1 Optimal energy management in the smart microgrid considering the electrical energy

2 storage system and the demand-side energy efficiency program

3 Sobhan Dorahakia, Rahman Dashtia, Hamid Reza Shakerb*

a
4 Clinical and Laboratory Center of Power System & Protection, Engineering Faculty, Persian Gulf

5 University, Bushehr7516913817, Iran

b
6 Center for Energy Informatics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

8 Sobhandorahaki@gmail.com, r.dashti@pgu.ac.ir, hrsh@mmmi.sdu.dk

10 Abstract – Smart MicroGrids (MGs) are known as a powerful platform for exploiting the Distributed

11 Generation (DG). On the other hand, the Energy Efficiency Programs (EEPs) are recognized as an

12 integral and highly valuable element of smart MGs investments and operations. While the EEPs are

13 known to be long term programs, they affect the short-term programs such as day ahead energy

14 management. In this paper, the problem of optimal energy management for MGs with electrical

15 energy storage is addressed. The problem takes the investment rate on the EEPs into account while

16 solving optimal energy management problem. To do this, the EEPs has been applied to the demand

17 model. Furthermore, the proposed demand model has been used in the optimal energy management

18 of the smart micro grids. the proposed objective function has been modeled as Mixed Integer Non-

19 Linear Programming (MINLP) For the optimal energy management. Moreover, the GAMS software

20 is used to solve the formulated optimization problem. The results of different scenarios confirm that

21 the EEPs is an effective program for the smart MGs energy management. The results are analyzed,

22 and the best cost optimal solution is identified.

23 Keywords: Energy Efficiency Programs (EEPs), Electrical Demand, Thermal Demand, Distributed

24 Generation (DG), Energy storage, Energy Management.

25

26
Nomenclature

Symbols Description Symbols Description

Ccons−pv The fixed cost of the solar unit in ($). F(cost) Total generation costs in ($).

cbuy Power purchase price from the grid in 𝐶𝐶𝐻𝑃 (𝑡) Cost from the CHP's unit in ($).

($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).

csell The price of selling power to the grid in Cwind (t) Cost from the Wind Unit in ($).

($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).

Psell (t) The amount of power to be sold to the Cboiler (t) Cost from the boiler unit in ($).

grid in (𝑘𝑊).

Pbuy (t) The amount of power to buy from the 𝐸𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 Minimum electrical storage energy in

grid in (𝑘𝑊). (𝑘𝑊h)

Cop−ES The variable cost of the electrical power 𝐶𝑃𝑉 (𝑡) The cost of the solar unit in ($).

storage unit in ($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).

PES (t) Electrical storage output power in (𝑘𝑊). 𝐶𝑏𝑢𝑦 (𝑡) The cost incurred by purchasing power in

($).

Cm−ES The variable cost of the electrical storage Csell (t) The income from power sales in ($).

in ($).

PMT (t) Output power from the microturbine unit CES (t) Cost from the Electric storage unit in ($).

in (𝑘𝑊).

𝜂𝑀𝑇 Unit efficiency factor. CMT (t) Cost from the microturbine unit in ($).

Cop−MT Variable cost of microturbine Unit in Cfuel Fuel prices in ($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).

($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).

TFCHP (t) The coefficient between the electrical PCHP (t) CHP output power in (𝑘𝑊).

power and the CHP heat.

Cm−MT Fixed cost of microturbine Unit in ($). θ Time frame

𝐸𝐿𝐷 (𝑡) Electrical load value in (𝑘𝑊). ηCHP CHP efficiency rate.

γ Penetration rate of electrical energy Cop−chp The variable cost CHP in ($⁄𝐾𝑊𝑘𝑊 ).

efficiency programs in (%).

ρ Electrical load elasticity of energy Cm−chp Fixed cost of the CHP unit in ($).

efficiency.
 ElEEI Improved Electrical energy efficiency Cop−wt The variable cost wind in ($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).

rate (%)

ElEEI0 Current percentage of investment on Pwt (t) Output Wind power in (𝑘𝑊)

electrical energy efficiency.

β Penetration rate of thermal energy Ccons−wt Fixed cost of wind unit in ($).

efficiency programs in %.

𝑇𝐿𝐷 (𝑡) Thermal load in (𝑘𝑊). Pboiler (t) Thermal power of the boiler unit in (𝑘𝑊)

δ Thermal load elasticity of energy ηboiler Boiler efficiency

efficiency.

ThEEI Improved Thermal energy efficiency rate Cop−boiler variable cost of boiler in ($⁄𝑘𝑊 )

(%)

ThEEI0 Current percentage of investment on Cm−boiler Fixed Cost of the boiler unit in ($).

thermal energy efficiency (%).

max
PCHP CHP's maximum power in (𝑘𝑊). Cop−pv The variable cost of the solar unit in

($⁄𝑘𝑊 ).
max
Pboiler Maximum boiler power in (𝑘𝑊). Ppv (t) Solar output power in (𝑘𝑊).

max 𝑚𝑎𝑥
PMT Maximum parsimony in (𝑘𝑊). 𝑃𝑑𝑒𝑐ℎ Maximum battery discharge in (𝑘𝑊).
max 𝑚𝑎𝑥
PPV Maximum solar power in (𝑘𝑊). 𝑃𝑐ℎ Maximum battery charge in (𝑘𝑊).
max
Pwt Maximum wind power in (𝑘𝑊). ES (t) Electrical storage energy at time t in

(𝑘𝑊ℎ).

PLine Line Capacity in (𝑘𝑊).

5
 1 1- Introduction

2 Nowadays, the structure of the power system has been changed from one-way communication to two-

3 way communication in the smart microgrids (MGs) [1]. Furthermore, the concept of MGs has been

4 emerged to increase the flexibility of the power system [2]. In this regards, the novel and efficient

5 concepts such as Distributed Generations (DGs) [3], Demand Response Programs (DRPs) [4], and

6 energy storages has been incorporated to the power system. The energy storages are divided in the

7 two subcategory such as electrical and thermal storages. The Electrical Storages (ESs) have high

8 technologies and the investment cost. However, the ESs play important role in the MGs and can

9 decrease the operation cost of the smart MGs. According to the numerous advantages of the ESs in

10 the smart MGs operation, many researches in this field has been performed. One of the most

11 interesting problem is evaluation the operation of ESs in the optimal energy management problem.

12 In [5] the energy management problem model has been performed considering the ESs and thermal

13 storages in the residential energy systems. In [6] the economic analyses has been performed to use of

14 electrical storage in residential section. In this paper the load demand of the customers has been

15 considered as an uncertain parameter.

16 Nowadays, smart MGs are challenged by integration of more and more DGs [7]. Furthermore, the

17 operation of the MGs is depended to the power exchange level between a MG and the main grid [8].

18 It is therefore necessary to use energy management in order to optimize the operation of the MGs.

19 The main purpose of such energy management would be to provide the power with the lowest cost.

20 In [9], the challenges and opportunities of energy management system in the smart MGs have been

21 investigated. The paper presents a comprehensive overview of DGs and their use in the smart MGs

22 systems. In [10], the structure has been proposed to solve the optimal energy market management

23 and optimal energy pricing in the smart grid power system. Therefore, the control theoretic

24 approaches have been developed to be a feasible solution for optimal energy market management and

25 optimal dynamic energy pricing. Furthermore, the electrical storages and DGs has been considered

26 in this paper to demonstrate the smart grid environment. In [11], a method for monitoring and
 1 implementation of the smart MGs is presented. The main objective of [11] is to present a model for

2 the long term implementation and planning of the smart MGs. In this paper, the green energy

3 resources and energy storage systems are considered to supply the consumer’s energy. In [12], a

4 probabilistic energy management of the MGs is proposed with the wind, solar, fuel cell, electrical

5 and thermal storage. The uncertainty is applied to the amount of wind and solar data. The main

6 contribution of [12] is to use the two-estimation method in the smart MGs. In [13], the economic

7 analysis and energy management of the grid-connected MG has been provided in Thailand. A

8 sensitivity analysis between load level, electrical and thermal storage has been done. The results show

9 that the proper utilization and reasonable size of electrical and thermal storage can be very useful in

10 the economic efficiency. In [14] a structure has been proposed to optimize the electrical and thermal

11 energy management of a multiple energy carrier micro-grid. In [15], the energy management of a

12 remote MGs (disconnected from the main grid) considering the battery lifetime cycle has been

13 investigated. In [16], the multi-objective energy management of a MG is investigated considering

14 renewable energy sources as well as the demand response program. In this study, the sensitivity

15 analysis has been used.

16 The demand side management programs are categorized into DRPs and the Energy Efficiency

17 Programs (EEPs) [17]. Furthermore, it is a well-known fact that the increase in energy efficiency is

18 one of the best ways to reduce the existing costs of the power systems as well as the greenhouse gas

19 emission[2]. In most cases, the investment on the EEPs has an appropriate rate of return.

20 The energy efficiency investment in the power system is categorized to generation side EEPs and

21 demand side EEPs. The system operator of the smart MG try to use the energy efficient recourses to

22 decrease the operation cost of the system as well as the green houses gases emission. In this paper the

23 demand side EEPs considered as a virtual demand side power plant to decrease the electrical and

24 thermal demand by increasing the energy efficiency of the costumer’s appliances. In the system

25 operator perspective, the generation units that has a high operation cost are decommitted with
 1 considering demand side EEPs. Therefore, the total operation cost of the smart MG is decreased. In

2 the customer perspective, the billing cost is decreased regarding to the energy efficiency investment.

3 In [18] the EEPs has been considered in the generation expansion planning problem. In this regard,

4 an economic model for energy efficiency programs has been proposed to use in the long term

5 expansion problem. This paper concludes that, the EEPs is very effective tools in the deregulation

6 power system to decrease the planning cost and increase the social welfare of the power system. In

7 [19], a model is proposed to coordinate the energy efficiency and demand response programs in the

8 smart grid. The results of this study show that the demand side programs (EEPs and demand response

9 programs) can have opposition and reinforcement points which should be considered in the smart

10 grid. A detail of some recent studies on the energy management problem in the smart MGs

11 environment are described in Table 1.

12 As it is clear from the review of the state-of-art, the role of EEPs as an important element affecting

13 the energy management in the smart MGs has not been investigated. In this paper, the energy
EEPs
14 management program considering EEPs and ESs model namely EPMESs has been proposed in the

15 smart MGs environment. The thermal and electrical demand are modeled based on the electrical

16 energy efficiency and thermal load energy efficiency coefficient. The energy management problem

17 is formulated as Mixed Integer Non-Linear Programming (MINLP) and the solutions are discussed.

18 Summary, the novelties of the paper are as follow:

19 • The optimal energy management considering EEPs and ESs in the smart MGs is addressed.

20 • The electrical and thermal energy efficiency investment sensitivity analyses is performed.

21 • The important role of the ESs and EEPs in the operation cost reduction is evaluated.

22 • The effects of ESs and EEPs on the exchange power with main grid are investigated.

23 The rest of this paper is structured as follows. The proposed MG and functions are studied in Section

24 2. The proposed model has been formulated in Section 3. The case study and simulation results are

25 discussed in Section 4. The paper is concluded in the final section.

26
 Table. 1: Comparison of the some recent studies on the energy management program
MGs ESs EEPs DGs Optimization Method Optimization Solver Thermal Demand Electrical Demand
[10] - - - * Dynamic Closed-Loop Control - *
[11] * * - * MINLP NSGA-II - *
[12] * * - * MINLP Gravitational Search Algorithm * *
[13] * * - * MILP CPLEX * *
[14] * * - * MINLP Multi-Objective Particle * *
Swarm Optimization
[12] * * - * MIQP CPLEX - *
[16] - - - - MINLP Multi-Objective Particle - *
Swarm Optimization
&
NSGA-II
[18] - - * - MINLP Fixed-Point Iteration - *
Algorithm
[19] - - - - MILP CPLEX - *
Current study * * * * MINLP BARON * *

1
 1 2- The proposed framework of 𝑬𝑴𝑷𝑬𝑬𝑷𝒔
𝑬𝑺𝒔

2 Nowadays, the smart and efficient technologies have been added to the MGs to increase the flexibility

3 of the system operation. The smart MGs are very best platform for DGs, ESs and demand side

4 management programs. The DGs are the most common section of the smart MG. However, the ESs

5 are the optional choice for the system operator to investment. In this regard, it is should be mention

6 that the ESs have high technologies and the price of ESs are very high. Therefore, it is a critical

7 decision for system operator to use of the ESs. The other choice of the system operator is the demand

8 side management programs. The one of the most common field of the demand side management

9 programs is the EEPs. In this regard, the system operator can investment on the increase of the

10 demand side energy efficiency. Therefore, the novel structure for investigation the effects of EEPs

11 and ESs on the energy management program has been needed in the smart MG environment.

12 In this section the novel framework for energy management program considering EEPs and ESs has
EEPs
13 been provided. The Fig. 1 shows the proposed framework of the EMPESs .

Microgrid System Operator

The smart microgrid system operator solves the (1-β )

Microgrid Parts Energy management program considering Demand Side EEPs

Electrical Storage Distributed Generation
Energy Efficiency Programs (EEPs)
& Initial Initial
Electrical Demand Thermal Demand
Electrical Storage
Green Energy Recourses
EEPs

Thermal EEPs Thermal EEPs

Output Results
Smart Microgrid Infrastructure
Thermal Demand Reduction Electrical Demand Reduction
Final Final
Generation Cost Analyses Electrical EEPs Sensitivity Analyses Electrical Demand Thermal Demand

Thermal EEPs Sensitivity Analyses Electrical Storage State of Charge

Constant Demand Constant Demand
Generation Scheduling Efficient Demand Efficient Demand

14

15 Fig. 1: The proposed framework of the smart MGs

16 In the left side of the Fig. 1, some important part of the MGs has been shown. The electrical storage,

17 DGs, green energy resources and smart MGs infrastructure makes the MGs parts section. The
 1 information of this section is submitted to the MG system operator section.

2 The demand model of the MGs has been addressed in the right hand of the Fig. 1. The demand of

3 MG is categorized to electrical and thermal demand. According to the Demand Side EEPs section of

4 the Fig. 1, each of the initial electrical demand and thermal demand are divided to two part. In this

5 regard, one part of the electrical and thermal demand is considered as a constant part. Therefore, this

6 facts has been shown by direct dash line between initial and final demands. On the other hand, another

7 part of demand is participated in the EEPs. The information of the demand model are submitted to

8 the MG system operator.

9 The system operator of MG solves the energy management program considering EEPs and ESs. In

10 the final, the output of the model are:

11 • Thermal Demand reduction value

12 • Electrical Demand reduction value

13 • Generation cost analyze

14 • Electrical EEPs sensitivity

15 • Thermal EEPs sensitivity

16 • Electrical storage state of charge

17 • Generation scheduling

18 3- The formulation of the 𝑬𝑴𝑷𝑬𝑬𝑷𝒔

𝑬𝑺𝒔

19 In this section, the formulation of the optimal energy management problem based on energy

20 efficiency improvement is investigated. In the following, the cost function and the constraints are

21 presented.

22 3-1 COST FUNCTION

23 In most energy management programs, the objective is to minimize the objective function, therefore

24 it is necessary to define the components of the objective function. Eq. (1) shows the defined objective
 1 function:

F(cost) = ∑Tt=1 (CCHP (t) + Cwind (t) + Cboiler (t) + CPV (t) + Cbuy (t) − Csell (t) + (1)

CES (t) + CMT (t))

2 Where Eq. (2) shows the output cost of the CHP's unit [20]:

Cfuel ∙ PCHP (t) ∙ θ (2)

CCHP = + Cop−chp ∙ PCHP (t) ∙ θ + Cm−chp
ηCHP

3 Eq. (3) represents the cost of the wind unit. The wind unit is usually thought to have no cost, but the

4 high initial costs during the use of wind turbines are amortized over the years [21]:

Cwind (t) = Cop−wt ∙ Pwt (t) ∙ θ + Ccons−wt (3)

5 Eq. (4) shows the output cost of the boiler unit. The boiler can only be thermal power supplier. The

6 following equation shows the cost associated with the use of the boiler[22]:

Cfuel ∙Pboiler (t)∙θ (4)

Cboiler (t) = + Cop−boiler ∙ Pboiler (t) ∙ θ + Cm−boiler
ηboiler

7 The output cost of the solar unit is in Eq. (5). The cost of the solar unit, like the wind power unit, is

8 generated when the initial costs are met.

CPV (t) = Cop−pv ∙ Ppv (t) ∙ θ + Ccons−pv (5)

9 The MG is able to exchange power from the main grid. Eq. (6) and (7) show the exchange power

10 cost[23]:

Cbuy (t) = cbuy ∙ Pbuy (t) ∙ θ (6)

Csell (t) = csell ∙ Psell (t) ∙ θ (7)

11 The electrical power storage is one of the fundamental components of the smart MGs. The battery

12 can be discharged when the load is high, and the amount of power generation is low. In this regard,

13 in Eq. (8) the cost of the electrical storages is presented [24]:

CES (t) = Cop−ES ∙ PES (t) ∙ θ + Cm−ES (8)

14

15 The Eq.(9) shows the microturbine cost [25]:

 Cfuel ∙ PMT (t) ∙ θ (9)
CMT = + Cop−MT ∙ PMT (t) ∙ θ + Cm−MT
ηMT

1 3-2 CONSTRAINTS

2 Constraints restrict the objective function and the solution space. In this subsection, the constraints

3 of the problem are mentioned. Eq (10) presents the electric power balance constraint:

Pwt (t) + PPV (t) + PMT (t) + PCHP (t) + PES (t) + Pbuy (t) − Psell (t) = ELD (t) ∙ (1 − γ) + (10)

(ELEEI−ELEEI0 )
γELD (t)(1 + ρ )
ELEEI0

4 In the above-mentioned relationship, the production power of DGs should be equal to the amount of

5 customer demand. Another important consideration in the above relation is the existence of

6 investment in energy efficiency and its effectiveness. In fact, this relationship shows that increasing

7 investment in energy efficiency reduces the amount of demand.

8 In Eq. (11), the thermal load balance is demonstrated with the heat power produced:

(ThEEI−ThEEI0 ) (11)
Pboiler (t) + PCHP (t) ∙ TFCHP = TLD (t) ∙ (1 − β) + βTLD (t)(1 + δ )
ThEEI0

9 The important consideration in Eq. (11) is the existence of the thermal investment elasticity of load.

10 This indicates that in the case of investment in energy efficiency, the amount of thermal demand can

11 decrease.

12 Equation (12) shows the limit of the CHP's unit constraint:

max
0 ≤ PCHP ≤ PCHP (12)

13 The thermal generation capacity of the boiler is also between a minimum and maximum value. It is

14 essential to note that this unit will only contribute to thermal demand. This restriction is shown in Eq.

15 (13):
max
0 ≤ Pboiler ≤ Pboiler (13)

16 The output power of the micro turbine has been set limited in Eq. (14):
max
0 ≤ PMT ≤ PMT (14)

17 The output power of solar wind units has been set limited in Eq. (15) and (16):
 max
0 ≤ PPV ≤ PPV (15)

max
0 ≤ Pwt ≤ Pwt (16)

1 One of the basic constraints of optimal planning and energy management in the MGs is the amount

2 of power exchange with the main grid. It is obvious that the capacity of transmission lines is limited.

3 In this regard, Eq. (17) shows the limit on the power transmission lines:

(Pbuy (t) orPsell (t) ) ≤ PLine (17)

4 The amount of electrical storage is modeled by Eq. (18), (19), (20) and (21):

𝑚𝑎𝑥
PES (t) ≤ 𝑃𝑑𝑒𝑐ℎ 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ (𝑃𝐸𝑆 (𝑡) > 0) (18)
𝑚𝑎𝑥
−PES (t) ≤ 𝑃𝑐ℎ 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑐ℎ (𝑃𝐸𝑆 (𝑡) < 0) (19)

PES (t) = ES (t) − ES (t − 1) (20)

𝐸𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ ES (t) ≤ 𝐸𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 (21)

7 4- Case study

8 In this section, the data of the case study has been presented. The smart MG test system is a nodal

9 network without power losses includes wind turbine, photovoltaic system, CHP, microturbine and

10 ESs. This study is carried-out using Gams software with a computer system with 4 GB of RAM and

11 mainframe 5 core processor. The proposed model is structured as MINLP model in GAMS

12 environment which is solved utilizing BARON solver. It should be mentioned that the main advantage

13 of GAMS platform in comparison with other heuristic algorithms is finding the most optimal solution,

14 while heuristic algorithms do not guarantee to find the optimal solution. Furthermore, all the reported

15 results in the “Numerical Study Section” are the most optimal one and the “Absolut Gap” of the

16 solutions is obtained equal to “zero” which shows the preference of the GAMS solver in comparison

17 with heuristic ones. The solver is performed to find the solution until the “Absolut Gap” is obtained

18 equal to zero, and lasted for a few minutes. In this study, the time frame (𝜃) has been assumed equal
1 to 1 hour. Therefore, the model has been implemented in the 24 hour horizon time. The essential date

2 of the test MG system has been obtained in the Table. 1.

3 Also, the amount of electrical demand and the thermal demand of the smart MG is observed in Fig.

4 2.

Table 1. Parameters of the case study

Symbols Value Symbols Value
Ccons−pv 0.001 Cm−MT 0.001
Cop−pv 0.003 Cop−MT 0.004
Pmax
PV 25 Cm−chp 0.002
Ccons−wt 0.002 Cop−chp 0.005
Cop−wt 0.005 Cop−boiler 0.005
Pmax
wt 40 Cm−boiler 0.002
Cm−ES 0.001 Pmax
boiler
200
Cop−ES 0.004 ηboiler 80%
𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑠
40 ThEEI 0 & 1.2
𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑠 0 ThEEI0 1
Cfuel 0.027 ElEEI 0 & 1.2
𝜂𝑀𝑇 30% ElEEI0 1
ηCHP 35% γ 30%
TFCHP 1.3 β 30%
Pmax
CHP 90 θ 1
𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑑𝑒𝑐ℎ
20 δ -0.5
𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑐ℎ
20 ρ -0.5
Pmax
MT 90 PLine 30
5

7 Fig. 2: The electrical and thermal demand of the smart MG

9 Regarding to the Fig. 2 it can be said that the peak of electrical demand is between hours 15:00 to
 1 17:00. Furthermore, the peak of thermal demand is between hours 23:00 to 2:00. The MG type is the

2 grid connected mode. Thus, one of the most important information is the amount of exchange prices

3 of the power grid. The grid operator with knowledge of this information is able to purchase and sell

4 power with the main grid. Fig. 3 shows the price of sell and buy price to the grid.

6 Fig. 3: The hourly price of the exchange power

7 The amount of pollution caused by the distributed generations is assumed to be zero and has been

8 neglected by the amount of grid pollution. The maximum amount of power that a battery can charge

9 in an hour of charge or discharge is considered to be 20 𝑘𝑊 . Furthermore, the maximum capacity of

10 the battery is assumed 40 kWh. The CHP's unit will also contribute 1.3 times its electrical power to

11 the thermal power supply. The parameters ElEEI0 and ThEEI0 are the current rate of the electrical

12 energy efficiency investment and thermal energy efficiency investment respectively. Moreover, the

13 ElEEI0 and ThEEI0 has been assumed to 1 (or %100). The amount of thermal elasticity on energy

14 efficiency and electrical elasticity on energy efficiency is considered -0.5. It is should be mentioned

15 that the negative value for energy efficiency is considered since it causes reduction in the demand. In

16 this study, the effects of investment on electrical and thermal energy efficiency in a grid-connected

17 MG under four different scenarios are investigated. Table. 2 shows the description of each considered

18 scenario.

19
 Table 2: Scenario description
EEPs status ESs status
Scenario Numbers Thermal EEPs Electrical EEPs With ESs Without ESs
(ThEEI = %20) (ElEEI = %20)
Scenario 1 I - - - *
II - - * -
Scenario 2 I - * - *
II - * * -
Scenario 3 I * - - *
II * - * -
Scenario 4 I * * - *
II * * * -
1

2 Each scenario in Table. 2 has been divided in two section I and II. In the following the scenarios has

3 been explained:

4 • Scenario 1: The thermal and electrical EEPs has been neglected in the scenario 1. In the section

5 I, the proposed model has been solved without the ESs but in contrast, in the section II the ESs

6 has been considered. The section I of the scenario 1 has been considered as the base-case

7 scenario.

8 • Scenario 2: The thermal EEPs has been ignored in the scenario 2. Moreover, the 20% investment

9 in the electrical EEPs has been considered in section I and II of the scenario 2. The effects of

10 electrical energy storage has been investigated with comparison of the section I and II of the

11 scenario 2.

12 • Scenario 3: In scenario 3, the thermal demand has been improved by 20% investment on the

13 thermal EEPs. Furthermore, the electrical EEPs has been neglected in the both section I and II of

14 the scenario 3. The electrical storage effects on the operation cost of the smart MG has been

15 evaluated in section I and II of the scenario 3.

16 • Scenario 4: The both of electrical and thermal EEPs has been considered in the scenario 4. This

17 scenario has been provided to determine the effects of electrical and thermal EEPs

18 simultaneously. Likewise other scenarios, without and with ESs has been addressed in the section

19 I and II respectively.
 1 5- Numerical study

EEPs
2 In this section, the results of implementation EMPESs on the test MG has been obtained. In this

3 regard, the optimization problem associated to four scenarios have been solved. The peak load

4 reduction is one of the most important issues in the operation of MGs. The smart MG operator is

5 always looking for ways to reduce the amount of demand. Furthermore, the increscent of the thermal

6 demand causes a variety of problems to the MG.

7 It is clear that the demand side EEPs effects on the thermal and electrical demand. The value of the

8 demand reduction is very important parameter because the electrical and thermal demand are the
EEPs
9 input parameters of the EMPESs . In this regard the system operator can investment on the demand

10 side to control the yearly electrical and thermal demand. The effects of EEPs (20% increment of the

11 energy efficiency investment) on the electrical and thermal demand has been shown in the Fig. 4 and

12 Fig. 5.

13

14 Fig. 4: The electrical demand before and after electrical EEPs

 1

2 Fig. 5: The thermal demand before and after thermal EEPs

3 As shown in the Fig. 4, the amount of electrical demand has been decreased significantly after the 20

4 % investment on the energy efficiency of electrical load. The electrical load reduction in the smart

5 MG is caused to decrease the use of high cooperation cost units. In Fig. 5, the amount of thermal load

6 reduction is shown. It can be seen that the thermal load is reduced. Thus, the system operator can

7 supply the thermal demand of the MG in a reliable way.

8 The ESs has a significant role in the operation of power MGs. In this regard, the ESs can save the

9 electrical power in low price times and returned it in the high price times. Therefore, this is caused to

10 increase the flexibility of the smart MGs. Fig. 6 shows the operation of the ESs in the different

11 scenarios.

12
 1 Fig. 6: Electrical charge and discharge of ES in different scenarios

2 From the Fig. 6, it can be seen that the ESs has been charged approximately in the low valley demand

3 and price hours and also, has been discharged in the peak hours. Therefore, the ESs effects on the

4 operation cost of the smart MGs.

5 In the following, the effects of demand reduction caused by EEPs and the ESs has been investigated
EEPs
6 on the EMPESs model. Therefore, the Table. 3 shows the operation costs related to different

7 scenarios.

Table 3. The operation cost of scenarios

Scenario Numbers Operation Cost ($) Operation Cost
Reduction (%)
Scenario 1 I 318.978 -
II 311.185 -2.44
Scenario 2 I 294.962 -7.52
II 288.412 -9.58
Scenario 3 I 314.247 -1.48
II 306.453 -3.92
Scenario 4 I 290.231 -9.01
II 283.681 -11.06
8

9 As mentioned before, in Table. 3, the section I of the scenario 1 has been considered as the base case

10 and other scenario will be compared with this scenario. The results of Table. 3 shows that the

11 operation cost has been reduced by using ESs. The comparison of the section I and II in all of the

12 scenarios shows that the cost reduction is approximately equal to 2% -2.5%. Therefore, it is can be

13 said that the ESs are valuable choice for system operator to decrease the operation cost of the smart

14 MGs. Also It is should be noted that, the investment cost of the ESs is returned by the day cost saving.

15 The results of the thermal and electrical demand EEPs shows that the operation cost has is reduced

16 significantly compared with base case. However, the result of the Table. 3 demonstrate that the

17 electrical EEPs are very effectiveness than the thermal EEPs. In this regard, the Fig. 7 shows the

18 sensitivity analyses to demonstrate the effects of each EEPs investment percent on the operation cost

19 of the smart MG.

20
 1

2 Fig. 7: Effects of each EEPs investment percent on the operation cost

4 Referring the Fig. 7, it is clear that the diagram Slope of the electrical EEPs is more than the thermal

5 EEPs. Therefore, the effects of the electrical EEPs on the operation cost of the MGs are more than

6 the thermal EEPs.

7 One of the important reasons for this point is the type of MGs. In this paper, the grid-connected MG

8 has been considered. The proposed grid-connected MG can exchange electrical power by line

9 between MG and main grid. Therefore, the electrical EEPs are caused to increase the sell power from

10 MG to main grid and the operation cost of the MG has been reduced more than thermal EEPs.

11 The Fig. 8 shows the power sell value from MG to main grid. Regarding to the Fig. 8, it is clear that

12 the Power sell to main grid in electrical EEPs scenario is more than the without EEPs scenario. Also,

13 the Fig. 8 shows that the ESs are caused to increase the power sell to main grid in with and without

14 ESs scenarios.
 1

2 Fig. 8: Power sell to Grid with and without electrical EEPs

4 Furthermore, the electrical EEPs are caused to decrease the buying power from the main grid.

5 Therefore, the MG is taking the steps to self-sufficiency from the main grid. Fig. 9 show the power

6 buying to main grid in different scenarios. The decrease dependent form the main grid is very

7 insightful because the operation cost of the micro grid is reduced and the operation cost of the MG is

8 safe form the price changes of the upper level main grid markets. Furthermore, the Fig. 9 show the

9 valuable effects of ESs on the self-sufficiency from the main grid. Regarding to the Fig. 9, the power

10 buying from the main grid has been significantly decreed by using ESs.

11

12 Fig. 9: Power buy from main grid with and electrical without EEPs

13
 1 6- Conclusion

EEPs
2 In this paper, the EMPESs model has been proposed to investigate the effects of the ESs and demand

3 side EEPs on the operation of the smart MG. The results of paper shows that the operation cost of the

4 smart MG is reduced approximately 2.44% by using ESs and without any other options (Such as

5 electrical and thermal EEPs). Furthermore, the power sell to main grid has been significantly

6 increased by using ESs in the grid connected MG. Also, the used of ESs in the smart MG is caused

7 to decrease the power buy from main grid and the self-sufficiency of the MG is increased. Moreover,

8 The scenario 4 reflects the simultaneously implementation of the electrical and thermal EEPs policy

9 and so, the scenario 4 is the more fundamental scenario because the operation cost has been decreased

10 9.01% and 11.01% (in section I and II of the scenario 4) from the base case. Moreover, the results of

11 sensitivity analysis between each percent of the energy efficiency investment and the operation cost

12 of the smart MG shows that the slope of the cost reduction of the electrical EEPs is more than the

13 thermal one. Therefore, the electrical EEPs is more effectiveness than the thermal EEPs. Nowadays,

14 the use of electrical vehicle as one of the most significantly parameter of the smart MG has been

15 increased. The authors, proposes the use of electrical vehicle model and stochastic parameters in the
EEPs
16 proposed EMPESs model as a future research aspects.

17 References

[1] Z. Wang, B. Chen, J. Wang, M. M. Begovic, and C. Chen, “Coordinated Energy Management

of Networked Microgrids in Distribution Systems,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.

45–53, Jan. 2015.

[2] R. Poudineh and T. Jamasb, “Distributed generation, storage, demand response and energy

efficiency as alternatives to grid capacity enhancement,” Energy Policy, vol. 67, pp. 222–231,

Apr. 2014.

[3] L. Mehigan, J. P. Deane, B. P. Ó. Gallachóir, and V. Bertsch, “A review of the role of

distributed generation (DG) in future electricity systems,” Energy, vol. 163, pp. 822–836, Nov.
 2018.

[4] P. Siano, “Demand response and smart grids—A survey,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol.

30, pp. 461–478, Feb. 2014.

[5] T. Terlouw, T. AlSkaif, C. Bauer, and W. van Sark, “Optimal energy management in all-

electric residential energy systems with heat and electricity storage,” Appl. Energy, vol. 254,

p. 113580, Nov. 2019.

[6] B. Lokeshgupta and S. Sivasubramani, “Multi-objective home energy management with

battery energy storage systems,” Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 47, p. 101458, May 2019.

[7] S. Kakran and S. Chanana, “Smart operations of smart grids integrated with distributed

generation: A review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 81, pp. 524–535, Jan. 2018.

[8] P. Balakrishna, K. Rajagopal, and K. S. Swarup, “Distribution automation analysis based on

extended load data from AMI systems integration,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 86,

pp. 154–162, Mar. 2017.

[9] O. Alsayegh, S. Alhajraf, and H. Albusairi, “Grid-connected renewable energy source systems:

Challenges and proposed management schemes,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 51, no. 8, pp.

1690–1693, Aug. 2010.

[10] B. B. Alagoz and A. Kaygusuz, “Dynamic energy pricing by closed-loop fractional-order PI

control system and energy balancing in smart grid energy markets,” Trans. Inst. Meas. Control,

vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 565–578, May 2016.

[11] E. R. Sanseverino, M. L. Di Silvestre, M. G. Ippolito, A. De Paola, and G. Lo Re, “An

execution, monitoring and replanning approach for optimal energy management in

microgrids,” Energy, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 3429–3436, May 2011.

[12] T. Niknam, F. Golestaneh, and A. Malekpour, “Probabilistic energy and operation

management of a microgrid containing wind/photovoltaic/fuel cell generation and energy

storage devices based on point estimate method and self-adaptive gravitational search
 algorithm,” Energy, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 427–437, Jul. 2012.

[13] Y.-H. Chen, S.-Y. Lu, Y.-R. Chang, T.-T. Lee, and M.-C. Hu, “Economic analysis and optimal

energy management models for microgrid systems: A case study in Taiwan,” Appl. Energy,

vol. 103, pp. 145–154, Mar. 2013.

[14] S. M. Moghaddas-Tafreshi, S. Mohseni, M. E. Karami, and S. Kelly, “Optimal energy

management of a grid-connected multiple energy carrier micro-grid,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol.

152, pp. 796–806, Apr. 2019.

[15] S. Chalise, J. Sternhagen, T. M. Hansen, and R. Tonkoski, “Energy management of remote

microgrids considering battery lifetime,” Electr. J., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1–10, Jul. 2016.

[16] B. Lokeshgupta and S. Sivasubramani, “Multi-objective dynamic economic and emission

dispatch with demand side management,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 97, pp. 334–

343, Apr. 2018.

[17] A. F. Meyabadi and M. H. Deihimi, “A review of demand-side management: Reconsidering

theoretical framework,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 80. Pergamon, pp.

367–379, 01-Dec-2017.

[18] A. Ghaderi, M. Parsa Moghaddam, and M. K. Sheikh-El-Eslami, “Energy efficiency resource

modeling in generation expansion planning,” Energy, vol. 68, pp. 529–537, Apr. 2014.

[19] S. Dorahaki, M. Rashidinejad, A. Abdollahi, and M. Mollahassani-pour, “A novel two-stage

structure for coordination of energy efficiency and demand response in the smart grid

environment,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 97, pp. 353–362, 2018.

[20] L. Zhang, N. Gari, and L. V. Hmurcik, “Energy management in a microgrid with distributed

energy resources,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 78, pp. 297–305, Feb. 2014.

[21] V. S. Tabar, M. A. Jirdehi, and R. Hemmati, “Energy management in microgrid based on the

multi objective stochastic programming incorporating portable renewable energy resource as

demand response option,” Energy, vol. 118, pp. 827–839, 2017.

[22] Y. Wang, H. Lin, Y. Liu, Q. Sun, and R. Wennersten, “Management of household electricity

consumption under price-based demand response scheme,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 204, pp. 926–

938, 2018.

[23] Y. Wang et al., “Energy management of smart micro-grid with response loads and distributed

generation considering demand response,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 197, pp. 1069–1083, Oct.

2018.

[24] M. P. Moghaddam, A. Abdollahi, and M. Rashidinejad, “Flexible demand response programs

modeling in competitive electricity markets,” Appl. Energy, vol. 88, no. 9, pp. 3257–3269,

2011.

[25] F. Alasali, S. Haben, and W. Holderbaum, “Energy management systems for a network of

electrified cranes with energy storage,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 106, pp. 210–

222, Mar. 2019.