Economic analysis of islanded microgrid
considering seasonal variation of load growth
up to planning period
Hemanth Chaduvula
Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Kharagpur, India
hemanthped@gmail.com
Abstract—This paper presents the operation of islanded mi-
crogrid (IMG) with dispatchable DG units, battery and shunt
capacitors considering load growth up to planning period. The
dispatchable DG units in the IMG can be able to meet load
demand up to the end of the planning period due to their inherent
droop nature. The battery and shunt capacitors inject the fixed
amount of active and reactive power into the system irrespective
of load growth; however, they were improving the voltage and
minimizing the power loss in the system. The averaged seasonal
load profile pattern and Modified Newton Raphson (MNR) load
flow method are integrated into the power flow analysis. This
paper solves the operation of an IMG system in two cases; in
which case(a) considers only biomass DG units and case(b) deals
battery and shunt capacitors along with biomass DG units. A
net profit based objective function is evaluated by taking various
costs of components in both cases up to planning period. The
effectiveness of the proposed method is demonstrated on a 33-
bus distribution system operating in islanded mode.
Index Terms—droop, seasonal load growth, net profit
I. I NTRODUCTION
Microgrid offers numerous benefits to both utility and
consumers. The sytematic establishment of microgrid leads
to lesser emissions and reduced cost of energy in the power
system. The microgrid can be operated in grid-connected mode
or islanded (autonomous) mode. The grid-connected microgrid
can maintain a constant voltage at slack bus and constant
frequency in the system. The microgrid can be disconnected
from the grid at the point of common coupling (PCC) and
operated independently due to technical and economic reasons
[1], [2]. The situations arise in operating the islanded micro-
grid is different from the grid-connected mode. In islanded
microgrid, no DG unit can able to perform the slack bus
function; therefore, its power generation is depending on
power flow variables. The power sharing among DG units
in IMG is based on either communication based or droop
based schemes. Each scheme has its own merits and demerits.
The communication based scheme is costly and unreliable due
to any loss of communication link. On the other hand, the
droop based scheme eliminates the need for communication
and power sharing is done using local measurements [3]–[5].
978-1-7281-4878-6/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on January 06,2022 at 16:28:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Debapriya Das
Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Kharagpur, India
ddas@ee.iitkgp.ernet.in
The energy management strategies are implemented for
attaining reliable and optimal operation of microgrid having
distinct sources, storage system, and uncertainty. The energy
management techniques based on robust optimization [6],
stochastic method [7] and chance constrained programming
[8] is performed for microgrid energy scheduling. A two stage
planning of microgrid is implemented in [9] to minimize
the capital and operation cost while ensuring the optimal
operation.
The storage device is an essential component in the micro-
grid. It acts as a source as well as a sink, thus providing
flexibility to the microgrid. In [10], the life cycle cost of
different energy storage technologies is analyzed by consid-
ering technical and cost parameters associated with it. The
storage system is incorporated due to its great support in many
objectives though it adds cost to the microgrid. Fossati et
al. [11] implemented a genetic algorithm with a fuzzy expert
system for the capacity determination and energy management
of a storage system to achieve the minimum operating cost
of the microgrid. Omran et al. [12] presented the methods
for reduction of power fluctuations in grid connected PV-
battery system and also net revenue based objective function
is calculated at the end of the project period. In [13], sizing
and present worth cost of all components in IMG is estimated
using annual recovery factor for twenty years, but the authors
have not taken droop characteristics of dispatchable DG. The
authors [14] evaluated the impact of renewable penetration
on the sizing of Wind-PV-DG-ESS system and net present
cost. However, the analysis is conducted on a certain load
level. Yahyaie and Soong [15] have solved the optimal power
flow under different load scenarios along with location and
sizing of the battery energy storage system, but the authors
did not consider the various costs of components in the system
up to planning period. In the case of IMG, the maximum
loadability is of particular importance as it is fed from the
limited capacity of DG units. Abdelaziz and Saadany [16]
considered the generation cost minimization in addition to
the maximum loading tolerated by the droop controlled IMG
system. However, the authors have not considered storage
5783
 25 Cs
device and costs of components.
In the light of the above, to the best of the author’s Cf

27 28 29 30 31 32 33
knowledge, no work has been carried out in the operation 24
Battery
23 26
of droop controlled islanded microgrid (IMG) with annual Main
Grid
PCC
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

load growth up to planning period. The biomass distributed

STATIC
generation, battery, and shunt capacitors are considered in the SWITCH 19 15

system and are optimally allocated using sensitivity analysis. 20

DG-1 DG-2 DG-3
16

21 17
In this work, an average seasonal variation of load pattern is
22 18
utilized and the battery charging and discharging operation is
managed to maintain its SOC limits. The injection of active Fig. 1. 33-bus islanded system with droop nature of DG, battery and shunt
capacitors
and reactive powers are carried out by battery and shunt
capacitors respectively. The life cycle cost of all components in
the system is computed up to the end of the planning period. In
The analysis is carried out by running the load flow algo-
this paper, an objective function based on net profit is evaluated
rithm in IMG system in two cases; in which case(a) considers
in the IMG system at the end of the planning period.
only biomass DG units and case(b) deals battery and shunt
II. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION capacitors, along with biomass DG units. In this work, a time
The biomass DG, battery and shunt capacitors are allocated span of 24 years is assumed from the base year (0th year) to
in the system according to minimum power loss criteria. The 23rd year as a planning period. The lifespan of biomass DG
battery and shunt capacitors are placed simultaneously after presumed as a planning period.
DG placement is shown in Fig. 1. In IMG, slack bus is
A. Load model
absent. In this work, Modified Newton Raphson (MNR) is
implemented to tackle the load flow with droop nature of DG Except for the base year, the load growth is accepted in
[4]. DG with inductive droop mimics the droop characteristics every year up to the end of the planning period. The active
of synchronous generators in the conventional system. The DG and reactive power load at year ‘yr 0 (PLyr , QyLr ) is shown in
with inductive output impedance, the active and reactive power equation (8).
generation is affected by frequency and voltage respectively
shown in equation (1). PLyr = PLbase (1 + g)yr , QyLr = Qbase
L (1 + g)
yr
(8)
1 1 for yr = 0, 1, · · · , 23.
PG k = (ωo − ω) , QGk = (|Vo | − |Vk |) (1)
mpk nqk Here, PLbase , Qbase
L are active and reactive power load of the
system at the base year and g is the annual load growth rate.
Here, PGk and QGk are active and reactive power supplied
by the DG located at bus k. The frequency and voltage droop The averaged seasonal load profile pattern in Fig. 2 is
parameters of DG installed at bus k are denoted as mpk and acquired from IEEE Reliability system data [17]. There are
nqk respectively. four seasons winter (120 days), spring (63 days), summer
The active and reactive power supplied by all droop gener- (91 days) and fall (91 days). Each season is represented as
ators in the system are given in equation (2), where d is the 24 hours averaged load paradigm. The peak load occurs at
number of droop buses in the system. the 18th hour in the winter season. The load pattern of each
season is repeated in a certain number of days of the year. The
d d
X X active and reactive load at all nodes of the 33-bus distribution
Psys = PGk , Qsys = QGk (2) system are multiplied by per unit hourly load value of averaged
k=1 k=1
seasonal load pattern is shown in equations (9-10).
The active and reactive power balance is inspected for i =
2, · · · n in equations (3) and (4) respectively. PLi (t) = PLpeak
i
(t) × Loadpu (t) (9)
n
X
PGi − PLi − |Vi | |Yij ||Vj |cos (δi − δj − θij ) = 0 (3)
j=1
Averaged Seasonal Load Profile Pattern
1.1
n Winter Spring Summer
X Fall
1
QGi − QLi − |Vi | |Yij ||Vj |sin (δi − δj − θij ) = 0 (4) 0.9
Load in p.u.

j=1 0.8

Pload + Ploss − Psys = 0 (5) 0.7

0.6

Qload + Qloss − Qsys = 0 (6) 0.5

0.4
1 18 24 48 72 96
After solving the equations (3-6), the unknown variables in Time in hours

vector [x] are determined.

Fig. 2. Hourly variation of averaged seasonal load profile pattern at base
x = [δ2 · · · δn |V2 | · · · |Vn | ω |V1 |] (7) year

5784

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on January 06,2022 at 16:28:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 QLi (t) = Qpeak
Li (t) × Loadpu (t) (10) 60
Reactive power injected by Shunt Capacitor

for i = 2, · · · , n and t = 1, 2, · · · , 96.

Discrete reactive power (kVAr)

50

Here, PLpeaki
(t) , Qpeak
Li (t) are peak active and reactive 40

power load at bus i in hour t respectively and Loadpu (t) 30

is the per unit load value at hour t. 20

10

B. Biomass distributed generation 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

The microgrid is evolved in the path of sustainable energy Time in hours

development through the utilization of renewables. Sustainable Fig. 4. A one day schedule of reactive power by shunt capacitors
development through bioenergy resources has to consider de-
cisions for its proper planning. The decisions made according t
|Pc,bat t
| ≤ P , Pd,bat ≤P (14)
to technology selection, transport of materials, capacity and
finance in the bioenergy sector [18]. Biomass type DG is one Where E t is the energy available in the battery at tth
type of renewable source, and it can follow the load demand. interval. E 0 , E T are energy available in the battery at the
beginning and end of the day respectively. ∆T duration of the
C. Battery and Shunt Capacitor model t t
interval is taken as 1 hour. Pc,bat , Pd,bat are battery charging
The battery type storage system has a rapid response and power and discharging power at tth interval and ηc , ηd are
can ensure optimal operation of the microgrid. A sodium- charging and discharging efficiency respectively.
sulfur (NaS) battery is examined in this work due to its long The shunt capacitor is considered for the source of reactive
cycle life, low maintenance, and high energy density [19]. power, and it delivers when the battery is discharging its active
The one-day battery scheduling with power and energy profile power. The reactive power supplied by the shunt capacitor at
depicted in Fig. 3 is derived from the seasonal load profile tth interval (Qtc ) is shown in equation (15). The power factor in
pattern shown in Fig. 2. For a day battery scheduling, 24- (15) is the same as the DG operating power factor in case (a).
hour load pattern is derived from the hourly average of all In this work, discrete sized reactive power in steps of 25kV Ar
seasons. The amount of power absorbed by the battery is are accounted. A one day schedule of reactive power injected
obtained by taking the difference of the 24-hour load pattern by shunt capacitors is shown in Fig. 4. The fixed and switched
from its mean. The charging and discharging of the battery is type of shunt capacitors are considered.
decided if the 24-hour load pattern is below or above its mean
value. The charging power is associated with a negative sign Qtc = Pd,bat
t
. tan φ (15)
and discharging power is associated with the positive sign are
III. FORMULATION OF AN OBJECTIVE FUNCTION
considered. The battery power at the 24th hour is modulated
BASED ON NET PROFIT
to maintain the same State of Charge (SOC) at the beginning
and the end of the day. In addition to that, the minimum SOC In this work, the present worth of net profit based objective
of the battery is satisfied, and it has to fulfill the constraints function is formulated in equations (16-23). All the parameters
shown in equations (13-14). The ratings of the battery (P , E) are given in the Appendix. The return cost in equation (16)
are determined based on its charging and discharging power is obtained by selling electricity to the consumers during the
with efficiencies [11]. planning period (N) in case (a) and case (b).
M
E t = E t−1 − Pc,bat
t
.∆T.ηc (11) X y y
(1 + g) r (1 + σ) r
return cost =E base × kebase y
E t = E t−1 − Pd,bat
t
.∆T /ηd (12) yr =1
(1 + r) r
N
!
y
E 0 = E T , 0.2E ≤ E t ≤ E (13) M
X (1 + σ) r
+ (1 + g) · y (16)
(1 + r) r
yr =M +1

The return cost is calculated up to the end of the planning

A day scheduled power and energy of Battery
period by considering annual energy generation E base (kW h)
150 1600

100
Pbat E
1400
and electricity price Kebase ($/kW h) at base year. As load
Discharging
50
1200
growth, energy generated by biomass DG increases with
‘g 0 rate in every year. The present worth of return cost is
Battery Power (kW)

0
Battery Energy (kWh)

1000
-50

-100 800 calculated in which the increase in electricity price (σ) and
-150
600 discount rate (r) are taken into account in every year [20].
-200

-250
Charging 400
It consists of two parts. In the first part, the number of years
-300
200
‘M’, in which the resources can take the load growth without
-350 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 violating constraints considered in equation (24). From the
Time in hours
year ‘M+1’ to the end of the planning period, same load
Fig. 3. One-day power and energy profile of the battery growth is continued in the second part lest constraint violation.

5785

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on January 06,2022 at 16:28:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Annual energy generation at the base year (E base ) is shunt capacitors are neglected.
determined by the sum of hourly active power generation of nC
all seasons are shown in equation (17).
X 1
costCAP s =Qf · Cf · (k−1)·LC
24 48 k=1 (1 + r)
X X nC
base
E = 120 × P sys + 63 × P sys X 1
h=1 h=25
+ Qs · Cs · (k−1)·LC
(22)
72 96
! k=1 (1 + r)
X X
+ 91 × P sys + 91 × P sys ∆T (17) Here Cf , Cs are the capital cost in ($/kV Ar) correspond-
h=49 h=73 ing to fixed and switched shunt capacitor respectively. Qf ,
The parameters of capital cost, operation and maintenance Qs are the discrete value of reactive power (kV Ar) injected
costs are considered for the planning of biomass power unit by fixed and switched shunt capacitor respectively. nC is the
[21]. The present worth of biomass DG (costDG ) is shown in number of times capacitor will be replaced during the planning
equation (18). horizon (nC = N/LC ).
nDG M y
Net profit is calculated by taking the difference between
cap
X X (1 + g) r return cost and cost spent on resources.
costDG = CBIO PGi + E base OMBIO yr
i=1 y =1
(1 + r)
r
Net profit = return cost − (costDG + costBAT T + costCAP s )
N
M
X 1 (23)
+ E base OMBIO (1 + g) y Constraints
yr =M+1
(1 + r) r
(18)
cap
Here, CBIO , OMBIO are the capital cost, operation and The load growth is ceased if the resources in case (a) and
maintenance cost of biomass DG in ($/kW ) and ($/kW h) case (b) are not able to satisfy the constraints specified in
respectively. nDG is the number of DG units. PGi is the active equation (24).
power rating of ith biomass DG (kW ). Vmin ≤ |Viyr | ≤ Vmax , |I l | ≤ Imax
l
(24)
The battery and shunt capacitors are replaced after the end
of their life period and available up to planning period. So Where |Viyr | is the minimum voltage magnitude at bus i in
in addition to DG, the present worth of battery and shunt year ‘yr0 . I l is current in branch l.
capacitor costs (costBAT T , costCAP s ) are also calculated up
IV. SOLUTION STRATEGY
to the end of the planning period.
The costs of capital (CP ($/kW ) , CE ($/kW h)), operation The IMG load flow with biomass distributed generation is
and maintenance (OP ($/kW ) , OE ($/kW h)) and salvage performed in case (a) up to the end of the planning period.
value (SP ($/kW ) , SE ($/kW h)) related to power and en- In case (b), the battery and shunt capacitors are considered
ergy ratings of battery and also its lifetime (LB ) are taken along with biomass DG in load flow up to end of the planning
from [12]. The salvage value is subtracted from battery cost period. The charging and discharging powers of battery and
equations [12] shown in (19-20). reactive power injected by shunt capacitors in each year of
the planning period is same irrespective of load growth. The
nB N
X 1 X 1 detailed procedure is explained in Fig. 5.
β= CP · + OP · k
(1 + r)
(k−1)·LB
(1 + r) The dispatchable type Biomass DG in the system delivers
k=1 k=1
nB hourly active and reactive power according to the seasonal load
X 1 profile pattern in the base year. Out of all hours; the active and
− SP · k·LB
(19)
k=1 (1 + r) reactive power generated by the biomass DG is maximum at
peak hour (18th hour) in the base year. The minimum voltage
nB
X 1
N
X 1 corresponding to an 18th hour at a particular node in the 33-
γ= CE · (k−1)·LB
+ OE · k bus system is observed. The minimum voltage obtained has to
k=1 (1 + r) k=1 (1 + r) satisfy the voltage constraint specified in (24). The maximum
nB
X 1 power loss also occurs at peak load condition.
− SE · k·LB
(20) Except for the base year, the load is increasing in every
k=1 (1 + r)
year of the planning period. In each year of planning period;
Here β, γ represents present worth cost associated with bat- minimum voltage, maximum power loss, and peak power
tery power rating($/kW ) and battery energy rating($/kW h) generated by the DG are noted in both cases. The number of
respectively. nB is the number of times battery will be replaced years DG units can take load growth in the planning horizon
during the planning horizon (nB = N/LB ) . is determined by constraints mentioned in (24). The DG
ratings are determined from its peak power generation in the
costBAT T = β · P + γ · E (21)
planning horizon. Three number of DG units are considered
The shunt capacitor cost information and its lifetime (LC ) and are placed at the same location in this work. Net profit is
are taken from [22]. The operation and maintenance costs of calculated at the end of the planning period in both cases.

5786

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on January 06,2022 at 16:28:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 start Minimum p.u. voltage at peak load of year

DG: PG (mp ),QG (nq ) 0.97

battery : P, E (a) without battery & shunt capacitors @ 25
Capacitor: Qc 0.96
(b) with battery & shunt capacitors @ 18
0.95
Allocate DG, battery and

p.u. voltage
shunt capacitor in the system 0.94
by using sensitivity analysis
0.93
yr = 0
base year 0.92

0.91

0.9
No 0 6 12 18 23
yr < N stop
Years

Yes
yr
PL = Pbase × (1 + g)yr
Fig. 6. Per unit minimum voltage profile up to planning period
L
yr = yr + 1
QyLr = Qbase
L × (1 + g) yr

t=1 Power loss at peak load of year

C
700

min(Vmin ) 600
No (a) without battery & shunt capacitors
t ≤ 96 max (Ploss )

Peak Power loss in kW

max(PG , QG ) 500
(b) with battery &shunt capacitors
400
Yes
PLi (t) = Ppeak
Li × Loadpu (t) 300
t=t+1
QLi (t) = Qpeak
Li × Loadpu (t) 200
Constraints
Yes 100
run modified New- Vmin ≤ |Viyr | ≥ Vmax
ton Raphson 0
load flow method |Il | ≤ Imax
l 0 6 12 18 23
Years

Vmin , Ploss
C
PG , QG
No
Fig. 7. Peak power loss up to planning period
stop

Fig. 5. Flow chart of an IMG operation

is maintained up to 23rd year in both cases. Thus, the DG
ratings are determined in both cases from power generation
of biomass DG at 23rd year shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
respectively. In this work, three DG units of equal rating are
The per unit minimum voltage profile corresponding to peak considered in case (a) and case (b) respectively.
load condition is shown for two cases in Fig. 6. It is found
that the minimum voltage corresponding to peak load in every
year occurred at node 25 in case (a) and node 18 in case
(b) respectively. Because the placement of the battery and
shunt capacitors at node 25 in case (b) foster the voltage
at node 25 than node 18; therefore, the voltage at node 18
becomes less than node 25 in case (b). From Fig. 6, the voltage
profile decreases in planning span with an increase in load and
maintains 0.9 p.u. voltage at the end of the planning period in
both cases.
The maximum power loss is occurred at peak hour out of all
hours in a year. The maximum active power loss at peak load Fig. 8. The DG capacities at peak load hour without battery and shunt
hour is shown in Fig. 7 for a few years of the planning period. capacitors up to planning period
From Fig. 7, the minimum loss is occurred with battery and
shunt capacitor case than without battery and shunt capacitor.
This minimum loss is due to the reduction in branch power Peak power generation of DG
flows after placement of battery and shunt capacitors at node with battery and capacitor
PG QG
12000
25. It is observed that the power flow in branches between
DG capacity in kW and kVAr

node 25 and node 6 {(25-24), (24-23), (23-3), (3-4), (4-5), 10000

(5-6)} are become less in case (b) compared to the case (a). 8000

The droop based biomass DG delivers the maximum amount 6000

of active and reactive power at peak hour in both cases. As 4000

load increases, the peak power generated by DG increases in 2000

every year up to planning period. The peak power generated 0

by biomass DG at the 18th hour is shown for a few years of 0 6

Years
12 18 23

planning horizon in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 respectively. The peak

power generated by DG without battery and shunt capacitors Fig. 9. The DG capacities at peak load hour with battery and shunt capacitors
in Fig. 8 is more compared with battery and shunt capacitors up to planning period
in Fig. 9. It is noticed from Fig. 6 that; the minimum voltage

5787

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on January 06,2022 at 16:28:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE I
T HE RATINGS OF DG UNITS , BATTERY AND S HUNT CAPACITORS [2] F. Katiraei, M. R. Iravani and P. W. Lehn, “Micro-grid autonomous oper-
ation during and subsequent to islanding process,” in IEEE Transactions
Biomass DG Battery Shunt Capacitors on Power Delivery, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 248-257, Jan. 2005.
Case BIO (kV A)
SDG P (kW ),E(kW h) Qfc (kV Ar) , Qsc (kV Ar) [3] H. Han, X. Hou, J. Yang, J. Wu, M. Su and J. M. Guerrero, “Review
(a) Without battery and of Power Sharing Control Strategies for Islanding Operation of AC
shunt capacitors 3 × 3900 - -
(b) With battery and Microgrids,” in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 7, no. 1, pp.
shunt capacitors 3 × 3800 320,1420 25,25 200-215, Jan. 2016.
[4] F. Mumtaz, M. H. Syed, M. A. Hosani and H. H. Zeineldin, “A Novel
Approach to Solve Power Flow for Islanded Microgrids Using Modified
TABLE II Newton Raphson With Droop Control of DG,” IEEE Transactions on
T HE NET PROFIT FOR DG WITH AND WITHOUT BATTERY AND SHUNT Sustainable Energy, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 493-503, April 2016.
CAPACITORS
[5] H. Bevrani and S. Shokoohi, “An Intelligent Droop Control for Simul-
taneous Voltage and Frequency Regulation in Islanded Microgrids,” in
Kebase Net profit ($) per Avg. net
$ $ IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1505-1513, Sept.
Case M ( kW ) Planning Period prof it( hr )
(a) Without battery and
h 2013.
shunt capacitors 23 0.1 13.76 × 106 68.28 [6] J. S. Giraldo, J. A. Castrillon, J. C. Lpez, M. J. Rider and C. A. Castro,
(b) With battery and “Microgrids Energy Management Using Robust Convex Programming,”
shunt capacitors 23 0.1 13.48 × 106 66.91 in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 4520-4530, July
2019.
[7] A. Bhattacharya, J. P. Kharoufeh and B. Zeng, “Managing Energy Stor-
From Tables I and II, up to M = 23, the system can able age in Microgrids: A Multistage Stochastic Programming Approach,” in
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 483-496, Jan. 2018.
to take the load growth in both the cases. The ratings of DG [8] Z. Shi, H. Liang, S. Huang and V. Dinavahi, “Distributionally Robust
units and battery are presented in Table I after rounded to Chance-Constrained Energy Management for Islanded Microgrids,” in
the nearest ten. Three biomass DG units are considered with IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 2234-2244, March
2019.
each DG unit has rated 3900kV A capacity with 0.85pf is [9] S. Mohamed, M. F. Shaaban, M. Ismail, E. Serpedin and K. A. Qaraqe,
obtained in case (a) whereas DG unit of 3800kV A capacity “An Efficient Planning Algorithm for Hybrid Remote Microgrids,” in
with 0.85pf is obtained in case (b). The battery with energy IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 257-267,
Jan. 2019.
rating 1420kW h and power rating of 320kW is obtained in [10] B. Zakeri and S. Syri, “Electrical energy storage systems: A comparative
case (b). The maximum discrete reactive power injected by life cycle cost analysis,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
fixed and switched shunt capacitors are 25kV Ar and 25kV Ar vol. 42, pp. 569-596, Feb. 2015.
[11] J.P. Fossati, A. Galarza, A. Martin-Villate and L. Fontan, “A method
respectively. The net profit is deliberated in both cases by for optimal sizing energy storage systems for microgrids,” Renewable
considering the parameters related to the DG unit, battery and Energy, vol. 77, pp. 539-549, May 2015.
shunt capacitors. For a value of Kebase = $0.072/kW h, no [12] W. A. Omran, M. Kazerani and M. M. A. Salama, “Investigation of
Methods for Reduction of Power Fluctuations Generated From Large
profit is obtained in both cases. By choosing unit cost of value Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Systems,” in IEEE Transactions on Energy
Kebase = $0.1/kW h, the net profit is obtained $13.76 × 106 Conversion, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 318-327, March 2011.
in case(a) and $13.48 × 106 in case(b) respectively. [13] A. Maleki and F. Pourfayaz, “Sizing of stand-alone photo-
voltaic/wind/diesel system with battery and fuel cell storage devices
VI. C ONCLUSION by harmony search algorithm,” Journal of Energy Storage, vol. 2, pp.
30-42, Aug. 2015.
In this work, DG units, battery and shunt capacitors are [14] C. Wang, Mengxuan Liu and Li Guo, “Cooperative operation and
optimal design for islanded microgrid,” 2012 IEEE PES Innovative
placed in the system according to minimum power loss based Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT), pp. 1-8, 2012.
sensitivity index. It was observed that the IMG could take [15] F. Yahyaie and T. Soong, “Optimal operation strategy and sizing of
load growth up to the end of the planning period in both battery energy storage systems,” 2012 25th IEEE Canadian Conference
on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE), pp. 1-4, 2012.
the cases without violating the constraints. Improvement in [16] M. M. A. Abdelaziz and E. F. El-Saadany, “Maximum loadability
voltage profile and reduction in power loss were noticed after consideration in droop-controlled islanded microgrids optimal power
placement of battery and shunt capacitors. In addition to that, flow,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 106, pp. 168-179, Jan.
2014.
the capacity of the DG units required in case (b) became less
[17] C. Grigg, P. Wong, P. Albrecht et al., “The IEEE Reliability Test System-
than case (a). Less investment spent on resources in case (a) 1996. A report prepared by the Reliability Test System Task Force of the
results in a slightly higher net profit than case (b). Application of Probability Methods Subcommittee,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Systems, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1010-1020, Aug. 1999.
APPENDIX [18] J. A. Scott, W. Ho, P. K. Dey, “A review of multi-criteria decision-
making methods for bioenergy systems,” Energy, vol. 42, pp. 146-156,
N = 24, LB = 6, LC = 10, r = 10%, g = 4%, σ = 3%, Apr. 2012.
[19] Z. Wen, Y. Hu, X. Hu, J. Han and Z. Gu, “Main Challenges for
ηc = 0.9, ηd = 0.9, mp = 5.102 × 103 , nq = 0.02, High Performance NAS battery: Materials and Interfaces,” Advanced
cap Functional Materials, vol. 23, 1005-1018, 2013.
CBIO = $3000/kW, OMBIO = $0.012/kW h, Cf =
[20] D. Das, “Maximum loading and cost of energy loss of radial distribution
$5/kV Ar, Cs = $10/kV Ar, feeders,” Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 26, pp. 307-314,
CP = $1000/kW, OP = $3/kW, SP = $10/kW , 2004.
[21] S. R. Gampa and D. Das, “Optimum placement and sizing of DGs
CE = $170/kW h, OE = $1.5/kW h, SE = $1.7/kW h. considering average hourly variations of load,” Electrical Power and
Energy Systems, vol. 66, pp. 25-40, 2015.
R EFERENCES [22] S. F. Mekhamer, M. E. El-Hawary, S. A. Soliman, M. A. Moustafa
and M. M. Mansour, “New heuristic strategies for reactive power
[1] R. H. Lasseter, “MicroGrids,” IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter compensation of radial distribution feeders,” in IEEE Transactions on
Meeting. Conference Proceedings, vol. 1, pp. 305-308, 2002. Power Delivery, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1128-1135, Oct. 2002.

5788

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on January 06,2022 at 16:28:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.