzadeh [43]
Summary of PHS-based HESs. using modified crow search algorithm. However, a comparative analysis
between PHS and battery storage along the detailed sensitivity analysis
Hybrid energy Off-grid/grid- Method Evaluation criteria
system connected was not reported in their analysis.
Studies on different HESs in different regions of Bangladesh have
PV/Wind/Diesel/ Off-grid HOMER COE, NPC, emissions,
PHS/FC/Battery EE, RF
been focused on PV/Diesel/Battery [44], PV/Wind/Battery [45], PV/
[28] Wind/Diesel/Battery [8,46], PV/Wind/Diesel/Biogas [6], and PV/
Wind/PHS [29] Off-grid HOMER COE Biomass/Diesel/Battery [47] configurations. Das et al. [48] studied and
PV/Battery/PHS Off-grid PSO LCOE, reliability proposed a PV/Micro-hydro/Diesel/Battery system for an off-shore area
[30]
in Bangladesh. They reported that the proposed system exhibited a COE
PV/Wind/PHS [31] Off-grid GA LCOE, reliability
PV/Wind/PHS [32] Off-grid GA, HOMER Sensitivity analysis, of 0.206$/kWh which was 28% cheaper than the diesel generator.
COE, reliability Nurunnabi et al. [49] carried out a feasibility analysis of an off- and on-
PV/Wind/PHS [22] Off-grid PSO, GA, SA COE, reliability grid PV/Wind-based HES at different areas in Bangladesh, including the
Wind/PHS [33] Grid-connected EA NPC, IRR, PP studied area considered in this study (Sitakunda). Results of their
PV/Wind/Battery/ Grid-connected NSGA-II Cost analysis, CO2
PHS [20] emissions
analysis indicated that the COE of PV/Wind option for off- and on-grid
PV/Wind/PHS [34] Grid-connected – LCI, CO2 price are 0.477$/kWh and 0.064$/kWh, respectively. However, they did
PV/Wind/PHS [35] Grid-connected Direct Multi- Cost analysis, CO2 not consider the PHS-based storage technology and RE was not sup­
search emissions, RF plemented by the diesel generator. The present study goes further by
PV/Wind/PHS [36] Off-grid Fmincon Cost analysis
examining a detailed comparative analysis between a PHS and a battery-
PV/Diesel/PHS [37] Off-grid Fmincon Cost analysis
PV/Wind/PHS [38] Off-grid Demand Cost analysis, EE based option.
Response Eltamaly et al. [50] carried out a load management strategy to
determine the optimal size of the PV/Wind/Diesel/FC/Battery-based
Keywords: COE: Cost of energy; EE: Excess energy; EA: Evolutionary algorithm;
GA: Genetic algorithm; HOMER: Hybrid optimization of multiple energy re­
HES using PSO technique and compared with the HOMER. They
sources; IRR: Internal rate of return; LCOE: Levelized cost of energy; LCI: Local considered two different types of load demand on priority basis such as
consumption index; NPC: Net present cost; NSGA-II: Non-dominated sorting high and low. They found that the COE was comparable between PSO
genetic algorithm II; PHS: Pump hydro storage; PSO: Particle swarm optimisa­ algorithm (0.2805$/kWh) and HOMER (0.2774$/kWh) when both
tion; RF: Renewable fraction; SA: Simulated annealing. loads were considered. However, they varied only the low priority load

3
B.K. Das et al.
demand and did not consider the scalability of load demand i.e.
increasing or decreasing the total load requirements. A hybrid PV/
Wind/Battery was optimised using GA-PSO by Ghorbani et al. [51] and
compared with the HOMER. The authors reported that the GA-PSO had
slightly lower, yet comparable COE (0.508$/kWh) than that of the
HOMER (0.51$/kWh). In another study, Fodhil et al. [52] also found
that the PSO offers lower cost (0.38$/kWh) than the HOMER (0.40
$/kWh) in optimising the HES. In this study, HOMER tool is used
because of its simplicity [53] and quick searching ability [54] to find the
optimal sizing of the hardware components. Although the current study
uses the standard HOMER tool, the analysis goes beyond the standard
application of HOMER by thoroughly examining the objective functions,
the various uncertainties, and the different consequential performance
indicators.
Methodology
A schematic layout of the PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro storage system
designed to satisfy the load demand (PL) of a small remote community
consisting of 50 households is presented in Fig. 1. A direct current (DC)
load bus is linked to the PV panel while the alternative current (AC) bus
is connected with both diesel generator and the pump-hydro storage
system. The DC power generated by the PV module (PPV) is converted to
AC power (Pinv) through an inverter. The excess energy (EE) produced
by the PV module after the load demand is satisfied is used to power the
pump (PP) to either lift water (Qw) to the upper reservoir or drain down
to the lower basin (PEE) when the reservoir reaches its maximum level.
The turbine is used to supply power (PT) when the production of PV
power is not sufficient to meet the electricity demand and the load is
under the specified load ratio of the diesel generator (30% of its rated
power).
HOMER optimisation framework
A well-structured framework is necessary to optimise a HES that can
consistently satisfy the load requirements for a stand-alone remote area.
The optimisation framework representing this current study is shown in
Fig. 2. The HOMER software operates in three different phases. In the
first phase, a conceptual system architecture (Fig. 1) is developed based
on existing renewable energy and meteorological data. In this phase, the
electric power requirement of the selected site is also assessed (Table 3
and presented in Fig. 5) and introduced in the HOMER optimisation tool
along with the technical characteristics and economic data of different
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro storage system.
4
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997
components (Table 4). In the second phase, an investigation delivers a
group of hybrid system options showing the minimisation of NPC and
COE under specified constraints. In the third phase, the different system
configurations are compared in terms of their technical, economic, and
environmental parameters in order to select the optimal hybrid option.
In summary, the simulation uses energy balance of HES components
with the given constraints, load profile, and meteorological data to
calculate the costs. HOMER then displays a list of configurations, sorted
by net present cost. In this process, the best solution is selected from
among all scenarios depending on the selected criterion (e.g. minimi­
zation of net present costs). In this process, HOMER does not provide a
Pareto front or convergence to yield the optimal solution [55]. However,
the comparative analysis between HOMER and other heuristic tech­
niques such as GA, PSO reveal that the outcome of the cost function is
comparable [51,52]. Although it is impossible to determine the quality
of the solution of the HOMER, a comparative analysis between HOMER
and other intelligent techniques (e.g., PSO, GA etc) can give a fair idea
about the quality of the HOMER solution. Therefore, the present study is
further extended to compare the outcome of HOMER with the GA
optimisation technique. Therefore, to justify the quality of solution, the
present study also compares the outcome of this study with the GA
optimization technique.
HOMER’s optimization and sensitivity analysis algorithms allow us
to evaluate the economic and technical feasibility of a large number of
technology options and to account for variations in technology costs and
energy resource availability [56,57]. Although HOMER can handle large
number of technologies, the simulation results are limited only to costs
(minimise the net present cost) and cannot perform other than costs.
Therefore, it is suitable for feasibility study of the on-grid/off-grid power
generation systems.
Dispatch strategy
Optimum sizing of a hybrid system requires a thorough analysis of
the available RE resources, load at the selected site, technical and eco­
nomic characteristics of the hardware components, and an appropriate
dispatch strategy. The power management algorithm or dispatch strat­
egy has substantial effects on the optimum sizing of the HES, and
consequently, on the post optimisation performance indicators [58,59].
Optimisation can be achieved with different dispatch strategies using
the HOMER software tool. However, in this study, a load following
dispatch strategy is considered because it helps in reducing the EE and
has lower COE and NPC values [60,61].
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Fig. 2. Optimisation framework for HOMER software tool.

Table 3 Table 4
Calculation of load requirements for a single household in Sitakunda, Technical characteristics of hardware components [65,67–69].
Bangladesh. Component Characteristic Value
Appliance Rating Quantity Operating hours Total demand
PV module Nominal power (PPV) 327 W
(W) per day (kWh/day)
Panel efficiency (ηPV) 21.4%
LED light 30 6 6 1.08 Rated voltage (Vmpp) 54.7 V
Fan 80 5 8 3.20 Rated current (Impp) 5.98 A
Refrigerator 150 1 24 3.60 Open-circuit voltage (Ioc) 64.9 V
TV 150 1 5 0.75 Short-circuit current (Isc) 6.46 A
Microwave 2100 1 0.5 1.05 Power temperature coefficient (αP) − 0.35%/℃
oven NOCT 45 ◦ C ± 2 ◦ C
Rice cooker 650 1 2 1.30 Diesel generator (Type 1) Rated capacity (RD) 50 kW
Blender 400 1 0.5 0.20 Fuel curve intercept coefficient (F1) 1.65L/h
Mobile 10 3 2 0.06 Fuel curve slope (F2) 0.267 L/h/kW
charger Diesel generator (Type 2) Rated capacity (RD) 100 kW
Grand Total 11.24 Fuel curve intercept coefficient (F1) 5.75L/h
Fuel curve slope (F2) 0.278 L/h/kW
Battery Nominal capacity (CB) 6.91 kWh
HOMER achieves optimised sizing and sensitivity results that satisfy Nominal voltage (VB) 6V
Round-trip efficiency (ηRT) 80%
the specified constraints. Based on the typical lifetime of a solar PV
Maximum charge current (Icc) 279 A
module, the lifetime of the project is considered to be 25 years in this Maximum discharge current (Idc) 279 A
study. The International Energy Agency (IEA) applies interest rates of DoD 80%
5% and 10% when calculating the cost of power generation projects Pump-hydro Nominal capacity (PPHS) 22 kW
Net head (h) 30 m
[62]. As a result, while the techno-economic constraints for the hard­
Round-trip efficiency (ηPHS) 70%
ware components are listed in subsequent sections, the economic con­ Reservoir capacity (Rc) 4,280 m3
straints include a nominal interest rate of 10% and an expected inflation Inverter Rated power (Pinv) 1 kW
rate of 2% [63,64]. This study uses hourly temporal resolutions for the Conversion efficiency (ηinv) 95%
meteorological data and load profiles of the selected area.

shown in Fig. 4. The monthly average temperature data is obtained from

Meteorological data and load profile
HOMER tool; however, the hourly temperature data is not available
from the local weather station.
The name of the selected area for this current study is Sitakunda
It is assumed that the daily load requirement for a single household is
(22◦ 37′ N, 91◦ 39.7′ E) in Bangladesh, which is an isolated and off-the-
consisted of five members and the load demand is estimated using a
grid site. Its hourly solar irradiation (Fig. 3) and temperature data
household meter in a grid-connected area, as shown in Table 3. The daily
(Fig. 4) are downloaded from within the HOMER software tool database.
load is calculated to be 11.24 kWh, which is then multiplied by 50 to
The average solar insolation is 4.77 kWh/m2/day, the clearness index is
obtain the total load demand (562 kWh/day) of the community. In
0.52, and the highest temperature is 28.55 0C in June and the lowest
HOMER, a residential load with the peak load demand in July and the
(21.2 0C) in January [65]. From Fig. 3, it is clearly shown that the solar
hourly temporal resolution (8760 h in a year) are selected. HOMER
irradiation is not available all the daytime due to cloud covers the sun in
determines the load profile based on type of load and the peak load
rainy season, which stands from June to October.
demand. In the simulation step, while calculating the system sizing, the
The hourly temperature data for the site selected for this study are

5
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Fig. 3. Time-resolved solar irradiation of selected area - Sitakunda, Bangladesh.

Fig. 4. Time-resolved ambient temperature of selected area - Sitakunda, Bangladesh.

Fig. 5. Time-resolved load demand of selected area - Sitakunda, Bangladesh.

software calculates the power balance for each time step (1 h) to satisfy The PV module’s temperature (TC) is estimated by using Eq. (2),
the load requirement. where Ta (℃) is its atmospheric temperature, (τα) is its effective
The annual hourly resolved loads for the study area are shown in transmittance-absorptance, ηPV is its efficiency (21.4%) [67], and UL
Fig. 5. (kW/m2℃) is its coefficient due to heat transfer.
( )(
τα η )
Tc = Ta + G 1 − PV (2)
Modelling of PV module UL τα
( )
The power output from the PV module is obtained through Eq. (1), The value of UταL , which is obtained from the manufacturer’s data
where PPV_rated is the module’s rated capacity (327 W), DF is the de-
considering that the load is connected to the panel and under the
rating factor (88%), G (kW/m2) and GS (1 kW/m2) are the incident
nominal operating cell temperature (NOCT) (at 800 W/m2 and a 20˚C
and the standard solar irradiations, respectively, and αP (-0.35%/℃), TC
ambient temperature), is calculated by [66]:
(℃), and TS (25℃) are the temperature coefficient of the power, PV cell
( )
temperature, and standard PV cell temperature, respectively [66]. τα Tc,NOCT − Ta,NOCT
= (3)
( ) UL GNOCT
G
PPV = PPV rated DF [1 + αP (Tc − Ts ) ] (1)
GS Therefore, assuming the value of (τα) to be 0.9 [66], the PV cell

6
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

temperature is obtained by: quantities (kWh) at time t and t-1, respectively, σ refers to the battery
self-discharge rate, ηbat is the efficiency of battery bank, ηinv is the
Tc,NOCT − Ta,NOCT ( η )
Tc = Ta + G 1 − PV (4) inverter efficiency.
GNOCT 0.9
( )
EL (t)
This study does not consider the tracking technology of a PV module EBatt (t) = EBatt (t − 1) × (1 − σ) − − ET (t) (10)
and the details of the technical features related to the panel used in the ηinv
study are presented in Table 4.
Modelling of inverter
Modelling of diesel engine
AC and DC buses are linked through an inverter, and the output
The consumption of the diesel fuel can be obtained using Eq. (5), power of which is determined using Eq. (11), where Pin is the input
where F1 is the intercept coefficient of the fuel curve, F2 is the slope of power to the inverter and ηinv is the inverter’s efficiency (95%) [69]. The
the fuel curve, RD is the diesel generator’s rated capacity, and PD is the HOMER calculates the required capacity of the inverter based on the
generator’s output at any instant [66]. The LHV and density of the fuel energy flow from the DC to AC.
are assumed to be 43,200 kJ/kg and 820 kg/m3, respectively. The cost of
the diesel price is taken from the local market price as 0.70$/L. As the Pout = Pin ηinv (11)
study area is well connected to the Dhaka-Chittagong highway and the
distance from Chittagong city to the study area is only 37 km, no Objective function and constraints
additional costs for transportation is considered. However, fuel price is
largely dependent on the global price; therefore, uncertainty of fuel The optimisation of sizing is performed by the HOMER software and
prices has been examined in the sensitivity analysis of this study. the GA optimisation technique based on obtaining the lowest NPC of the
Fc = F 1 R D + F 2 P D (5) different system configurations. The objective function of this study is to
minimise the NPC, which is calculated using Eq. (12) where CA_cap, CA_rep
Additionally, the efficiency of the diesel engine is obtained by: and CA_O&M are a system’s annualised capital, replacement, and opera­
3600 × PD tional and maintenance (O&M) costs, respectively [73].
ηD = (6)
ρ × Fc × LHV CA + CA rep + CA
(12)
cap O&M
MinNPC =
CRF(i, n)
Modelling of pump-hydro storage
Equation (13) is used to estimate the capital recovery factor (CRF) (i,
n), where i is the actual annual interest rate (determined using Eq. (14))
In this study, the surplus power from the PV module is used to drive
the pump to lift water from the lower basin of the waterfall to an upper and f, i’ and n are the annual inflation rate, nominal interest rate and
reservoir. The power required to operate the pump is calculated by Eq. number of years, respectively [74].
(7), where QP is the water volume’s flow rate, ρw is the water density, g is i(1 + i)n
the gravitational acceleration, h is the water’s net head due to pumping CRF(i, n) = (13)
(1 + i)n − 1
and ηP is the pumping efficiency [39,70].
i’ − f
PP =
QP ρw gh
(7) i= (14)
ηP 1+f
The system having minimum NPC results in a minimum COE. The
On the other hand, a deficit in the load demand can be met by
study also calculates the COE, an important evaluation criterion for the
running the micro-turbine set. Eq. (8) provides the power delivered from
optimisation hybrid system configurations, using Eq. (15), where Es is
the micro-turbine, where QT is the water volume’s flow rate from the
the annual energy served [73].
upper basin to micro-turbine and ηT is the micro-turbine’s efficiency
[39,70]. CA + CA rep + CA
(15)
cap O&M
COE =
Es
PT = QT ρw ghηT (8)
The financial and technical details of different components of the
The site selected for the pump-hydro project is close to the Sahas­
proposed system are listed in Table 5. However, the costs related to the
radhara waterfall at Sitakunda in Bangladesh, which is an area covered
installation and fabrication, piping, civil works, instrumentations, and
by some small mountains, with the height from the lower stream of
control systems are not considered. The project lifetime is considered to
water being approximately 30 m [71]. This study considers the bottom
be as 25 years in accordance with the highest component lifetime of PV
of the waterfall as the lower basin and a man-made concrete structure on
module (25yrs).
the highlands as the upper reservoir.
The decision variables of the study are the number of PV, PHS,
Battery, inverter, and diesel generators. The optimisation technique is
Modelling of battery
the subject to the following constraints:

The surplus energy from the RE sources is stored into the battery. NPV,min ≤ NPV ≤ NPV,max (16)
When the total generated energy (ET )is greater than the load demand
(EL ),then the battery is charged and the available battery bank capacity NPHS,min ≤ NPHS ≤ NPHS,max (17)
at any time (t) during this process can be described by Eq. (9) [72]:
( ) NBatt,min ≤ NBatt ≤ NBatt,max (18)
EL (t)
EBatt (t) = EBatt (t − 1) × (1 − σ ) + ET (t) − ×ηbat (9)
ηinv NDG,min ≤ NDG ≤ NDG,max (19)
When the load requirement is larger than the energy generation from
Ninv,min ≤ Ninv ≤ Ninv,max (20)
the RE, the battery is used to serve the load requirement. In the dis­
charging process, the battery bank capacity at any time (t) is defined by The battery and PHS devices are subjected to the following
Eq. (10), whereby EBatt (t) and EBatt (t − 1) are the available energy constraints:

7
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Table 5
Data related to costs, technical data, and lifetimes of different components used for optimization input parameters.
Type of component Description Capital cost ($) Replacement cost ($) O&M cost ($/yr) Lifetime (yrs) Ni, min Ni, max

PV module [75] 327 W 1300/kW 0 20 25 1 1000

Diesel generator [1] 50/100 kW 370/kW 296/kW 0.05/h 15,000 h 1 10
PHS [28,65] 22 kW 1000/kW 1000/kW 100 25 1 5
Battery [76] 6.91 kWh 1100/unit 1000/unit 10 15 1 200
Inverter [69] 1 kW 800/unit 750/unit 20 15 1 200
Nominal interest rate 10%
Inflation rate 2%

EBatt,min ≤ EBatt ≤ EBatt,max
EPHS,min ≤ EPHS ≤ EPHS,max
The study considers LPSP as the system reliability constrains as
expressed by the Eq. (23),
LPSP ≤ LPSPDesired
The lower and upper limits of the decision variables are reported in
Table 5. The lower and upper constraints are chosen to satisfy the given
load requirements; however, for satisfying larger load demand, the
upper constrains of the HES components should be larger.
GA optimisation
The GA optimization technique is used for sizing the PV/Diesel/PHS-
based HES for minimizing the NPC ($) under a certain reliability (LPSP
= 0%). The objective function and the constraints are established in a
MATLAB M-file based on the load following dispatch strategy and the
energy balance of HES components. The HES components data related to
technical, economic, and environmental details are incorporated into
the objective function and constraints. The GA optimization parameters
are population size (300), selection, crossover rate, mutation rate, and
maximum generation (1000) selected as stopping criteria. The LPSP is
calculated for each population, and the population, which cannot satisfy
the predefined LPSP, is discarded from the next generation to continue
the process until the maximum generation is reached. The detailed of the
GA can be found in the literature [77,78]. The convergence of the GA
optimisation process is shown in Fig. 6.
Results and discussion
In this study, comparisons of different system configurations of the
PV/Diesel/PHS-based HES designed to meet a remote community’s load
demand are conducted. Then, the investigation is extended to
comparing PHS-based HES and battery storage systems based on
(21) economic indicators (i.e., COE, NPC, and annualised costs), technical
parameters (i.e., system capacity, duty factor-DF, excess energy-EE,
(22) renewable fraction-RF, and reliability), and environmental indicators
(i.e. CO2 emissions). Furthermore, the economic benefits related to the
payback period for the diesel/PHS system and the effects of the scal­
ability of the diesel generator and load demand are analysed. The
(23) detailed analysis and results are discussed in the following sections.
Types of system configurations
The optimised results presented in Table 6 indicate that the COE and
the NPC for the PV/Diesel/PHS option (0.27$/kWh and $595,123,
respectively) are significantly lower than those of the PV/PHS (0.43
$/kWh and $947,927, respectively) and Diesel/PHS (0.41$/kWh and
$918,018, respectively) ones. This is because the capital, replacement,
and O&M costs are less for the PV/Diesel/PHS system than those for the
PV/PHS system (Table 7). Although these costs are lower for the Diesel/
PHS system, the resource cost ($66,405) is found to be considerably
higher than that of the PV/Diesel/PHS system ($13,927). The data
presented in Fig. 7 reveal that the significant capital cost for the pro­
posed option entails PV module ($203,436) while that of the pump-
hydro system is $66,000. Although the capital cost ($3700) of the
diesel generator is not as significant, its resource cost (i.e., fuel) is quite
high as $150,679. On the other hand, the O&M cost for the PHS system
slightly higher than those of the other system components. The opti­
mised PV/Diesel/PHS system entails of PV module of 156 kW, diesel
generator of 100 kW, PHS of 762kWh, and the inverter capacity of 57.5
kW.
In Fig. 8, it is indicated that the majority of the total electricity de­
mand is met by the power generated by the PV modules (84%) and the
rest by the diesel engine (16%), with the PHS system providing similar
power patterns throughout the year. It is to be noted here that, due to the
local rainy seasons, the power output from the PV module is low be­
tween June and September.
The time-series data presented in Fig. 9 show how the various

Fig. 6. Convergence of GA for the PV/Diesel/PHS-based HES.

8
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Table 6
Summary of optimisation results for different HES configurations.
Characteristics PV/Diesel/PHS PV/PHS Diesel/PHS PV/Diesel (split)/PHS PV/Diesel/Battery PV/Battery

COE ($/kWh) 0.27 0.43 0.41 0.24 0.34 0.63

NPC ($) 595,123 947,927 918,018 524,791 745,734 1,386,009
Diesel genset (kW) 100 – 100 2 × 50 100 –
PV module (kW) 156 300 – 137 142 517
PHS (kWh) 762 2,542 508 508 – –
Battery (kWh) – – – – 884 2,536
Inverter (kW) 57.5 119 34.2 51 54.5 119
EE (kWh/yr) 47,368 224,395 0 34,655 41,166 561,708
Unmet load (kWh/yr) 0 130 0 0 0 134
Renewable fraction (%) 84 100 – 80 76 100
Genset energy (kWh/yr) 39,205 – 243,385 53,755 54,002 –
PV energy (kWh/yr) 243,509 466,373 – 212,244 220,926 803,760
Fuel consumption (L/yr) 17,855 – 85,135 18,714 24,585 –
DF (kWh/start-stop/yr) 73 – 385 65 77 –

meeting the load demand.

Table 7
It can be seen from Fig. 8 that the majority of the load requirements is
Annualised costs of different hybrid system configurations.
supported by the PV modules and pump-hydro system. It is also apparent
Component PV/ PV/ Diesel/ PV/Diesel/ PV/ in Table 6 that the EE of this system is much lower (47,368kWh/yr) than
cost Diesel/ PHS PHS Battery Battery
that of the PV/PHS (24,395kWh/yr) one. This is because it requires
PHS
larger PV modules (300 kW), which produce more energy
Capital ($) 29,916 59,726 8,841 35,004 102,908
(466,373kWh/yr) than the PV/Diesel-based configuration
Operating ($) 9,650 26,969 4,542 4,639 15,020
Replacement 2,003 1,089 5,530 11,020 12,067 (243,509kWh/yr). However, in the Diesel/PHS system, as the diesel
($) generator follows the load demand, no EE is produced, whereas the PV/
Salvage ($) − 490 − 170 − 467 − 913 − 1,890 PHS system has a negligible unmet load (130kWh/yr) compared with
Resource ($) 13,927 0.00 66,405 19,176 0.00 the total load demand (205,130kWh/yr). The excessive fuel consump­
Total ($) 55,005 87,614 84,849 68,926 128,104
tion (85,135L/yr) for the Diesel/PHS system is attributed to the higher
COE (0.41$/kWh) than the hybrid PV/Diesel/PHS (0.27$/kWh) and the
components of the PV/Diesel/PHS hybrid system satisfy the load de­ PV/Diesel/Battery (0.34$/kWh) ones. In summary, the proposed PV/
mand in January. It is evident that in the winter season (Fig. 9(a)), the Diesel/PHS option appears to be a more financially attractive and
electricity requirement is mostly met by the PV module, whereas in profitable venture than the PV/PHS and Diesel/PHS systems. Interest­
summer (Fig. 9(b)), the diesel generator also plays a large role in ingly, a more cost-effective choice is attained by installing a PHS-based
hybrid option than the battery-based one. Fig. 10 illustrates the time

Fig. 7. Summary of costs of different components of PV/Diesel/PHS hybrid system.

Fig. 8. Energy generations from different units of PV/Diesel/PHS system to meet load demand.

9
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

175
150 (a) PV power (b)
PV power
Diesel power
Diesel power 125
100 Pump-hydro power
Power (kW) Pump-hydro power
Load demand

Power (kW)
Load demand 75
50

0 25

-50 -25

-100 -75
0 8 16 24 32 40 48 0 8 16 24 32 40 48
Time step (h)
Time step (h)

Fig. 9. Time-series data for different components of PV/Diesel/PHS system satisfying load demand for two days in (a) Winter (January) and (b) Summer (July).

series data for power input to the pump (Fig. 10(a)) by surplus energy a PV/Diesel/Battery system using the HOMER and found that its COE
generation from the PV module and power output from the water tur­ was 0.31$/kWh for Malaysian conditions which is comparable with that
bine while meeting the load demand (Fig. 10(b)). of the battery-based hybrid option in this study. The COE found in the
present study is slightly lower than that of the authors’ previous study
(0.37$/kWh), which considered a PV/Diesel/Battery system [8]. It can
PHS- vs battery-based hybrid systems
also be seen in Table 6 that the battery-based system requires a larger
capacity battery storage (884kWh) than the pump-storage one
The analysis is extended to compare the PHS and battery storage
(762kWh). The RF of the PV/Diesel/PHS system is higher (84%) than
(lead-acid battery) systems. The COE of the PV/Diesel/PHS system is
that of the PV/Diesel/Battery option (76%), which is attributable to the
found to be lower (0.27$/kWh) than that of the PV/Diesel/Battery-
lower contribution made by the diesel generator (39,205kWh/yr) in the
based one (0.34$/kWh), as can be seen in Table 6. Their NPCs also
former than that by the latter (54,002kWh/yr), as presented in Table 6.
show similar trends mainly because the latter has higher capital and
However, the DF (73kWh/start-stop/yr) is slightly lower for the PV/
replacement costs ($35,004 and $11,020, respectively compared with
Diesel/Pump-hydro system than that for the PV/Diesel/Battery
$29,916 and $2,003, respectively), as shown in Table 7. Although
(77kWh/start-stop/yr) one. On the other hand, the COE is 146% higher
Diesel/PHS requires lower capital investment, the system needs
for the latter than the former, because it requires a larger-capacity PV
continuous monetary injection for purchasing fuel (refer resource cost),
module due mainly to its battery charging/discharging functions when
which makes the annualised cost ($84,849) to be higher than the PV/
meeting a similar load demand. Therefore, the implementation of a PV/
Diesel/PHS ($55,005) one. On the other hand, PV/Battery system scores
Diesel/PHS option is not only more financially viable choice but also
the highest capital investment ($102,908) among all the systems re­
technically attractive compared with the PV/Diesel/Battery system.
ported in Table 7. Halabi et al. [60] conducted a performance analysis of

(a)
75
Hydro power input (kW)

60

45

30

15

0
0 876 1752 2628 3504 4380 5256 6132 7008 7884 8760
Time step (h)

75 (b)
Hydro power output

60

45
(kW)

30

15

0
0 876 1752 2628 3504 4380 5256 6132 7008 7884 8760
Time step (h)

Fig. 10. Time-series data for PHS (a) power input to the pump, (b) power output from the turbine system.

10
B.K. Das et al.
Fig. 11 represents the summary costs of the different components
over its lifetime. It is clearly apparent that the major capital costs in the
PV/Diesel/Battery option includes the PV module (49%) and the battery
(37%), whereas the diesel generator and converter share 10%, and 4%,
respectively. The larger amount of capital input ($207,475) requires for
purchasing diesel fuel (resource cost). On the other hand, a little
attention is needed for operating the PV module though the major
replacement cost involves (77% of total replacement cost) for the bat­
tery bank. In this study, a 40% minimum discharge is set for the battery
bank for its longevity, as shown in Fig. 12. Battery delivers more energy
to meet the summer demand.
Effects of genset scalability
This research also examines the effects of a single large-capacity
diesel generator (100 kW) versus two smaller ones (2 × 50 kW) in
terms of the cost and system performance. It is obvious from the results
presented in Table 6 that the unit cost of energy of the PV/PHS system
with 2 smaller generator sets is slightly lower (0.24 $/kWh) than that
with the larger single-capacity diesel generator set (0.27$/kWh). This is
because the latter has a higher minimum load ratio of 30 kW (30% of the
rated capacity for 100 kW) required to start the generator than that of
the former of 15 kW (30% of the rated capacity for 50 kW). Therefore,
the energy generated by the PV module is higher in the latter
(243,509kWh/yr) than the former (212,244kWh/yr), as revealed in
Table 6. Alternatively, the energy generation from a large generator is
lower (39,205kWh/yr) than that of the two smaller generators
(53,755kWh/yr). In this context, the system requires a higher capacity
of the PV module (156 kW) to satisfy the load demand which is under the
minimum load ratio for the larger-capacity engine. In addition, the RF
for the former option is slightly higher (84%) than that of the later (80%)
one, and consequently, the CO2 emissions in the former are lower than
the later. In summary, the hybrid PV/Pump-hydro with two smaller
diesel generators has COE at the cost of RF and CO2 emissions.
Effects of load scalability
In the above analysis, the load demand is considered to be 205,130
kWh/yr which covers a community of 50 households. Then, considering
a community with a different number of households, a techno-economic
analysis is conducted to study the effects of a load’s scalability on the
COE and the NPC (Fig. 13), and the RF and the EE (Fig. 14). The out­
comes indicate that the COE decreases slightly when the load demand
(number of households) increases. This occurs because, at any instant, it
can be met by the minimum load ratio of the diesel generator. When the
number of households increases from 50 to 70, the COE decreases from
0.27$/kWh to 0.26$/kWh, whereas the NPC rises from $595,123 to
$797,628.
As a result, the contribution of the PV module decreases and so does
400,000
350,000
300,000 Diesel Generator
250,000
200,000
Cost ($)
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
-50,000 Capital cost($) Operating cost
($)
Fig. 11. Summary of costs of different components of PV/Diesel/Battery hybrid system.
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997
the COE while the RF reduces from 81% for 30 households
(127,147kWh) to 75% for 70 (287,255kWh) and the EE increases from
22,128kWh/yr to 47,850kWh/yr. However, the EE to the total load
demand is comparable for all the scenarios studied (~17%).
Environmental analysis
The environmental emissions from the PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro sys­
tem are substantially lower than those from the Diesel/Pump-hydro-
based hybrid one. It is noticeable in Table 8 that the former generates
fewer CO2 emissions (47,158 kg/yr) than the latter (224,858 kg/yr),
whereas, the PV/Pump-hydro system produces no operational emis­
sions. An alternative explanation of this situation is that the higher RFs
of the PV/Pump-hydro (100%) and PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro (84%) sys­
tems than the Diesel/Pump-hydro (0%) one can be attributed to their
lower environmental emissions. The more interesting results from this
analysis are that the PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro-based hybrid system pro­
duces lower environmental emissions than the PV/Diesel/Battery one.
For example, in Table 8, it appears that the CO2 emissions generated by
the former are 47,158 kg/yr, while this value for the latter is 64,934 kg/
yr. From Table 8, it is also evident that the CO, UHC, PM, SO2, and NOx
emissions are lower in PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro option than these of the
PV/Diesel/Battery and Diesel/pump-hydro ones. For example, the NOx
emission for the hybrid PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro, Diesel/pump-hydro,
and PV/Diesel/Battery options are 76.1 kg/yr, 363 kg/yr, and 105 kg/
yr, respectively. Similar trends are also true for other emissions.
Therefore, the implementation of the proposed hybrid option illustrates
a substantial reduction of CO2 emissions than the diesel-only and hybrid
one with battery storage systems.
In this section, the systems’ environmental emissions are compared
in terms of their operational CO2 emissions. In Fig. 15, it is apparent that
the optimised hybrid system (PV/Diesel/PHS) generates the lowest
amount of CO2. It is worth noting that the battery-based hybrid system
produces 30% higher operational CO2 emissions than the pump-based
one when a similar load demand is satisfied. Using a factor of 0.465
CO2 kg/kWh for Bangladesh’s grid electricity [79], the total generation
of CO2 required to meet a 205,130 kWh load demand is 95,385 kg/yr. It
is clearly seen that the proposed PHS-based HES is environmentally
sustainable compared to the grid electricity. In comparison with kero­
sene, which generates CO2 of 61,594 kg/yr, the proposed HES (47,158
kg/yr) is environmentally benefitted. Additionally, the Diesel/PHS
produces the highest operational CO2 emissions (224,858 kg/yr).
Therefore, the proposed PV/Diesel/PHS option is clearly beneficial in
terms of environmental aspect over the other studied options.
Economic benefits
This study is further extended to explore the payback period as an
economic indicator in order to assess the economic competitiveness of
Battery PV Module System Converter
Replacement Salvage ($) Resource ($)
cost ($)
11
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

100

80

State of Charge (%)

60

40

20

0
0 876 1752 2628 3504 4380 5256 6132 7008 7884 8760
Time step (h)

Fig. 12. Battery state of charge for a PV/Diesel/Battery hybrid system over a year.

0.30 1000000

0.25 800000
COE ($/kWh)

0.20
NPC ($)
600000
0.15
400000
0.10 COE NPC

0.05 200000

0.00 0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
No of households

Fig. 13. Effects of load demand (sizes of households) on the COE and the NPC.
Fig. 15. CO2 emissions from different energy sources.

100 60000
HOMER calculates the discounted payback period as the point where the
75 45000 cumulative cash-flow over the project lifetime (25yrs) of the proposed
optimised HES and the base system crosses each other [47]. Further­
EE (kWh/yr)
RF (%)

50 30000 more, the PV/Diesel/PHS system has a discounted payback period of 7

RF Excess Energy years when compared with the Diesel/Pump-hydro one, as shown in
25 15000 Fig. 17. Although the latter system requires a lower initial investment
than the former, it has higher O&M costs. In summary, the proposed PV/
0 0 Diesel/PHS-based HES further shows more economic viability compared
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 with the other investigated configurations.
Number of households

Fig. 14. Effects of load demand (sizes of households) on the RF and the EE. Sensitivity analysis of PV/diesel/PHS option

To assess the robustness of the current analysis, the uncertainty

Table 8 associated with both the climatic data, load demand, and hardware
Comparison of emissions from PV/Diesel/PHS, Diesel/PHS, and PV/Diesel/ components is considered and discussed in this section. The uncertain
Battery hybrid systems.
parameters include solar irradiation, solar PV costs (decrease from the
Emission (kg/yr) PV/Diesel/PHS Diesel/PHS PV/Diesel/Battery base line cost), derating factor of the PV module, load demand, diesel
CO2 47,158 224,858 64,934 fuel price, converter efficiency, PHS price, and interest rate. HOMER has
CO 40.9 195 56.3 taken into account the different uncertainty in the input parameters for
UHC 5.89 28.1 8.11 off-grid hybrid system design. HOMER considers the different uncer­
PM 4.29 20.4 5.90
tainty of renewable resources as the input parameters in the hybrid
SO2 115 546 158
NOx 76.1 363 105 system design and provides a graphical representation, as reported in
Fig. 18. The study examines the uncertainty of renewable sources in
association with the similar studies reported in the literature [80,81].
the proposed configuration. As mentioned before, the COE is consider­ Fig. 18 shows the graphical illustration of PV/Diesel/PHS-based
ably lower in the PV/Diesel/PHS system (0.27$/kWh) than that in the hybrid option by varying the load demand and solar irradiation, in
Diesel/PHS-only one (0.41$/kWh). To evaluate the economic attrac­ which superimposed values denote the COE ($/kWh) of the hybrid
tiveness of the optimised hybrid system (PV/Diesel/PHS), the payback system. It is evident that the COE is comparable at constant solar irra­
period, which indicates the time needed for the cash flow (cumulative) diation with varied load demand. For example, at 5.5 kWh/m2/day solar
to equate the value of the initial investment, of both the PV/Diesel/PHS irradiation, the COEs remain in the ranges of (0.268–0.270$/kWh)
and the Diesel/PHS systems are compared (Figs. 16 and 17). It is when load demand varies from 350khW/day to 562kWh/day. However,
apparent from Fig. 16 that the cash flow (cumulative) of the former around 12% cost reduction has been achieved when the solar irradiation
exceeds that of the latter within 5 years of the project’s initiation. is increased from 4 kWh/m2/day to 6 kWh/m2/day meeting similar load

12
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Fig. 16. Simple payback periods of PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro and Diesel/Pump-hydro systems.

Fig. 17. Discounted payback periods of PV/Diesel/Pump-hydro and Diesel/Pump-hydro systems.

Fig. 18. Sensitivity of solar irradiation and load demand.

demand. In real-world application, the degration of PV module and converter

The costs of the PV modules and the diesel fuel have significant ef­
fects on the COE of the PV/Diesel/PHS-based system, as reported in
Fig. 19. The lower COE is found to be 0.23$/kWh at 40% reduction of
the PV module costs from the base line costs (Table 5) and the diesel fuel
price of 0.50$/L. When the diesel price increases from 0.50$/L to 1.20
$/L, the COE rises from 0.260$/kWh to 0.316$/kWh at the present
capital cost of the PV module. In addition, the COE drops 6% at the 20%
reduction of the PV capital costs and 12% at the reduction of 40% with
the fixed diesel price of 0.70$/L.
may occur during its lifetime. In this context, the study is further
extended to analyse the effects of PV derating factor and converter ef­
ficiency on the COE, as described in Fig. 20. Results reveal that the
derating factor of PV module has some effects on the COE of hybrid PV/
Diesel/PHS option. A 6% drop in COE is observed when the PV derating
factor decreases from 95% to 80% at 95% converter efficiency. On the
other hand, a 9% reduction in COE is achieved when the converter ef­
ficiency drops from 95% to 80% at the derating factor of 88%.

13
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

Fig. 19. Sensitivity of PV module capital and diesel fuel costs.

Fig. 20. Sensitivity of PV derating factor and converter efficiency for hybrid PV/Diesel/PHS system.

Effects of interest rate and PHS costs

In the final section of this study, the effects of the variations in the
interest rate and pump-hydro costs on the COE and the NPC are inves­
tigated. A summary of the results is presented in Fig. 21 (a) and (b) for
the PV/Diesel/PHS system. The baseline scenario is shown as 100%, and
the parameters (i.e., interest rate and component costs) are then varied.
For example, 80% means that they are decreased by 20% from those of
the baseline scenario (the results for which are presented in Table 6). It
appears that the interest rate has notable effects on both the COE and the
NPC. For example, a reduction of 20% and 40% in the interest rate from
the baseline scenario leads to a decrease in the COE by 9% and 18%,
respectively. However, the PHS cost has insignificant effects on the COE
and NPC, as presented in Fig. 21.

Comparison with GA

The outcomes optimised by the HOMER software of the proposed

PV/Diesel/PHS-based HES are compared with the GA optimisation
technique, as reported in Table 9. Results reveal that the NPC
($501,399) and COE (0.226$/kWh) for the proposed HES is lower while
sized by the GA optimisation technique than the HOMER software
(NPC=$524,791 and COE = 0.24$/kWh). This is because the GA option
selects 50 kW diesel generator, which results in lower fuel cost
Fig. 21. Effects of cost parameters of components and interest rates on (a) COE
compared to HOMER despite having higher PV capacity in the former
($/kWh) and (b) NPC ($) for PV/Diesel/PHS system.
technique than the latter. The RF (91%) is higher in GA technique due to
the higher PV contribution (272,690kWh/yr) than the HOMER (RF =
80%). In addition, CO2 emission of the GA-based sizing offers signifi­
cantly lower than the HOMER one. In summary, the GA-based

14
B.K. Das et al.
Table 9
Comparative analysis between HOMER and GA for the proposed PV/Diesel/
PHS-based option.
Characteristic HOMER GA
COE ($/kWh) 0.240 0.226
NPC ($) 524,791 501,399
Diesel genset (kW) 2 × 50 50
PV module (kW) 137 184
PHS (kWh) 508 490
PV energy (kWh/yr) 212,244 272,690
Genset energy (kWh/yr) 53,755 18,935
EE (kWh/yr) 34,655 78,513
RF (%) 80 91
Fuel consumption (L/yr) 18,714 6,592
CO2 emissions (kg/yr) 48,314 17,019
optimisation technique not only provides cost effective solution but also
offers environmentally sustainable sizing option.
Although GA provides cost-effective solution compared to HOMER,
the later sizing software tool is widely used due to its simplicity [53] and
quick searching ability [54] in sizing the HES components.
Conclusions
In this study, a PV/Diesel/PHS-based HES is analysed and optimised,
which meets the load demand of a remote community in Bangladesh.
The optimisation framework assesses different configurations, such as
PV/PHS, Diesel/PHS, and PV/Diesel/Battery systems, in terms of their
costs, emissions, and performance indicators. Scalability and sensitivity
analyses are also carried out to improve the quality and robustness of
this optimisation study. The key findings of this paper can be summar­
ised as follows:
The COE and NPC for the PV/Diesel/PHS-based hybrid system (COE
= 0.24$/kWh and NPC=$524,791) are considerably lower than those of
the PV/PHS (COE = 0.43$/kWh and NPC=$947,927) and Diesel/PHS
(COE = 0.41$/kWh and NPC=$918,018) ones. Additionally, its CO2
emissions are approximately 5 times lower than those of the Diesel/PHS
system. This finding reveals the economic and environmental benefits of
the studied PV/Diesel/PHS-based hybrid system.
Compared with the PV/Diesel/PHS system, the PV/Diesel/Battery
one has a 25% higher COE and NPC. More interestingly, the CO2 emis­
sions of the former are 30% lower than those of the latter while satis­
fying the same load demand. These data signify the superiority of
integrating the pump-hydro option over the battery option with PV/
Diesel system.
The generator scalability analysis shows that, although the cost
(COE = 0.24$/kWh) with two small diesel generators is lower than that
with a single large-capacity one (COE = 0.27$/kWh) for a PV/PHS-
based hybrid system configuration, their RFs, CO2 emissions and DFs
are comparable. Therefore, the pump-hydro option with the two smaller
generator sets is found to be more economic than the one with a single
large-capacity generator.
With minimum effects of the load scalability on the COE, the EE is
estimated to be generated at a higher rate with the increase in the load
demand. The CO2 emissions of the proposed PV/Diesel/PHS system are
found to be 91%, 35%, and 30% lower than those of the grid electricity,
diesel-only, and battery-based systems, respectively.
The studied PV/Diesel/PHS system also offers a considerably lower
payback period (cumulative payback: 5yrs; discounted payback:7yrs)
than that of the Diesel/PHS option. While variations in the interest rate
substantially affect the COE and NPC, changes in the costs of PHS does
not seem to have significant impacts on the COE. In addition, the COE
drops 12% at the 40% reduction of capital costs of PV module; however,
no appreciable changes in COE are observed with the variation of
electric loads. These findings from the sensitivity analysis indicate that
the suggested optimised system is relatively robust against the uncertain
15
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997
future costs of the fuel, PHS, and PV module.
A comparative analysis of HOMER-based optimised results with the
GA optimisation suggests that more cost effective and environmentally
sustainable sizing options are achieved with the GA technique. The
higher renewable contribution and lower CO2 emissions are attained in
GA optimisation process than the HOMER software.
This paper essentially focuses on assessing the technical, economic,
and environmental aspects of the PHS when used in a PV/Diesel hybrid
system to satisfy a remote community’s load requirement in Bangladesh.
In other words, it formulates and identifies the optimal system config­
uration for achieving techno-economic feasibility with high reliability
by using locally available RE resources, such as, solar energy and pump-
hydro options. However, further study is warranted to investigate the
HES using different intelligent optimisation techniques. In addition, the
utilisation of excess energy of HES and heat recovery of diesel engine for
meeting thermal demands can be implemented. The study considers a
small village having 50 houses and further research is warranted to
investigate the sizing of the HES considering large scale energy demand.
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.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rajshahi University of Engi­
neering & Technology (RUET), Bangladesh.
References
[1] Das BK, Zaman F. Performance analysis of a PV/Diesel hybrid system for a remote
area in Bangladesh: Effects of dispatch strategies, batteries, and generator
selection. Energy 2019;169:263–76.
[2] Bangladesh Power Development Board. [cited 2020 12.03]; Available from:
12.03.2020 https://www.bpdb.gov.bd/bpdb_new/index.php/site/new_annual_
reports.
[3] Population, total-Bangladesh. [cited 2020 10.01]; Available from: 10.01.2020
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=BD.
[4] Baky MAH, Rahman MM, Islam AS. Development of renewable energy sector in
Bangladesh: Current status and future potentials. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;
73:1184–97.
[5] Knutti R, et al. A scientific critique of the two-degree climate change target. Nat
Geosci 2016;9(1):13.
[6] Das BK, et al. A techno-economic feasibility of a stand-alone hybrid power
generation for remote area application in Bangladesh. Energy 2017;134:775–88.
[7] Bank, W. Electric power consumption (kWh per capita). [cited 2019 07/04/2019];
Available from: 07/04/2019 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.
KH.PC.
[8] Mandal S, Das BK, Hoque N. Optimum sizing of a stand-alone hybrid energy system
for rural electrification in Bangladesh. J Cleaner Prod 2018;200:12–27.
[9] Rad MAV, et al. Techno-economic analysis of a hybrid power system based on the
cost-effective hydrogen production method for rural electrification, a case study in
Iran. Energy 2020;190:116421.
[10] Yang G, Zhai X. Optimal design and performance analysis of solar hybrid CCHP
system considering influence of building type and climate condition. Energy 2019;
174:647–63.
[11] Patel AM, Singal SK. Optimal component selection of integrated renewable energy
system for power generation in stand-alone applications. Energy 2019;175:
481–504.
[12] Raghuwanshi SS, Arya R. Reliability evaluation of stand-alone hybrid photovoltaic
energy system for rural healthcare centre. Sustainable Energy Technol Assess 2020;
37:100624.
[13] Li C, et al. Techno-economic performance study of stand-alone wind/diesel/battery
hybrid system with different battery technologies in the cold region of China.
Energy 2020;192:116702.
[14] Ramesh M, Saini RP. Dispatch strategies based performance analysis of a hybrid
renewable energy system for a remote rural area in India. J Cleaner Prod 2020:
120697.
[15] Huang Z, et al. Performance analysis of optimal designed hybrid energy systems for
grid-connected nearly/net zero energy buildings. Energy 2017;141:1795–809.
[16] Salameh T, et al. Techno-economical optimization of an integrated stand-alone
hybrid solar PV tracking and diesel generator power system in Khorfakkan. United
Arab Emirates Energy 2020;190:116475.
B.K. Das et al.
[17] Hoque N, Kumar S. Performance of photovoltaic micro utility systems. Energy for
Sustainable Development 2013;17(5):424–30.
[18] Ma T, et al. Pumped storage-based standalone photovoltaic power generation
system: Modeling and techno-economic optimization. Appl Energy 2015;137:
649–59.
[19] Rathore A, Patidar N. Reliability assessment using probabilistic modelling of
pumped storage hydro plant with PV-wind based standalone microgrid. Int J Electr
Power Energy Syst 2019;106:17–32.
[20] Abdelshafy AM, et al. Optimized energy management strategy for grid connected
double storage (pumped storage-battery) system powered by renewable energy
resources. Energy 2020;192:116615.
[21] Hunt JD, et al. Mountain Gravity Energy Storage: A new solution for closing the
gap between existing short-and long-term storage technologies. Energy 2020;190:
116419.
[22] Xu X, et al. Optimized sizing of a standalone PV-wind-hydropower station with
pumped-storage installation hybrid energy system. Renewable Energy 2020;147:
1418–31.
[23] Connolly D, et al. The technical and economic implications of integrating
fluctuating renewable energy using energy storage. Renewable Energy 2012;43:
47–60.
[24] Shabani M, Mahmoudimehr J. Techno-economic role of PV tracking technology in
a hybrid PV-hydroelectric standalone power system. Appl Energy 2018;212:
84–108.
[25] Aneke M, Wang M. Energy storage technologies and real life applications–a state of
the art review. Appl Energy 2016;179:350–77.
[26] Mahlia T, et al. A review of available methods and development on energy storage;
technology update. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:532–45.
[27] Das CK, et al. Overview of energy storage systems in distribution networks:
placement, sizing, operation, and power quality. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;
91:1205–30.
[28] Awan AB, et al. Performance analysis of various hybrid renewable energy systems
using battery, hydrogen, and pumped hydro-based storage units. Int J Energy Res
2018.
[29] Canales FA, Beluco A, Mendes CAB. A comparative study of a wind hydro hybrid
system with water storage capacity: Conventional reservoir or pumped storage
plant? J Storage Mater 2015;4:96–105.
[30] Bhayo BA, et al. Power management optimization of hybrid solar photovoltaic-
battery integrated with pumped-hydro-storage system for standalone electricity
generation. Energy Convers Manage 2020;215:112942.
[31] Nyeche E, Diemuodeke E. Modelling and optimisation of a hybrid PV-wind turbine-
pumped hydro storage energy system for mini-grid application in coastline
communities. J Cleaner Prod 2020;250:119578.
[32] Ma T, et al. Optimal design of an autonomous solar–wind-pumped storage power
supply system. Appl Energy 2015;160:728–36.
[33] Anagnostopoulos J, Papantonis D. Simulation and size optimization of a
pumped–storage power plant for the recovery of wind-farms rejected energy.
Renewable Energy 2008;33(7):1685–94.
[34] Jurasz J, et al. Large scale complementary solar and wind energy sources coupled
with pumped-storage hydroelectricity for Lower Silesia (Poland). Energy 2018;
161:183–92.
[35] Segurado R, et al. Optimization of a wind powered desalination and pumped hydro
storage system. Appl Energy 2016;177:487–99.
[36] Kusakana K. Optimal scheduling for distributed hybrid system with pumped hydro
storage. Energy Convers Manage 2016;111:253–60.
[37] Kusakana K. Hybrid DG-PV with groundwater pumped hydro storage for
sustainable energy supply in arid areas. J Storage Mater 2018;18:84–9.
[38] Ghasemi A, Enayatzare M. Optimal energy management of a renewable-based
isolated microgrid with pumped-storage unit and demand response. Renewable
Energy 2018;123:460–74.
[39] Kusakana K. Feasibility analysis of river off-grid hydrokinetic systems with pumped
hydro storage in rural applications. Energy Convers Manage 2015;96:352–62.
[40] Ma T, Yang H, Lu L. Feasibility study and economic analysis of pumped hydro
storage and battery storage for a renewable energy powered island. Energy Convers
Manage 2014;79:387–97.
[41] Ayodele T, Ogunjuyigbe A, Ibitoye T. Optimal selection of pumped hydro storage
based renewable energy generator (s) for isolated community using binary sort and
search algorithm. Renewable Energy Focus 2019;28:100–11.
[42] Li Y, et al. The performance investigation of increasing share of photovoltaic
generation in the public grid with pump hydro storage dispatch system, a case
study in Japan. Energy 2018;164:811–21.
[43] Makhdoomi S, Askarzadeh A. Optimizing operation of a photovoltaic/diesel
generator hybrid energy system with pumped hydro storage by a modified crow
search algorithm. J Storage Mater 2020;27:101040.
[44] Bala BK, Siddique SA. Optimal design of a PV-diesel hybrid system for
electrification of an isolated island—Sandwip in Bangladesh using genetic
algorithm. Energy Sustainable Develop 2009;13(3):137–42.
[45] Nandi SK, Ghosh HR. A wind–PV-battery hybrid power system at Sitakunda in
Bangladesh. Energy Policy 2009;37(9):3659–64.
[46] Rashid S, et al. Optimized design of a hybrid PV-wind-diesel energy system for
sustainable development at coastal areas in Bangladesh. Environ Prog Sustainable
Energy 2017;36(1):297–304.
[47] Islam MS, Akhter R, Rahman MA. A thorough investigation on hybrid application
of biomass gasifier and PV resources to meet energy needs for a northern rural off-
grid region of Bangladesh: a potential solution to replicate in rural off-grid areas or
not? Energy 2018;145:338–55.
16
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997
[48] Das HS, et al. Proposition of a PV/tidal powered micro-hydro and diesel hybrid
system: a southern Bangladesh focus. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;53:1137–48.
[49] Nurunnabi M, et al. Size optimization and sensitivity analysis of hybrid wind/PV
micro-grids-a case study for Bangladesh. IEEE Access 2019;7:150120–40.
[50] Eltamaly AM, et al. Load management as a smart grid concept for sizing and
designing of hybrid renewable energy systems. Eng Optim 2017;49(10):1813–28.
[51] Ghorbani N, et al. Optimizing a hybrid wind-PV-battery system using GA-PSO and
MOPSO for reducing cost and increasing reliability. Energy 2018;154:581–91.
[52] Fodhil F, Hamidat A, Nadjemi O. Potential, optimization and sensitivity analysis of
photovoltaic-diesel-battery hybrid energy system for rural electrification in
Algeria. Energy 2019;169:613–24.
[53] Sinha S, Chandel S. Review of recent trends in optimization techniques for solar
photovoltaic–wind based hybrid energy systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;
50:755–69.
[54] Zahraee S, Assadi MK, Saidur R. Application of artificial intelligence methods for
hybrid energy system optimization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;66:617–30.
[55] Weinand JM, Scheller F, McKenna R. Reviewing energy system modelling of
decentralized energy autonomy. Energy 2020:117817.
[56] T. Givler, P.L., Using HOMER® Software, NREL’s Micropower Optimization Model,
to Explore the Role of Gen-sets in Small Solar Power Systems.
[57] Sen R, Bhattacharyya SC. Off-grid electricity generation with renewable energy
technologies in India: An application of HOMER. Renewable Energy 2014;62:
388–98.
[58] Ipsakis D, et al. Power management strategies for a stand-alone power system using
renewable energy sources and hydrogen storage. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2009;34
(16):7081–95.
[59] Das BK, Al-Abdeli YM. Optimisation of stand-alone hybrid CHP systems meeting
electric and heating loads. Energy Convers Manage 2017;153:391–408.
[60] Halabi LM, et al. Performance analysis of hybrid PV/diesel/battery system using
HOMER: A case study Sabah. Malaysia Energy Convers. Manage. 2017;144:
322–39.
[61] Ngan MS, Tan CW. Assessment of economic viability for PV/wind/diesel hybrid
energy system in southern Peninsular Malaysia. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;
16(1):634–47.
[62] Agency, I.E. Projected costs of generating electricity, 2010. Available from:
12.09.2019. https://www.oecd-nea.org/ndd/pubs/2010/6819-projected-costs.
pdf.
[63] Hossain M, Mekhilef S, Olatomiwa L. Performance evaluation of a stand-alone PV-
wind-diesel-battery hybrid system feasible for a large resort center in South China
Sea. Malaysia Sustainable Cities Soc. 2017;28:358–66.
[64] Odou ODT, Bhandari R, Adamou R. Hybrid off-grid renewable power system for
sustainable rural electrification in Benin. Renewable Energy 2020;145:1266–79.
[65] HOMER Pro, 2020. [cited 2020 10.10]; Available from: https://www.
homerenergy.com/products/pro/docs/latest/index.html.
[66] Pro, H. HOMER’s Calculations. 2020 [cited 2020 10.20]; Available from:
12.20.2019 https://www.homerenergy.com/products/pro/docs/3.11/homers_
calculations.html.
[67] Solar PV Module. [cited 2020 05.02]; Available from: 05.02.2020 https://us.
sunpower.com/sites/default/files/sunpower-e-series-commercial-solar-panels-
e20-327-com-datasheet-505701-revh.pdf.
[68] Lead acid battery, 2019. [cited 2019 10.02]; Available from: https://www.
rollsbattery.com/wp-content/uploads/batteries/6CS25P.pdf.
[69] Brka A, Al-Abdeli YM, Kothapalli G. The interplay between renewables
penetration, costing and emissions in the sizing of stand-alone hydrogen systems.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40(1):125–35.
[70] Ma T, et al. Technical feasibility study on a standalone hybrid solar-wind system
with pumped hydro storage for a remote island in Hong Kong. Renewable Energy
2014;69:7–15.
[71] Jui FS, et al. A feasibility study of mini hydroelectric power plant at Sahasradhara
waterfall, Sitakunda, Bangladesh. In: 2015 International Conference on Advances
in Electrical Engineering (ICAEE). 2015. IEEE.
[72] Maleki A, Askarzadeh A. Comparative study of artificial intelligence techniques for
sizing of a hydrogen-based stand-alone photovoltaic/wind hybrid system. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2014;39(19):9973–84.
[73] Elkadeem M, et al. Feasibility analysis and techno-economic design of grid-isolated
hybrid renewable energy system for electrification of agriculture and irrigation
area: a case study in Dongola. Sudan Energy Convers. Manage. 2019;196:1453–78.
[74] Li C, et al. Techno-economic feasibility study of autonomous hybrid wind/PV/
battery power system for a household in Urumqi. China Energy 2013;55:263–72.
[75] Cano A, Arévalo P, Jurado F. Energy analysis and techno-economic assessment of a
hybrid PV/HKT/BAT system using biomass gasifier: Cuenca-Ecuador case study.
Energy 2020:117727.
[76] Arabzadeh Saheli M, et al. Performance analysis of a photovoltaic/wind/diesel
hybrid power generation system for domestic utilization in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Canada Environ. Progr. Sustainable Energy 2019;38(2):548–62.
[77] Ismail M, Moghavvemi M, Mahlia T. Genetic algorithm based optimization on
modeling and design of hybrid renewable energy systems. Energy Convers Manage
2014;85:120–30.
[78] Deb K, et al. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE
Trans. Evol. Comput. 2002;6(2):182–97.
B.K. Das et al. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 44 (2021) 100997

[79] Nandi SK, Ghosh HR. Prospect of wind–PV-battery hybrid power system as an
alternative to grid extension in Bangladesh. Energy 2010;35(7):3040–7.
[80] Rajbongshi R, Borgohain D, Mahapatra S. Optimization of PV-biomass-diesel and
grid base hybrid energy systems for rural electrification by using HOMER. Energy
2017;126:461–74.
[81] Padrón I, et al. Assessment of hybrid renewable energy systems to supplied energy
to autonomous desalination systems in two islands of the canary Archipelago.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;101:221–30.

17