Sustainability 2836462

1
1 Residential Prosumer Energy Management System with

2 Renewable Integration Considering Multi Energy Storages
3 and Demand Response
4 Asjad Ali*1, Abdullah Aftab2, Muhammad Nadeem Akram3, Shoaib Awan4, Hafiz Abdul
5 Muqeet5, Zeeshan Ahmad Arfeen6
6
7 1, 4
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila 47050,
8 Pakistan (asjadali14113@gmail.com), shoaibawanece@gmail.com
9 2, 5
Department of Electrical Engineering Technology, Punjab Tianjin University of Technology, Lahore
10 54770, Pakistan abdulla.eet@gmail.com (A.A.)
11 3
Department of Mechanical, Automotive and Materials Engineering, University of Windsor, Windsor,
12 Ontario Canada akram113@uwindsor.ca
13 6
Department of Electrical Engineering, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB), Bahawalpur, 63100
14 Pakistan zeeshan.arfeen@iub.edu.pk
15 * Correspondence: Correspondence: Asjad Ali (asjadali14113@gmail.com)
16 Abstract: Rising energy demands, economic challenges, and the urgent need to address climate change have urged the
17 emergence of a market where consumers can both purchase and sell electricity to the grid. This market leverages diverse
18 energy sources and energy storage systems to achieve significant cost savings for consumers while providing critical grid
19 support for utilities. In this study, an energy management system has been employed to tackle the optimization problem
20 associated with various energy sources. This approach relies on mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) to optimize
21 energy utilization while adhering to diverse constraints, yielding a feasible energy solutions. This model is applied to real-
22 world energy system consumption data and forecasts the most cost-effective day-ahead energy plans for different types of
23 loads engaged in demand response. Furthermore, time-based charging and discharging strategies for electric vehicles and
24 energy storage system are considered, conducting a comprehensive analysis of energy costs across various storage devices.
25 Findings demonstrate that implementing this model can lead to 18.26% reduction in operational costs when using lithium
26 batteries and a remarkable 14.88% reduction with lead-acid batteries, particularly when integrating solar power and EV into
27 the system, while GHG is reduced by 36018 grams/day for a load of 25 kW in the particular scenario. However, the analysis
28 reveals that integrating wind power is not economically viable due to its comparatively
29 Citation: To be added by editorial higher operational costs.
staff during production.
30 Academic Editor: Firstname Last- Keywords: Demand side management; distributed generation; energy management system;
31 name electric vehicle; energy storage system; smart grid; PV Generation; Wind; prosumer
32
Received: date
Revised: date
Accepted: date
33 Published: date
34 1. Introduction
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.

Submitted for possible open access
publication under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license
(https://creativecommons.org/license
s/by/4.0/).
3 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

4
35 Both energy demand and the price of electricity over the globe are increasing,
36 and conventional sources of energy are being exhausted at higher rates, raising en-
37 vironmental concerns like global warming and temperature surges. Paris Agree-
38 ment of 2015 and COP 28 have cogitated to hamper the emission of CO 2 caused by
39 fossil fuels and to deploy renewable energy sources for power generation
[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]
40 . Moreover, conventional grids equipped with conventional energy
41 sources (fossil fuels) also face lots of problems like peak load management, frequent
42 blackouts, and failures along the unidirectional flow of energy
[7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]
43 . These problems have given rise to the concept of smart grids or micro-
44 grids and renewable energy sources. Smart grids are equipped with smart meters,
45 control systems, and decentralized energy sources that are capable of intelligent
46 generation, transmission, and distribution of energy, which is known as the prop-
47 erty of self-healing. In smart grids, loads can communicate with each other and
48 there is a bidirectional flow of electricity [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18] . In
49 Ref. [19] , the authors have discussed the architecture of microgrids and different
50 techniques and software to optimize these microgrids to reduce costs. Smart micro-
51 grids consist of power electronics modules, controllers, renewable energy sources,
52 loads (residential and in some cases loads related to electrical vehicles), and storage
53 systems. The authors also emphasized that by using IoT/AI smart grids can be oper-
54 ated and observed more efficiently. The authors also cogitated that energy manage-
55 ment systems (EMS) are very crucial from an economic perspective. The structure of
56 microgrids (both on & off-grid) entails centralized DC bus configuration, centralized
57 AC bus configuration, and hybrid AC/DC bus configuration. Storage systems also
58 play a crucial role as they provide power during outages, and other supportive ser-
59 vices such as peak shaving, balancing load, and reliability of system.
60 Storage system usually has three configurations i.e. single, multi, and swap-
61 pable configuration. It consists of Li-Ion batteries and super-capacitors. A lot of re-
62 search has shown that by employing storage systems, a hefty amount of cost can be
63 reduced. Among renewable energy sources, the most important sources are wind
64 and solar PV cells, and they are also feasible for installation in residential and com-
65 mercial usage. The homes equipped with solar PV cells or small wind turbines in
66 the vicinity of smart grids can use their energy during peak hours and sell their ex-
67 tra amount of energy to utilities. These homes are termed as smart homes. Smart
68 homes have schedulable loads, DG, EV, and a home energy management system
69 (HEMS) controller. HEMS controller provides access to real-time information about
70 electricity consumption, rate of electricity, condition of weather, and supportive or
71 enabling technology such as Artificial intelligence (AI) or the Internet of thing (IOT)
72 [20], [21], [22], [23], [24] . If a greater number of consumers support the grid it
73 has a significant impact on the grid which would enhance the reliability of micro

7
74 grid, especially at peak loads. Furthermore, intelligent use of energy by consumer

75 would reduce their electricity bill considerably [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28] .
76 Smart meters are also installed in these homes for net metering and they respond
77 to demand response (DR) programs or Demand side management (DSM). In the DR
78 technique end user’s load curve is improved as per external signal (i.e. price or incen-
79 tives) which is usually received from utility, while in DSM overall efficiency of elec-
80 tricity consumption is improved in the domain of customer [29], [30], [31] . Au-
81 thors in Ref. [32] have presented a control system based on IEEE 802.15.4 and Zig-
82 Bee. Both hardware and software designs were presented. The authors devised a con-
83 trol system to turn off the lights for energy saving and a significant amount of cost re-
84 duction was observed in the system. In Ref. [33] , an optimization method is pro-
85 posed for real-time management of energy in smart homes having rooftop solar pan-
86 els, lighting loads, air conditioners, and other smart appliances. The results depicted a
87 considerable reduction in cost without disturbing customer satisfaction.
88
89
90 Figure 1. Smart Home Energy management system components.
91 2. Literature Review
92 In [34], the model for smart household scheduling is presented by the authors.
93 The approach bases scheduling of all sorts of load on optimal cost planning on mixed
94 linear integer programming. When necessary, the intelligent system can buy and sell
95 power to the power grid utilizing a bi-directional energy meter. The systems guaran-
96 tee effective use of energy resources, which leads to greater cost savings. In this

10
97 study, despite conducting a thorough analysis, the electric vehicle is only charged us-
98 ing one method from the grid, and a sole battery storage system is employed. In Ref.
99 [35] the authors proposed a home energy management system that includes predic-
100 tive modeling and control. The technology has the potential to optimize the home en-
101 ergy management system at any time. It chooses model predictive control concepts
102 that make use of MILP to get around the issue of updating new variables with fresh
103 forecasts. In this study, the authors did not incorporate the investigation of a wind
104 energy system and electric vehicle (EV) in their research study. Microgrids and smart
105 grids containing green energy sources and storage systems have the prowess to re-
106 solve these issues by properly scheduling the resources according to demand to bene-
107 fit both consumers and utility [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41]. Similarly, In Ref. [42], the
108 authors proposed optimal scheduling of the university campus of Pakistan consider-
109 ing the various system constraints. The proposed system was comprised of the utility
110 grid, solar PV, energy storage system, and diesel generator. Mixed integer linear pro-
111 gramming was used in the MATLAB software to carry out the simulations. The ob-
112 tained results reduced the operational cost and GHG by 35% and 750 kg respectively.
113 In reference [41], the authors proposed a scheduling plan for a university cam-
114 pus that integrated various energy sources, but the inclusion of wind energy and
115 electric vehicles within the campus was not considered. In Ref. [43], the authors pre-
116 sented energy management for residential appliances using a based strategy consid-
117 ering the end user’s priority and comfort based on real-time transport protocol (RTP).
118 Different mathematical models for Home energy management framework and en-
119 ergy storage systems were developed. A considerable decline in cost was observed
120 after employing Home Energy management (HEM). In Ref. [44], the authors consid-
121 ered a campus-based micro-grid containing both dispatchable and non-dispatchable
122 energy sources in China and devised a system using linear programming techniques
123 in MATLAB with various system constraints. The grid was comprised of secured ad-
124 vanced communication, control, protection, monitoring, and bidirectional controllers
125 for system operation. The cost of energy declined by 20.5%, while GHG decreased by
126 hundreds. In references [42,43], the authors resolved issues concerning campus mi-
127 crogrids, employing an energy storage system exclusively composed of lithium-ion
128 batteries, with no incorporation of wind energy among the renewable energy sources.
129 In Ref. [45], authors have cogitated over the impacts of PV installation and Energy
130 storage system (ESS) considering the home-to-grid exchange (H2G) of energy and
131 proposed a scheduling scheme using a Genetic algorithm. Different cases were stud-
132 ied with certain restrictions and it was observed that cost was reduced by 68.8% in
133 the best-case scenario.
134 Ref. [46] exhibits the advantages of distributed energy and energy storage sys-
135 tems (ESS) in a smart grid prosumer-based market. Linear programming is used to
136 schedule ESS to exchange energy with the grid depending upon tariffs at a specific
137 time. It was observed that charging ESS at the maximum availability of renewable
138 sources was beneficial, and intelligent scheduling reduced the bill by 67.91% in the
139 best-case scenario. In Ref. [47], M. Yair et al. explained the significance of implement-
140 ing edge computing (EC) on Smart Grids (SG). Authors have explained that by em-
141 ploying EC the decision-making ability of SG can be meliorated. Authors have con-
11

13
142 curred that conventional IOT-based SGs store data on the cloud which makes them
143 vulnerable to cyber-attacks and there are time delays which are not considered good
144 in real-time applications, but if all the requirements for operating EC are fulfilled it
145 makes SGs more efficient in terms of data communication and security. In References
146 [44, 45, 46], researchers examined the influence of PV and ESS on the operational ex-
147 penses of smart homes. However, wind energy was omitted in [44], and both wind
148 energy and Electric Vehicles (EV) were overlooked in References [45, 46].
149 In Ref. [48], Authors have used chaotic salp swarm algorithms (CISSA) to con-
150 template the impacts of the integration of renewable energy sources (RES) in smart
151 grids on the cost of fuel, CO2 emission, and overall cost of the system. Data was taken
152 from already conducted research and different scenarios were considered and results
153 obtained from CISSA were compared with other optimization methods. It was ob-
154 served that results acquired from CISSA were more efficient and the overall cost of
155 generation was increased by improper integration and utilization of RES. In Ref. [49],
156 the authors have elaborated on three mechanisms that can be adopted for charging
157 electrical vehicles (EVs). The authors have also considered different renewable energy
158 sources (RES) and storage materials that can be utilized to attain maximum efficiency.
159 Authors have concluded that a hybrid system is most suitable for charging EVs, but
160 there remain many areas regarding storage types where exuberant research is needed
161 to improve the efficiency of these systems. In Ref. [50], Muqeet et al. have reviewed
162 various campus microgrids in the World considering disparate storage technologies.
163 The energy management system of campus microgrids has also been included in the
164 paper keeping in view different optimization techniques. This paper also discusses
165 the resiliency of microgrids and provides some insights about future research areas in
166 the field of microgrids, energy management and storage, and optimization tech-
167 niques.
168 In Ref. [51], the authors have presented a comprehensive review of load fre-
169 quency control (LFC) in power systems that contain renewable energy sources. The
170 authors have discussed the utilization of LFC in different power system configura-
171 tions. Types of different controllers and optimization techniques to operate these con-
172 trollers more precisely have also been expounded. The authors have concluded that
173 LFC is an indispensable part of contemporary power systems and more research is
174 required in the area of development of robust controllers and efficient optimization
175 techniques. The authors in Ref. [52] have elaborated on smart energy management
176 systems (EMS) and their usage in smart grids (SGs). The authors have explained vari-
177 ous advanced features of smart grids and smart energy subsystems as well. The au-
178 thors have also presented different tools and methods for the smart management of
179 energy. As smart grids are also prone to cyber-attacks, the authors have also ex-
180 pressed systems that need to be protected when an unusual condition occurs. This re-
181 search also opens research areas in the fields of energy management systems, energy
182 subsystems, and electric power protection. In Ref. [27], a feasible energy manage-
183 ment system is proposed by the authors for a campus microgrid by using the de-
184 mand response method. The real-time load data was utilized and a battery energy
185 storage system (BESS) was presented to reduce the cost. The campus consisted of PV
186 panels, a diesel generator, BESS, and a grid. The obtained mathematical model was
14

16
187 solved using MILP in MATLAB. The results showed that the cost of electricity was
188 reduced by 42.8% in the best-case scenario and the emission of CO2 dropped by
189 700.82 Kg/day by using 2KW rooftop solar panels.
190 In the study above, the authors presented a scheduling scheme for a campus mi-
191 crogrid consisting of a single BESS, a diesel generator, and solar PV. The study lacked
192 the inclusion of wind energy and Electric vehicles to support the grid. Authors in Ref.
193 [53] presented a reprogramming scheme for consumer loads during peak demand.
194 The home appliances were reprogrammed using the Demand Response (DR) pro-
195 gram. The simulations were run to study the benefits for both consumer and utility.
196 Authors observed that on average, reprogramming the appliances aided in reducing
197 the peak demands. In Ref. [54], authors have proposed an Internet of Things (IoT)
198 source-load-storage coordination system for a campus microgrid integrated with Re-
199 newable energy sources. The problem was solved using MILP in MATLAB. For sum-
200 mer seasons, three different scenarios were undertaken and in the best-case scenario,
201 a considerable decrement in energy prices was observed. Likewise, in the earlier
202 studies, in Reference [5], the authors introduced a day-ahead scheduling approach for
203 various consumer loads to support the local substation, yet they omitted any Renew-
204 able Energy Sources (RES) and Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) in their inves-
205 tigation. In Reference [27], the model they put forward included a Diesel generator,
206 solar PV, and BESS, but it lacked Wind Energy and solely employed a single BESS.
207 In Ref. [55] the authors have proposed a technique to reduce the cost of elec-
208 tricity and carbon emissions by blending natural gas with hydrogen. The applied
209 planning model is stochastic and consists of two steps. In the first step blended hy-
210 drogen with natural gas is supplied to the gas unit and a stepped carbon trading
211 mechanism with a variable incentive mechanism is employed. In the second step,
212 uncertainties regarding energy sources and loads are considered by the interaction
213 of cost between both the distribution network and MMG. Different cases of sched-
214 uling are observed by using ADMM and the results showed considerable declina-
215 tion in cost and carbon emission, while utilization of energy sources augmented. In
216 this reference neither EV nor other RESs are taken into account. In Ref. [56] the au-
217 thors have proposed a new algorithm called the CSAJAYA algorithm by amalga-
218 mating CSA and JAYA algorithms for energy management of small microgrids con-
219 sidering demand response program. The proposed algorithm outperformed al-
220 ready existing algorithms in terms of speed and robustness. Both peak demand and
221 cost of electricity were reduced significantly by employing the CSAJAYA algorithm
222 as compared to already existing algorithms. The stochastic nature of various com-
223 ponents involved in microgrids is a complex and fundamental problem to be con-
224 sidered.
225 The authors in Ref. [57] have considered the stochastic response of microgrid
226 uncertainties in day-ahead optimal dispatch and employed SRSM and SOCP to op-
227 timize the dispatching problem by taking into account the very fluctuating nature
228 of RESs and load demands. By using SRSM theory, random distribution is con-
229 verted to normal distribution Nataf transformation is employed, and a hermetic
230 chaotic matrix finally establishes the linear constraint functions for probability dis-
231 tribution characteristics. To ensure the convergence of the optimization model,
17

19
232 SOCP is utilized and a robust stochastic optimization (SO) model is obtained that is
233 solved using Yalimp-Gurobi solver. Monte Carlo simulation is used to show the ef-
234 fectiveness of the proposed model. The results displayed a remarkable reduction in
235 both carbon emission and cost reduction after employing the proposed model. The
236 multiple commercial buildings having RESs, Electric vehicles, and battery energy
237 storage systems are considered commercial microgrids. However, these microgrids
238 present problems like network instability due to variations in loads and the inter-
239 mittent nature of RESs. The detail analysis and impacts of RESs is ignored in this
240 paper. The authors in Ref. [58] developed a linear bi-level macro energy hub (MEH)
241 control for several microgrids that can take part in demand response and reduce
242 both cost and carbon emission. The optimization problem is solved in flower polli-
243 nation algorithm (FPA) considering both deterministic and uncertain variables.
244 Multi-regression analysis technique is employed to establish the relationship be-
245 tween customer and utility. Simulations showed a great decrement in cost, GHG
246 emission, and load deviation in best case scenario. This paper covers comprehen-
247 sive aspects of RESs but impact of wind energy is not considered in this research.
248 Up to the best knowledge of authors from the literature it has been observed
249 that to date, no contemporary economic analysis has been conducted comprehen-
250 sively using multiple energy storage systems. So, the main contributions of this re-
251 search are as follows;
252
253  A real-time load has been taken under observation to perform analysis.
254  A multi-energy storage system has been employed and an economic analysis has
255 been performed to find out the most economical battery energy storage system.
256  Electric vehicles (EVs) have been charged in different schemes (BESS & Grid) to find
257 out the operational cost and cheapest scheme to charge EVs in different cases.
258  Different types of ESS are analyzed considering the economic aspects.
Energy
BESS Op-
Case GHG exchange Economic Demand Win E BES P Gri
timal Reference
Study Emission with Analysis Response d V S V d
Scheduling
grid
Smart
×  ×  ×      [33]
household
Campus
     × ×    [41]
microgrid
Campus
×     × ×    [43]
microgrid
Residential
×   ×  × ×    [44]
home
Residential
×   ×       [45]
home
Smart
×     × ×    [42]
home
Large
×     ×     [29]
Building
20

22
Campus
     ×     [26]
microgrid
Campus
×     × ×    [59]
microgrid
Prosumer
     × ×    [60]
microgrid
Campus
×   ×  ×     [17]
microgrid
Campus
      ×    [61]
microgrid
Campus
×   ×  × ×    [62]
microgrid
Residential Proposed
         
Building System
259
260 Table 1. Summary of Literature Review.
261
262
263
264 3. Mathematical Modeling
265 In this section of the paper mathematical modeling of the various components is
266 described in the following subsections. The major focus of all the literature is to de-
267 vise an optimal way for minimization of cost and the objective function for the opera-
268 tional cost (OC) which serves as the foundation for constraints is presented below.
269
t=24
270 OC = ∑ {(Ptg × Rate )+(PtPV × Rate)+(P Wind
t × Rate)+( P EV BES
t × Rate )+(Pt ¿× Rate )}¿
t =1
271 (1)
272
273 The price of electricity is different during different hours of the day and the energy
274 demand also varies during the entire day.
275
276 3.1. Power Balance Equation
277 Equation 2 represents the power balance equation and equation 3 consists of in-
278 equality constraints that show the import and export of power from the grid station.
279 Import and export of power cannot exceed the limits of equations 2 and 3. Both re-
280 quired power from the prosumer and surplus power which is sold by the prosumer
281 are bounded by these two equations as shown below [63].
282
g PV Wind EV BES L
283 Pt + P t + Pt + Pt + Pt =Pt (2)
284
g g g
285 Pt min ≤ Pt ≤ Pt max (3)
286
287 3.2. Modeling of Solar PV
23

25
288 In this subsection, the mathematical model for photovoltaics is presented. Power
289 spawned from solar cells greatly depends upon the solar irradiance as given in the
290 equation below.
291
PV PV
292 Pt =ƞ × A × Irr (4 )
293
294 Here ƞ PV denotes the efficiency of solar panels, A denotes the area of the rooftop
295 covered by solar panels and Irr denotes the irradiance of the sun. The irradiance of
296 the sun is calculated by stochastic modeling. The probability density function is used
297 to determine the intermittent nature of solar irradiance. Beta PDF is used to deter-
298 mine the value of irradiance and the equation for the function is given below. Over 24
299 hours, around 6561 scenarios are considered by employing the Latin hypercube tech-
300 nique. To decrease the computational burden, only 10 scenarios are considered via
301 the k-means method. The normal probability density function is given below.
302
2
− ( 1−μ)
303 1 2σ
2
(5)
h ( Irr )= e
σ √2 π
304
305 Irr (kW/ m2) is the value of solar irradiance in an hour on a specific day. σ , and
306 μ are the deviation and mean of normal distribution. The equation below enforces
307 the fact that the power produced from solar PV can either be used for household pur-
308 poses or it can be sold back to the grid [64].
309
PV Sold PV Used PV
310 Pt + Pt =P t (6)
311
312 3.3. Modeling of EV
313 An electric vehicle also acts as an energy storage system or battery. This reserve
314 energy can be utilized during peak hours or in case of any contingency situation.
315 The energy stored in the battery cannot exceed the maximum power of the battery
316 storage system used in electric vehicles. Equations 7 & 8 represent the maximum
317 and minimum state of energy of the battery. Both the energy states are bound to a
318 fixed value and the energy of batteries used in EV cannot go beyond those values.
319
BSOE ( t−1 ) ( 1−∅ EV ) −BSO Emax EV EV
320 ×Cp ≤ Pt (7)
100
321
322 The term BSOE represents the energy level (kWh) of an electric vehicle when
323 it is connected for charging at any specified timet , BSO Emax symbolizes the maxi-
324 mum energy level (kWh) of an electric vehicle which is a fixed value, and ∅ ev repre-
325 sents the internal energy lost (%).
326
EV
BSOE ( t−1 ) ( 1−∅ EV ) −BSO Emin EV
327 Pt ≤ ×Cp (8)
100
26

28
328
329 In the equation 8 above, BSO Emin is the minimum state of energy of the bat-
330 tery. Equation 9 below expounds the state of energy of the battery at any instant of
331 time t. The state of energy of a battery depends upon its previous energy state [65].
332
ch ch disc
100 × ƞEV × P t 100 × Pt
333 BSO Et =( 1−∅ EV ) BSO E (t−1 )− EV
− EV disc (9)
Cp Cp ×ƞ EV
334
335 Charging and discharging constraints of EV at any time t are defined by the equa-
336 tions below.
337
ch ch
338 0 ≤ p EV ( t ) ≤ ά EV ( t ) C EV ( t ) (10)
339
disc disc
340 0 ≤ p EV ( t ) ≤ ά EV ( t ) C EV ( t ) (11)
341
342 Here, C EV ( t ) is the maximum energy that is stored in the EV. Equation 12 below
ch disc
343 shows that ά EV ( t )∧ά EV ( t ) are binary numbers and their sum is 1.
344
ch disc
345 ά EV ( t ) +ά EV ( t ) ≤ 1 (12)
346
347 The operation and maintenance cost of the EV bounds its charging and discharging
degr
348 related degradation cost C EV , capacity cost which is paid by the utility to the EV
c s d
349 owner, C EV (t), selling cost C EV (t), and buying price C EV (t).
350
351 Both charging and discharging cycles are modeled as.
352
ch ch ch
353 Ɓ EV ( t ) ≥ ά EV ( t )−ά EV ( t−1 ) (13)
disc disc disc
354 Ɓ EV ( t ) ≥ ά EV ( t )−ά EV ( t−1 ) (14)
355
356 The operation and maintenance cost is defined by the equation below.
357
disc ch
1 ch p EV ( t ) p EV ( t )
358 C EV ( t )=C
degr
EV
2
( Ɓ EV ( t ) +Ɓ EV ( t )) +C EV ×Cp + disc ×C EV − ch ×C EV
disc c EV s d
ƞ EV ƞ EV
359 (15)
360
361 3.4. Modeling of BESS

362
363 The Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) assumes a pivotal role within an
364 energy management system, providing essential support by supplying power to
29

31
365 loads during grid failures and peak hours when the rate of electricity is high. Mod-
366 eling of battery energy storage systems is provided in the equations below.
367 Given the inherent limitation of BESS, which cannot instantly charge or discharge,
368 power constraints are explicitly outlined in equations 16 & 17.
369
BSOC ( t−1 ) ( 1−∅ BES ) −BSO Cmax BES BES
370 ×Cp ≤ Pt (16)
100
371
BES
BSOC ( t−1 ) ( 1− ∅ EV ) −BSO Cmin BES
372 Pt ≤ ×C (17)
100
373
374 To forestall scenarios of overcharging and complete discharging, stringent upper
375 and lower limits are imposed on BSOC, designated as BSO C max and BSO C min, re-
376 spectively, as articulated in expression 18.
377
378 BSOC min ≤ BSO C t ≤ BSOC max (18)
379
380 An underlying assumption is made that the battery state of charge at the close of
381 the day is BSO C t identical to its initial state BSOC BES ( 0 ).
382
383
384 BSOC BES ( 0 )=BSOC BES ( 24 ) (19)
385 The limits on the upper and lower-value battery charging and discharging are
386 given below.
387
ch ch
388 0 ≤ p t BES ( t ) ≤ ά BES ( t ) ΡBES ( t ) (20)
389
disc disc
390 0 ≤ p t BES ( t ) ≤ ά BES ( t ) ΡBES ( t ) (21)
391
ch disc
392 ά BES ( t ) , and ά BES ( t ) are binary operational variables of charging and discharging re-
393 spectively. When the charging operation is on it is 1 and the discharging is 0 and
394 off.
395
ch disc
396 ά BES ( t ) + ά BES ( t ) ≤ 1(22)
397
398 The equation below shows the state of charge of the battery.
399
ch ch disc
100 × ƞBES × Pt 100 × Pt
400 BSO C t=( 1−∅ BES ) BSO C (t −1 )− BES
− BES disc (23)
Cp Cp ×ƞ BES
401
32

34
402 The Battery State of Charge (BSOC) at any time interval “t”, denoted as
403 BSO C t , is intricately linked to its preceding state BSO C (t −1 )as elucidated in equa-
404 tion 22. The inception flags for charging or discharging modes are represented by
405 the equations below.
406
ch ch ch
407 Ɓ BES ( t ) ≥ ά BES ( t )−ά BES (t−1 )(24)
408
disc disc disc
409 Ɓ BES ( t ) ≥ ά BES ( t )−ά BES (t−1 )(25)
410
ch
411 In the equations above, Ɓ BES ( t ) is an inception flag for charging mode, and
disc ch disc
412 Ɓ BES ( t ) is an inception flag for discharging mode, whileά BES ( t ) , and ά BES ( t ) are bi-
413 nary variables for charging and discharging respectively.
414 In the model, operation and maintenance cost has also been considered [58].
415
1 ch
416
degr
C BES ( t )=C BES (Ɓ ( t ) +Ɓdisc
2 BES BES ( t ) ) +C BES BSOC BES ( t ) (26)
mt
417
degr mt
418 In the equation above, C BES is the cost of degradation of batteries, C BES is the
419 maintenance cost of batteries. The degradation cost of batteries depends upon many
420 factors including temperature, no. of cycles, etc. Degradation of batteries depends
421 upon the temperature and the equation for that is given below.
¿¿
422 Degr Rate=e (27)
423 If the battery is charged and discharged more frequently, the temperature of
424 batteries escalate usually and they degrade quite swiftly. The degradation rate is
425 analyzed by using the Zhurkov model as given by the equation below. T f repre-
426 sents is a coefficient of temperature in the thermal aging model, T is the actual tem-
427 perature, T nor is a normal temperature taken at 25 ºC. T ref is reference temperature
428 and is measured in kelvin by adding 273 in T nor .T|¿|¿ is the absolute temperature in
429 kelvin which is T|¿|=T +273¿ [66]. The degradation cost of the battery is given by equa-
430 tion 28.
431
degr capital cost
432 C BES =( ) (28)
No . of cycles ×total capacity ×2
433
434 3.5. Modeling of Wind
435 The unpredictable and non-continuous nature of wind speed is modeled using
436 Weibull PDF. The equation for Weibull PDF is given below.
437
( )
k
k−1 −v w
k vw ( )
438 PDF ( v w ) = × ×е c
(29)
c c
439
35

37
440 Where c is the scale of Weibull PDF and k emblematizes the shape which is ob-
441 tained from historical data of random variation of wind speed ( v w ¿ in a particular
442 area. Around 6561 different scenarios were created and 10 were taken for observation
443 to reduce computational burden. The output of wind energy depends upon the speed
444 of wind in a specific area as given
445
{
s s
v wt ≤ v Cl v wt ≥ v CO
s
max v wt −v Cl s
v Cl ≤ v wt ≤ v R (30)
446 Pw
v R−v Cl
Pw v R ≤ v swt ≤ vCO
max
447
448 3.6. Modeling of Demand Response
449 Demand response (DR) is one of the imperative features of smart grids as it al-
450 lows consumers to schedule their loads at their will by participating in different de-
451 mand response programs. In this section demand response constraints are formu-
452 lated to establish a factor for the flexibility of DR. The energy profile in any specified
453 horizon of time should be the same before and after applying the demand response
454 program. This allows the shifting of load from peak or expensive hours to non-peak
455 or economical hours [67].
456
457 ( 1−∂ ) Lt ≤ D R t ≤ (1+ ∂ ) Lt (31)
458
459 In the equation above, Lt represents load without applying DR and ∂ is the flexibility
460 of DR.
461
462 ∑ D Rt =¿ ∑ Lt ¿ (32)
t t
463
464 Table 2: Parameters for Proposed System
465
466
38

40
467
468
Parameters Value Parameters Value

P
PV
t
10 kW BSO Emin 8 kWh
Pt
Wind
600 W BSO C max (lead acid) 80%
Pt
EV
16 kW BSO C min (lead acid) 30%
Pt
L
25 kW Cp
BES
20kWh
ƞ
PV
0.19 BSOC BES ( 0 ) (lead acid) 50%
Cp
EV
16 kwh BSOC BES (24 ) (lead acid) 50%
BSO Emax 16 kWh BSO C max (Li−Ion) 90%
BSOC BES ( 0 ) (Li−Ion) 50% BSO C min (Li−Ion) 10%
BSOC BES (24 ) ( Li−Ion) 50% ∅ EV ,∅ BES 0.001
41

43 Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15
469
470
1.6
1.4
1.2
Wind Speed (m/s)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
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
Time (h)
Scenerio 1 Mean STD Scenerio 2

Scenerio 3 Scenerio 4 Scenerio 5 Scenerio 6
Scenerio 7 Scenerio 8 Scenerio 9 Scenerio 10
471 Figure 2: Monte Carlo Scenarios of Wind Speeds
472
473
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
Irradiance(W/m2)
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
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
Time (h)
Scenario 1 Standard Deviation Mean Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4
474 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Scenario 9 Scenario 10
475
476 Figure 3: Monte Carlo Scenarios of Solar Irradiance
477
478
479 4. System Description

480 This system consists of a consumer load of 25 kW and the price of electricity
481 varies in different hours. Rooftop solar panels of 10 kW capacity are also installed
482 along with a 600 W wind turbine commissioned at the roof. A bidirectional EV
483 operation containing both V2G (meaning energy stored in the vehicle can be sold
484 back to the grid) and V2H (meaning energy of vehicle can be used to cover household
485 loads) is also taken into account. EV has total capacity of 16 kW. Charging efficiency
486 and discharging efficiencies of EVs are kept at 90%. Electric vehicle is not available at
487 home from 8 AM to 4 PM. A 20 kW battery energy storage system (BESS) is also
488 included in the system. BESS is charged from PV, Wind, and grid [41]. Electricity
489 Tariff is taken from NEPRA Pakistan [68] and the data is collected from the Lahore
490 region. The figure below shows the energy generation from PV system and wind
491 turbine. The figure 4 displays the power produced from solar system and wind
492 turbine during a typical day, while figure 5 shows the flow chart of optimization
493 6 algorithm. Wind speeds are very low in the region of Lahore as per data obtained
494 from literature and due to lower wind speeds energy production is also trivial [69].
495 5
4
Power (kW)
3
Solar Power
2
Wind Power
1
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Time (h)
496
497 Figure 4: Energy Generation of PV & Wind

498
499
Start
Check the current scenario

Day of the week/time of the week
Check the available

sources and energy
Check Battery SOC
demand
Balance load >0
Yes
Check the Electric No
No
vehicle availability SOC< Soc max
SOCev>50%
Yes
Export to the Grid
No
Use the Electric Vehicle Charge battery
Yes
Check battery Soc
No Is Grid
SOC>Soc min available
No
Yes Yes Shed Load
Supply from the Grid

Use Battery
500
501
502 Figure 5: Flow Chart of Proposed Model
503
504 5. Analysis of Different Cases
505 This section presents different cases which are observed with both renewable
506 energy sources, EV and without them as well. In this study lead acid and lithium
507 ion batteries are used as storage system. EV is charged from two different schemes,
508 once it is charged from grid and once storage batteries are used to charge EV. Sce-
509 narios with both renewable energy resources and without renewable energy re-
510 sources have been taken under consideration to study the impact on daily opera-
511 tional cost which are discussed in the subsections below.
512
513 5.1. Case 01: Grid-Connected with BESS Boost
514 In the case 1 consumer only imports electricity from gird with energy storage
515 system. The incurred daily operational cost with Li-Ion battery storage system is
516 $68.7969 and with lead acid energy storage system the incurred cost is $69.609. The
517 Figure 6 below shows the state of energy for both batteries along with power ex-
518 change with grid. During the peak hours the exchange with the grid is minimum
519 while battery provides most of the energy for loads. The Peak hours are from 17:00 to
520 22:00 and power exchange with the grids in these hours is minimum.
30
25
20
15
Power (kW)
10
5
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
-5
-10
-15
Time (h)
Energy Storage Power (Li-ion ) Grid Power (Li-ion )
Energy Storage Power (Lead acid) Grid Power (Lead acid)
521
522
523 Figure 6: Power Exchange with Grid
524
525 It can be observed in the figure 7 that the state of charge of batteries during peak
526 hours of electricity decreases providing ancillary service of meeting the load. The
527 Levelized cost of lithium ion and lead acid batteries in this case are $1.019 and $0.0786
528 respectively. Overall, the operational cost for both lead acid and lithium ion batteries
529 is highest in this case and this case is considered as base case.
530
531
532 Figure 7: State of Charge of Batteries

533
534 5.2. Case 02: PV-Grid-BESS Synergy
535
536 In this case, along with grid power and energy storage system consumer has in-
537 stalled 10 kW rooftop solar panels system. The solar panels generate considerable
538 amount of energy as of solar irradiance abundance in Lahore for almost 8-10 hours
539 during the day. Figure 8 shows the amount of energy generated from solar panels
540 along with the energy exchange with the grid and energy stored in batteries. The
541 Levelised cost of solar system is 0.03 $/kWh. Therefore the net cost of electricity is re-
542 duced by $9.986 which is 14.52% less compared to the base case with lithium battery
543 storage system.
544 Similarly with lead acid energy storage system the overall obtained operational
545 cost is $59.26 less than 14.88% than base. Considerable reduction in operational cost
546 can be seen with both battery storage systems. Moreover, the overall units generated
547 from solar cells serve imperative role in the reduction of carbon emission. On daily
548 bases, the amount of carbon which is reduced is approximately 36018 grams/day.
549
30
25
20
15
10
Power (kW)
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
-5
-10
-15
-20
Time (hour)
Energy Storage Power (Li-ion ) Grid Power (Li-ion ) Solar Power
Energy Storage Power (Lead acid) Grid Power (Lead acid)
550 Figure 8: Power Exchange with Grid

551 The figure 8 above depicts the energy exchange with grid. During the peak
552 hours, there is no import of energy from grid. Grid Power plunges down during peak
553 hours when ESS charged from solar cells and grid during peak hours is utilized. Even
554 during off peak hours extra energy available in storage system is sold back to grid be-
555 fore it is replenished back to full capacity for peak hours.
556
557 Figure 9: State of Charge of Batteries
558
559 In the figure 9 state of charge of battery for both lead acid and Lithium ion
560 is depicted. It can be seen that during off peak hours, the lithium ion battery is
561 charged at maximum value of 90% and lead acid battery is charged up to 80%.
562 During off-peak hours, the lithium ion battery is discharged to 10% and lead acid
563 battery is discharged to 30%.
564
565 5.3. Case 03: Inclusion of EV with Grid, PV & BESS
566 In this case, PV is utilized again with Electric vehicle and energy storage
567 system. Electric vehicle leaves the home charged at full capacity of 16 kW at
568 8AM and leave 4PM. In this case EV is bound to be charged from ESS and grid
569 and different operational cost has been observed. Both lead acid and lithium ion
570 batteries are considered for this scenario.
571 The scenario 1 is observed with lithium ion battery storage system. Electric Vehi-
572 cles (EVs) are charged in both scenarios with Energy storage system and grid and
573 their operational cost is observed. When EV is exclusively charged by Battery En-
574 ergy Storage Systems (BESS), the overall electricity rates falls down slightly. The
575 operational cost for the particular scenario is $56.2602 which is less compared to
576 the case when EV is charged from grid. The cost when EV is charged with the
577 grid is $56.6473.
578 In the figure 10, the power dynamics of Grid Battery Energy Storage Systems
579 (BESS) and Electric Vehicles (EVs) are outlined. When the EV is away from
580 home during certain hours of the day, it is disconnected from residence. During
581 this period, the load decreases since the battery is charged and discharged
582 through solar cells, taking advantage of abundant solar energy. Upon the EV's
583 return home, there is a one-hour window to maximize its charging, coinciding
584 with the start of off-peak hours at 17:00. Both the energy storage system and the
585 battery contribute to meeting load requirements, reducing the need for grid pro-
586 curement. After peak hours, when solar energy is unavailable, grid power is
587 used to charge both the BESS and EV.
588
589
30
20
10
Power (kW)
0 Energy Storage Power (Li-ion )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Grid Power (Li-ion )
-10 Electric Vehicle (ESS Charged)
-20
-30
Time (Hour)
590
591 Figure 10: Power Exchange with grid for Li-Ion BESS when EV is charged from BESS
592
593 The figure 11 shows the state of charge of lithium ion battery when EV is
594 charged from battery storage system and grid. When EV is charged from grid,
595 the state of charge remains in the lower spectrum of values signifying that even
596 during non-peak hours most of energy needs are filled with ESS to reduce the
597 operational cost. But during peak hours battery is drained comparatively higher
598 in scenario when EV is charged from grid.
599
100
90
80
70
60
SOC (%)
50
40
30
20
10
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
SOC1: EV charged with grid. Time (Hour)

SOC2: EV charged with ESS.
SOC 1 (Li-ion ) SOC 2 (Li-ion )
601 Figure 11: State of Charge of Li-Ion Battery

602
603 The figure 12 below exhibits the power exchange with grid in case when
604 EV is charged exclusively from grid. Similar to previous case, The Grid BESS
605 and EV operate as a cohesive energy system. During the EV's downtime, solar
606 power is harnessed for loads. Upon the EV's return, during peak hours along
607 with ESS, it also provides power for loads decreasing procurement from grid.
608 Post-peak, grid power steps in, charging both the BESS and EV for sustained en-
609 ergy efficiency.
610
30
20
10
Power (kW)
0 Energy Storage Power (Li-ion )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324
Grid Power (Li-ion )
-10 Electric Vehicle (Grid Charged)
-20
-30
Time (hour)
611
612 Figure 12: Power Exchange with grid for Li-Ion BESS when EV is charged from BESS
613
614 In the second scenario, a lead acid battery is employed as the energy storage system. Unlike lithium-ion ESS,
615 the lead acid battery has a maximum state of charge set at 80%, and it can only discharge to 30% to ensure a longer
616 lifespan. The daily operational cost in this situation is $59.2679 when the EV is charged from the grid and $58.0848
617 when charged from the ESS. The operational expenses incurred with the lead acid battery are marginally higher
618 than those associated with lithium-ion batteries in both cases, whether the EV is charged from the grid or the ESS.
619 Figure 13 illustrates the energy exchange pattern with the grid throughout various hours of the day. In the initial
620 hours, the BESS undergoes charging until reaching its maximum capacity. Through the midday hours, solar energy
621 availability enables the energy storage system to satisfy nearly all of the home's energy demands. During peak
622 hours, when the EV is accessible, a substantial supply of energy is jointly provided by both the EV and the energy
623 storage system, leading to a reduction in grid procurement.
624 Figure 13: Power Exchange with grid for Lead acid BESS when EV is charged from BESS
625 Electric Vehicle Power by ESS
626 40
Solar Power (Lead acid)
Grid Power (Lead acid)
Energy Storage Power (Lead
acid)
30
20
Power (kW)
10
Electric Vehicle (ESS
Charged)
0 Grid Power
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 BESS (Lead Acid)
-10
-20
-30
Time (h)
627
628
90
80
70
60
SOC (%)
50
40 SOC 1 (Lead Acid)

30 SOC 2 (Lead Acid)
20
SOC1: EV charged with grid.
10
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
Time (hour)
629
630 Figure 14: State of Charge of Lead acid Battery
631
632 In figure 15, the power exchange and status of the electric vehicle and en-
633 ergy storage system are showcased throughout different daily hours, when the
634 electric vehicle exclusively relies on grid charging. The observed pattern closely
635 mirrors the prior scenario, showcasing a decrease in grid procurement during
636 peak hours. Meanwhile, in off-peak hours, solar energy seamlessly meets the
637 home's energy demands and concurrently charges the battery storage for subse-
638 quent use during peak periods.
639
640
40
30
20
Power (kW)
10
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
-10
-20
-30
Time (hour)
ESS (Lead Acid) Grid Power
Electric Vehicle (Grid Charged)
641
642
643 Figure 15: Power Exchange with grid for Lead acid BESS when EV is charged from Grid
644
645 5.4. Case 04: Integration of Wind with Grid, PV, BESS & EV
646
647 In this scenario, we have enhanced our energy system by introducing a 600 W
648 wind turbine to complement the existing photovoltaic (PV) system, Electric Vehicle
649 (EV), and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS). The EV usage pattern remains con-
650 sistent, with the vehicle being inactive between 8 AM and 4 PM. Within this context,
651 we analyze the charging dynamics for EVs, considering both lead-acid and lithium-
652 ion batteries. The strategy for charging the EV involves a combination of Energy Stor-
653 age Systems (ESS) and grid electricity, resulting in varying operational costs. When
654 relying solely on grid energy for EV charging, the operational cost is $69.59 for lead-
655 acid batteries and $69.53 for lithium-ion batteries. However, when utilizing ESS en-
656 ergy, the operational cost decreases to $68.42 with lead-acid batteries and $68.80 with
657 lithium-ion batteries. Figure 16 illustrates the energy exchange pattern with the grid
658 when charging the EV from either ESS or the grid in the case of a lithium-ion battery
659 energy storage system. In both scenarios, whether charging from the grid or ESS, dur-
660 ing peak hours, power export from the grid decreases while most of the household
661 load is supplied by either the EV or ESS.
662
30
20
10
Power (kW)
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
-10
-20
-30
Time (h)
BESS (Li-ion) Grid Power Electric Vehicle (ESS Charged)

ESS (Li-ion) Grid Power Electric Vehicle (Grid Charged)
663
664 Figure 16: Power Exchange with Grid for Li-Ion Battery
665
666 Illustrated in Figure 17 are the variations in the battery's state of charge during
667 both instances of EV charging. It is evident that as the peak hours commence, the
668 state of charge gradually diminishes, reaching a minimum before stabilizing at 50%
669 at the beginning of the next day. Subsequently, the battery is charged to its full ca-
670 pacity just before the onset of the next peak hours. This cyclical pattern highlights
671 the dynamic charging and discharging of the battery system, strategically manag-
100
672 ing energy reserves to optimize performance during peak demand periods.
90
673
80
70
60
SOC (%)
50
SOC 1 (Li-ion)
40
SOC 2 (Li-ion)
30
20 SOC1: EV charged with grid.

10
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
Time (hour)
674

676
677 Given the specific limitations imposed on the lead-acid battery, where the maxi-
678 mum state of charge is capped at 80% and the discharge capacity is restricted to
679 30%, the power exchange and state of charge (SOC) profiles exhibit a distinctive
680 pattern. Notably, during peak hours, the power import from the grid is minimized,
681 with both the Energy Storage System (ESS) and Electric Vehicle (EV) playing cru-
682 cial roles in meeting the load demands. However, it's important to note that the be-
683 cause of different constraints on charging and discharging, the lead-acid batteries
684 exhibit a different dynamic compared to lithium-ion batteries. Although the overall
685 Levelised cost of lead-acid batteries is lower, their effectiveness is limited by these
686 constraints. Consequently, the operational cost is higher when compared to
687 lithium-ion batteries. In summary, while lead-acid battery storage system offers a
688 cost advantage, their operational efficiency is compromised due to the restricted
689 limitations on charging and discharging values. This makes lithium-ion batteries a
690 more effective and versatile option in this energy setup.
691
30
20
10
Power (kW)
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
-10
-20
-30
Time (hour)
ESS (Lead acid) Grid Power
BESS (Lead acid) Grid Power
Electric Vehicle (ESS Charged) Electric Vehicle (Grid Charged)
692
693
694 Figure 18: Power Exchange with Grid having Lead acid Battery Storage System
695
696
697 The graphical representation in figure 18 illustrates the state of charge (SOC)
698 of the lead-acid battery. When the Electric Vehicle (EV) is charged using the
699 Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), a distinctive pattern emerges. Notably,
700 initial hours of the day, from 1:00 to 6:00, the state of charge of the battery re-
701 mains relatively low. It gradually rises, reaching up to 80% just before the
702 commencement of peak hours. However, during the peak hours themselves,
703 there is a significant reduction in the state of charge, dropping down to the
704 predetermined lower constraint of 30%. The SOC profile reveals that the bat-
705 tery deliberate discharges during peak hours responding to the imposed con-
706 straint. This dynamic charging and discharging pattern is a strategic approach
707 to manage and optimize the battery's performance within defined operational
708 parameters.
709
710
90
80
70
60
SOC (%)
50
40
SOC 1 (Lead acid)
SOC 2 (Lead acid)
30
20
SOC1: EV charged with grid.
10
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
Time (hour)
711
712
714
715 Overall the cost reduction in case is very lower in compared to base case of be-
716 cause of higher Levelised cost of wind energy which is 0.7$/Kwh. Due to lower
717 wind speeds the operational cost is very high and wind turbine generates very
718 low units in the entire day as calculated from monte carlo simulations and from
719 data obtained from literature as well [70]. Though reduction in carbon emission
720 is a little higher that is up to 36968 grams/day but the operational cost is very
721 high. The cost reduction in case of lead acid battery is only 0.28% compared to
722 base case while the operational cost remains same in case of lithium ion battery
723 energy storage system.
724
725 6. Energy Market and Economical Analysis
726
727 The cases which are discussed above present a dynamic interplay be-
728 tween energy market and prosumer. By employing multi-energy storage sys-
729 tems and renewable energy sources a system is proposed which reduces the
730 operational costs that favors consumer and carbon emission is also lowered
731 which benefits utility. The article explores the implementation of the time-of-
732 use (TOU) technique as a demand response strategy, wherein electricity prices
733 fluctuate between peak hours (17:00 -22:00) and non-peak hours. The underly-
734 ing assumption is that consumers have ceded control of their electrical loads to
735 the utility. During peak hours, consumers autonomously reduce their reliance
736 on the grid for energy, leveraging battery management systems and renewable
737 energy sources. This strategic shift in energy consumption results in a notewor-
738 thy reduction in overall operational costs, with the potential to decrease bills by
739 18.2% in the most favorable scenarios. This dual benefit positively impacts both
740 consumers and the grid by fostering a more sustainable and cost-effective en-
741 ergy ecosystem.
742 In the context of non-peak hours, where energy demand is less, surplus
743 energy generated by solar panels is harnessed. After charging batteries, any ex-
744 cess energy is exported back to the utility. This not only provides consumers
745 with additional incentives but also assists the utility in diminishing its depen-
746 dence on fossil fuels. Consequently, this practice contributes to a substantial re-
747 duction in carbon emissions that helps the utility in avoiding carbon taxes and
748 reducing peak hour load as well. By strategically redistributing the load tradi-
749 tionally experienced during peak hours to non-peak periods, this approach op-
750 timizes energy distribution and consumption patterns. The synergy between
751 consumer behavior, renewable energy utilization, and grid management
752 emerges as a powerful strategy that not only enhances energy efficiency but
753 also aligns with sustainability goals, making it a win-win for both consumers
754 and the broader energy infrastructure. The implementation of batteries as stor-
755 age system poses some challenges as disadvantages as well. The first and fore-
756 most challenge in battery energy storage system is heavy initial cost. Even
757 though considerable research has been conducted to make batteries economical,
758 yet battery storage system is costly. Other than this, they require huge amount
759 of space to be installed depending upon the size of the system. Ensuring proper
760 installation of battery storage system and compliance with safety regulation can
761 add further complexities to the system and further enhance the cost of the sys-
762 tem. In some of the regions, regulatory policies related to net metering and grid
763 connection might pose some challenges for homeowners and may impact the
764 feasibility of energy storage systems. Table 3 below presents a comparison of
765 operational cost in different scenarios considered in the study.
766
767
768 Table 3: Comparison of Operational Cost in Different Cases
769
Disparate Cases Lithium Ion BESS Lead Acid BESS

Case 1 (Base case) $68.79 $69.61
Case 2 $58.80 $59.26
Case 3 (EV charged from Grid) $56.64 $59.27
Case 3 (EV charged from BESS) $56.26 $58.08
Case 4 (EV charged from Grid) $69.53 $69.59
Case 4 (EV charged from BESS) $68.80 $68.42
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
60 Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 32 of 43
780 7. Discussion and Challenges

781 Pakistan is a developing country and population is rising in paralleled by
782 surging demand for energy. This presents a formidable challenge for the utilities
783 and energy suppliers. The issue of rising energy demands can be solved by embrac-
784 ing a prosumer-based market with Distributed Energy Resources (DERs). This trans-
785 formative approach would empower consumers to become producers of energy and
786 take part in energy market. Furthermore, this would also alleviate the strain on the
787 utility grid, particularly during peak hours. As Pakistan continues to burgeon as a
788 growing economy, the conventional practice of time-based load shedding during
789 peak demand periods can be mitigated through the evolution towards a market
790 structure consisting of prosumers and distributed energy sources. In this paradigm
791 shift, consumers would not only be passive recipients of energy but they would ac-
792 tively contribute in market, leveraging from DERs. This shift would foster a dy-
793 namic energy ecosystem where individuals and businesses would not only generate
794 and consume their energy but and even sell surplus energy. The adoption of a pro-
795 sumer-based market structure offers multifaceted benefits. This dynamic change not
796 only aligns with global trends in sustainable energy but also propels Pakistan to-
797 wards a more resilient and adaptive energy infrastructure. As the nation continues
798 on its route of economic growth a prosumer-oriented market can serve as a catalyst
799 for sustainable development.
800 In Pakistan, only TOU demand response technique is employed to reduce both peak
801 loads and operational cost. But, other demand response techniques like real time
802 pricing (RTP) and peak time pricing (PTP) can also be considered that would not
803 only enhance the consumer participation in the energy market but also bring forth
804 reduction in operational cost and peak load as well. More energy storage systems
805 like fuel cell, hydrogen based energy storage systems, and latest batteries which are
806 more efficient, can also be utilized which would further improve the proposed sys-
807 tem that would be considered in the next study.
808 Implementing renewable energy systems in residential areas of developing coun-
809 tries like Pakistan faces several challenges. One major issue is the cost, setting up re-
810 newable energy and storage systems can be expensive, which might deter people
811 with average incomes from installing them. Additionally, there's a lack of technical
812 expertise among residents for installation and maintenance. Many people are not
813 aware of how to manage their energy usage efficiently or the benefits of demand re-
814 sponse techniques.
815 Residents also encounter bureaucratic hurdles when trying to get permits for in-
816 stalling renewable energy systems. This red tape can discourage people from mak-
817 ing the switch. Moreover, there are complications with net metering policies and
818 connecting renewable energy systems to the grid, making it difficult for homeown-
819 ers to sell excess energy back to the grid due to the grid's structure.
820 Overall, these challenge like cost, lack of expertise, bureaucratic obstacles, and grid-
821 related issues, can hinder the adoption of renewable energy systems in residential
822 areas of countries like Pakistan.
823 Overall, comparison of the existing system with some literature work has depicted
824 reduction in both cost and CO2 emission. Table 4 presents the comparison of pro-
825 posed work with existing work in literature.
826
827 Table 4: Comparison of Proposed worked with existing work
828
Ref Year Technique Application Remarks Savings
Two Level Load

forecasting (LF) Prosumer By employing LF, a day-ahead scheduling
1-7% reduction in oper-
model is em- based mar- and operation is proposed for cost reduction
ational cost is observed
[71] 2020 ployed ket
Quadratic Objec-
Prosumer
tive problem A numerical analysis is performed consider- Operational cost is re-
[72] 2020 based mar-
with interior ing energy storage system duced by 12%.
ket
points algorithm
[73] 2023 GRU network Integra- The system contains electric hydrogen and Overall the cost has
tion energy short term wind data prediction been reduced by 5.24 %
and carbon emission is

reduced by 1.543%
system while electrolysis of hy-
drogen reduced carbon
emission by 12.90%
Considering demand response and DERs & Operational cost is re-

Isolated
[67] 2023 MICQP ESS a new method is proposed to decrease the duced by 2.6% for 24
microgrid
cost hours and 3.72 % for
year
Pro- Operational cost is re-

A residential building is considered with grid
posed duced by approxi-
connected PV, Wind, ESS and EV. EV is
Sys- 2024 MILP Residential mately 18.2% while car-
charged for the certain available hours. TOU
tem Building bon emission is reduced
tariff scheme is employed.
by 36018 grams/day for
25 kW load.
829
830 8. Conclusion
831 This paper focuses on optimizing diverse energy sources to effectively manage the elec -
832 trical load of a residential building of 25 kW load situated in Lahore, Pakistan. The pro-
833 posed system integrates various renewable energy sources, a battery storage system, and an
834 Electric Vehicle (EV), all connected to a bidirectional energy meter aimed at minimizing
835 electricity expenses. The study explores different scenarios involving both lithium-ion and
836 lead-acid battery energy storage systems, employing varied charging schemes for the EV.
837 By employing TOU demand response technique, the findings reveal that utilizing grid
838 power alongside solar PV energy, energy storage systems, and an EV leads to significantly
839 lower operating costs compared to alternative scenarios. Specifically, a cost reduction of
840 14.88% is observed with lead-acid battery energy storage, while an 18.26% cost reduction is
841 noted with a lithium-ion battery, compared to the base case involving only the grid and bat -
842 tery energy storage system. In future, the new energy sources like micro turbine, biomass
843 with the hydrogen based energy storage system will be considered along with the risk
844 averse power system.
845 Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.A.A. and M.N.A.; methodology, A. Aftab.; software,
846 A.A.; validation, S.A.; formal analysis, A Aftab.; investigation, Z.A.A data curation, S.A.; writing
847 —original draft preparation A.A and A. Aftab.; writing—review and editing H.A.M.
848 Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
849 Nomenclature:
850 Pt g Import Power from the grid (kW)

PV
851 Pt Generation of PV (kW)
Wind
852 Pt Generation of Wind (kW)
EV
853 Pt Generation of Electric Vehicle (kW)
BESS
854 Pt Power of Battery Energy Storage System (kW)
L
855 Pt Total Load of house (kW)
856 PDF Probability Density Function
PV
857 ƞ Solar Plate efficiency
858 A Area of Solar Plate
859 Irr Irradiance
860 σ Deviation of normal distribution
861 μ Mean of normal distribution
862 BSOE State of Energy of Electric Vehicle
863 BSO Emax Maximum state of Energy of Electric Vehicle
EV
864 Cp Capacity of Electric Vehicle
865 BSO Emin Minimum state of energy of Electric vehicle
ch
866 ƞ EV Charging efficiency of Electric Vehicle
ch
867 Pt Charging Power of Electric Vehicle
disc
868 ƞ EV Discharging efficiency of Electric Vehicle
disc
869 Pt Discharging Power of Electric Vehicle
degr
870 C EV Degradation cost of EV
871 BSO C max Maximum State of Charge of Battery (%)

872 BSO C min Minimum State of Charge of Battery (%)
873 BSOC (24) State of charge level of BESS at 24th hour (%)
874 B SOC (0) Initial level of SOC (%)
ch
875 ƞ BES Charging Efficiency of battery storage system
ch
876 Pt Charging Power of battery storage system
disc
877 Pt Discharging Power of battery storage system
disc
878 ƞ BES Discharging efficiency of battery storage system
BES
879 Cp Capacity of Battery storage system
mt
880 C BES Maintenance cost of Battery storage system
degr
881 C BES Degradation cost of Battery storage system
882 vw Variation of wind speed in particular area
883 t Hourly time interval (h)

884 IoT Internet of things
885 AI Artificial Intelligence
886 disc Discharging
887 ch Charging
888 DR Demand Response
889 GHG Green House Gas
890 RTP Real Time Protocol
891 HEM Home Energy Management
892
893 References
894
[1]
895 S. Nazir, A. Ali, A. Aftab, H. A. Muqeet, S. Mirsaeidi, and J. Zhang, “Techno-Economic and Environmental Perspec-
896 tives of Solar Cell Technologies : A Comprehensive Review,” Energies (Basel), pp. 1–32, 2023.
[2]
897 F. Martins, C. Felgueiras, M. Smitkova, and N. Caetano, “Analysis of fossil fuel energy consumption and environmen-
898 tal impacts in european countries,” Energies (Basel), vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1–11, 2019, doi: 10.3390/en12060964.
[3]
899 N. Ullah et al., “Environmental impacts, water footprint and cumulative energy demand of match industry in Pak-
900 istan,” PLoS One, vol. 16, no. 5 May, pp. 1–20, 2021, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251928.
[4]
901 A. Zakari, F. F. Adedoyin, and F. V. Bekun, “The effect of energy consumption on the environment in the OECD coun-
902 tries: economic policy uncertainty perspectives,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 28, no. 37, pp.
903 52295–52305, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-14463-8.
[5]
904 G. Liu, C. Ofori, S. A. Ampong, F. Appiah-Twum, and E. A. Alhassan, “Towards a sustainable environment: Examin-
905 ing the spatial VARIATIONS of renewable energy, environmental pollution, and economic growth in Europe,” Energy
906 Strategy Reviews, vol. 50, no. April, p. 101231, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2023.101231.
[6]
907 S. B. Wali et al., “Techno-economic assessment of a hybrid renewable energy storage system for rural community to-
908 wards achieving sustainable development goals,” Energy Strategy Reviews, vol. 50, no. September, p. 101217, 2023, doi:
909 10.1016/j.esr.2023.101217.
[7]
910 O. Majeed Butt, M. Zulqarnain, and T. Majeed Butt, “Recent advancement in smart grid technology: Future prospects
911 in the electrical power network,” Ain Shams Engineering Journal, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 687–695, 2021, doi: 10.1016/
912 j.asej.2020.05.004.
[8]
913 M. A. Raza, M. M. Aman, A. G. Abro, M. A. Tunio, K. L. Khatri, and M. Shahid, “Challenges and potentials of imple-
914 menting a smart grid for Pakistan’s electric network,” Energy Strategy Reviews, vol. 43, p. 100941, Sep. 2022, doi:
915 10.1016/J.ESR.2022.100941.
[9]
916 P. Kokoszka, M. Rimkus, S. S. Hosur, D. Duan, and H. Wang, “Detection and Localization of Faults in a Regional
917 Power Grid,” Austrian Journal of Statistics, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 143–162, 2023, doi: 10.17713/ajs.v52i4.1511.
[10]
918 A. Mar, P. Pereira, and J. F. Martins, “A survey on power grid faults and their origins: A contribution to improving
919 power grid resilience,” Energies (Basel), vol. 12, no. 24, 2019, doi: 10.3390/en12244667.
[11]
920 H. A. Muqeet, R. Liaqat, M. Jamil, and A. A. Khan, “A State-of-the-Art Review of Smart Energy Systems and Their
921 Management in a Smart Grid Environment,” Energies (Basel), vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2023, doi: 10.3390/en16010472.
[12]
922 A. Ali et al., “Latest Energy Storage Trends in Multi-Energy Standalone Electric Vehicle Charging Stations: A Compre-
923 hensive Study,” Energies (Basel), vol. 15, no. 13, pp. 1–19, 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15134727.
[13]
924 M. Meliani, A. El Barkany, I. El Abbassi, A. M. Darcherif, and M. Mahmoudi, “Energy management in the smart grid:
925 State-of-the-art and future trends,” International Journal of Engineering Business Management, vol. 13, pp. 1–26, 2021, doi:
926 10.1177/18479790211032920.
[14]
927 I. Mashal, O. A. Khashan, M. Hijjawi, and M. Alshinwan, “The determinants of reliable smart grid from experts’ per-
928 spective,” Energy Informatics, vol. 6, no. 1, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s42162-023-00266-3.
[15]
929 S. Dorji, A. A. Stonier, G. Peter, R. Kuppusamy, and Y. Teekaraman, “An Extensive Critique on Smart Grid Technolo-
930 gies: Recent Advancements, Key Challenges, and Future Directions,” Technologies (Basel), vol. 11, no. 3, p. 81, 2023, doi:
931 10.3390/technologies11030081.
[16]
932 E. Hossain, J. Hossain, and F. Un-Noor, “Utility grid: Present challenges and their potential solutions,” IEEE Access,
933 vol. 6, pp. 60294–60317, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2873615.
[17]
934 H. A. Muqeet, H. M. Munir, H. Javed, M. Shahzad, M. Jamil, and J. M. Guerrero, “An energy management system of
935 campus microgrids: State-of-the-art and future challenges,” Energies (Basel), vol. 14, no. 20, 2021, doi: 10.3390/
936 en14206525.
[18]
937 T. Nasir et al., “Optimal scheduling of campus microgrid considering the electric vehicle integration in smart grid,”
938 Sensors, vol. 21, no. 21, pp. 1–22, 2021, doi: 10.3390/s21217133.
[19]
939 A. Ali, H. A. Muqeet, T. Khan, A. Hussain, M. Waseem, and K. A. K. Niazi, “IoT-Enabled Campus Prosumer Micro-
940 grid Energy Management, Architecture, Storage Technologies, and Simulation Tools: A Comprehensive Study,” Ener-
941 gies (Basel), vol. 16, no. 4, 2023, doi: 10.3390/en16041863.
[20]
942 B. Celik, R. Roche, S. Suryanarayanan, D. Bouquain, and A. Miraoui, “Electric energy management in residential areas
943 through coordination of multiple smart homes,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 80, no. April 2016, pp.
944 260–275, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.118.
[21]
945 S. Zheng, M. Shahzad, H. M. Asif, J. Gao, and H. A. Muqeet, “Advanced optimizer for maximum power point track -
946 ing of photovoltaic systems in smart grid: A roadmap towards clean energy technologies,” Renew Energy, vol. 206, no.
947 December 2022, pp. 1326–1335, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.023.
[22]
948 H. A. Muqeet et al., “Sustainable Solutions for Advanced Energy Management System of Campus Microgrids: Model
949 Opportunities and Future Challenges,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 6, 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22062345.
[23]
950 H. Abd Ul Muqeet, H. M. Munir, A. Ahmad, I. A. Sajjad, G. J. Jiang, and H. X. Chen, “Optimal Operation of the Cam -
951 pus Microgrid considering the Resource Uncertainty and Demand Response Schemes,” Math Probl Eng, vol. 2021,
952 2021, doi: 10.1155/2021/5569701.
[24]
953 T. Nasir et al., “Recent Challenges and Methodologies in Smart Grid Demand Side Management: State-of-the-Art Lit-
954 erature Review,” Math Probl Eng, vol. 2021, 2021, doi: 10.1155/2021/5821301.
[25]
955 H. Daki, A. El Hannani, A. Aqqal, A. Haidine, and A. Dahbi, “Big Data management in smart grid: concepts, require-
956 ments and implementation,” J Big Data, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2017, doi: 10.1186/s40537-017-0070-y.
[26]
957 M. K. Rafique et al., “An intelligent hybrid energy management system for a smart house considering bidirectional
958 power flow and various EV charging techniques,” Applied Sciences (Switzerland), vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1–24, 2019, doi:
959 10.3390/app9081658.
[27]
960 H. Javed, H. A. Muqeet, M. Shehzad, M. Jamil, A. A. Khan, and J. M. Guerrero, “Optimal energy management of a
961 campus microgrid considering financial and economic analysis with demand response strategies,” Energies (Basel),
962 vol. 14, no. 24, pp. 1–24, 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14248501.
[28]
963 H. Abdul Muqeet et al., “IoT-based intelligent source–load–storage coordination scheme for prosumer campus micro-
964 grids,” Front Energy Res, vol. 10, no. October, pp. 1–13, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.960104.
[29]
965 Z. Wan, H. Li, H. He, and D. Prokhorov, “Model-Free Real-Time EV Charging Scheduling Based on Deep Reinforce -
966 ment Learning,” IEEE Trans Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 5246–5257, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1109/TSG.2018.2879572.
[30]
967 L. Fei, M. Shahzad, F. Abbas, H. A. Muqeet, M. M. Hussain, and L. Bin, “Optimal Energy Management System of IoT-
968 Enabled Large Building Considering Electric Vehicle Scheduling, Distributed Resources, and Demand Response
969 Schemes,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 19, pp. 1–22, 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22197448.
[31]
970 M. Azeem et al., “Combined Economic Emission Dispatch in Presence of Renewable Energy Resources Using CISSA in
971 a Smart Grid Environment,” Electronics (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 3, 2023, doi: 10.3390/electronics12030715.
[32]
972 D. M. Han and J. H. Lim, “Smart home energy management system using IEEE 802.15.4 and zigbee,” IEEE Transac-
973 tions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 1403–1410, 2010, doi: 10.1109/TCE.2010.5606276.
[33]
974 S. Paul and N. P. Padhy, “Real-Time Energy Management for Smart Homes,” IEEE Syst J, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 4177–4188,
975 2020, doi: 10.1109/jsyst.2020.3016358.
[34]
976 N. E. Koltsaklis, I. P. Panapakidis, G. C. Christoforidis, and C. E. Parisses, “An MILP model for the optimal energy
977 management of a smart household,” International Conference on the European Energy Market, EEM, vol. 2019-Septe, pp.
978 1–6, 2019, doi: 10.1109/EEM.2019.8916426.
[35]
979 I. L. R. Gomes, M. G. Ruano, and A. E. Ruano, “MILP-based model predictive control for home energy management
980 systems: A real case study in Algarve, Portugal,” Energy Build, vol. 281, pp. 28–30, 2023, doi: 10.1016/
981 j.enbuild.2023.112774.
[36]
982 M. Steen, “a At T Ti I Io O on N N S S Sy Y Ys S St T Te E Em M Ms S S Eur 19754 En,” 2004.
[37]
983 L. Abdallah and T. El-Shennawy, “Reducing carbon dioxide emissions from electricity sector using smart electric grid
984 applications,” Journal of Engineering (United Kingdom), vol. 2013, 2013, doi: 10.1155/2013/845051.
[38]
985 B. J. van Ruijven, E. De Cian, and I. Sue Wing, “Amplification of future energy demand growth due to climate
986 change,” Nat Commun, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-10399-3.
[39]
987 A. K. Karmaker, M. M. Rahman, M. A. Hossain, and M. R. Ahmed, “Exploration and corrective measures of green -
988 house gas emission from fossil fuel power stations for Bangladesh,” J Clean Prod, vol. 244, p. 118645, Jan. 2020, doi:
989 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.118645.
[40]
990 L. Zhang, C. Sun, G. Cai, and L. H. Koh, “Charging and discharging optimization strategy for electric vehicles consid-
991 ering elasticity demand response,” eTransportation, vol. 18, no. July, p. 100262, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.etran.2023.100262.
[41]
992 K. Liu et al., “An energy optimal schedule method for distribution network considering the access of distributed gen-
993 eration and energy storage,” IET Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 17, no. 13, pp. 2996–3015, 2023, doi:
994 10.1049/gtd2.12855.
[42]
995 H. A. U. Muqeet and A. Ahmad, “Optimal scheduling for campus prosumer microgrid considering price based de -
996 mand response,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 71378–71394, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2987915.
[43]
997 M. M. Iqbal, M. Waseem, A. Manan, R. Liaqat, A. Muqeet, and A. Wasaya, “IoT-Enabled Smart Home Energy Man -
998 agement Strategy for DR Actions in Smart Grid Paradigm,” Proceedings of 18th International Bhurban Conference on Ap-
999 plied Sciences and Technologies, IBCAST 2021, pp. 352–357, 2021, doi: 10.1109/IBCAST51254.2021.9393205.
[44]
1000 M. Shahab, S. Wang, and H. Abd Ul Muqeet, “Advanced Optimal Design of the IoT Based University Campus Micro-
1001 grid Considering Environmental Concerns and Demand Response,” 2021 6th International Conference on Power and Re-
1002 newable Energy, ICPRE 2021, pp. 798–802, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ICPRE52634.2021.9635493.
[45]
1003 M. M. Iqbal, I. A. Sajjad, M. F. Nadeem Khan, R. Liaqat, M. A. Shah, and H. A. Muqeet, “Energy Management in
1004 Smart Homes with PV Generation, Energy Storage and Home to Grid Energy Exchange,” 1st International Conference
1005 on Electrical, Communication and Computer Engineering, ICECCE 2019, no. July, pp. 1–7, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ICEC-
1006 CE47252.2019.8940684.
[46]
1007 H. A. Muqeet, A. Ahmad, I. A. Sajjad, R. Liaqat, A. Raza, and M. M. Iqbal, “Benefits of Distributed Energy and Storage
1008 System in Prosumer Based Electricity Market,” Proceedings - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Environment and
1009 Electrical Engineering and 2019 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe, EEEIC/I and CPS Europe 2019 , 2019,
1010 doi: 10.1109/EEEIC.2019.8783636.
[47]
1011 M. Y. Mehmood et al., “Edge Computing for IoT-Enabled Smart Grid,” Security and Communication Networks, vol. 2021,
1012 2021, doi: 10.1155/2021/5524025.
[48]
1013 M. Azeem et al., “Combined Economic Emission Dispatch in Presence of Renewable Energy Resources Using CISSA in
1014 a Smart Grid Environment,” Electronics (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 3, 2023, doi: 10.3390/electronics12030715.
[49]
1015 A. Ali et al., “Latest Energy Storage Trends in Multi-Energy Standalone Electric Vehicle Charging Stations: A Compre-
1016 hensive Study,” Energies (Basel), vol. 15, no. 13, pp. 1–19, 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15134727.
[50]
1017 H. A. Muqeet, H. M. Munir, H. Javed, M. Shahzad, M. Jamil, and J. M. Guerrero, “An energy management system of
1018 campus microgrids: State-of-the-art and future challenges,” Energies (Basel), vol. 14, no. 20, 2021, doi: 10.3390/
1019 en14206525.
[51]
1020 M. M. Gulzar, M. Iqbal, S. Shahzad, H. A. Muqeet, M. Shahzad, and M. M. Hussain, “Load Frequency Control (LFC)
1021 Strategies in Renewable Energy‐Based Hybrid Power Systems: A Review,” Energies (Basel), vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 1–23,
1022 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15103488.
[52]
1023 H. A. Muqeet, R. Liaqat, M. Jamil, and A. A. Khan, “A State-of-the-Art Review of Smart Energy Systems and Their
1024 Management in a Smart Grid Environment,” Energies (Basel), vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2023, doi: 10.3390/en16010472.
[53]
1025 S. Balouch et al., “Optimal Scheduling of Demand Side Load Management of Smart Grid Considering Energy Effi-
1026 ciency,” Front Energy Res, vol. 10, no. May, pp. 1–14, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.861571.
[54]
1027 H. Abdul Muqeet et al., “IoT-based intelligent source–load–storage coordination scheme for prosumer campus micro-
1028 grids,” Front Energy Res, vol. 10, no. October, pp. 1–13, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.960104.
[55]
1029 K. Wang, Y. Liang, R. Jia, X. Wu, X. Wang, and P. Dang, “Two-stage stochastic optimal scheduling for multi-microgrid
1030 networks with natural gas blending with hydrogen and low carbon incentive under uncertain envinronments,” J En-
1031 ergy Storage, vol. 72, no. PB, p. 108319, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.est.2023.108319.
[56]
1032 B. Dey, S. Misra, and F. P. Garcia Marquez, “Microgrid system energy management with demand response program
1033 for clean and economical operation,” Appl Energy, vol. 334, no. January, p. 120717, 2023, doi: 10.1016/
1034 j.apenergy.2023.120717.
[57]
1035 Y. Liang, Z. Xu, H. Li, G. Wang, Z. Huang, and Z. Li, “A random optimization strategy of microgrid dispatching
1036 based on stochastic response surface method considering uncertainty of renewable energy supplies and load de -
1037 mands,” International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 154, no. August, p. 109408, 2023, doi: 10.1016/
1038 j.ijepes.2023.109408.
[58]
1039 A. Raza and T. N. Malik, “Energy management in commercial building microgrids,” Journal of Renewable and Sustain-
1040 able Energy, vol. 11, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1063/1.5034352.
[59]
1041 M. S. Pansota et al., “An Optimal Scheduling and Planning of Campus Microgrid Based on Demand Response and
1042 Battery Lifetime,” Pakistan Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 8–17, 2021, doi: 10.51846/vol4iss3pp8-
1043 17.
[60]
1044 H. A. Muqeet, I. A. Sajjad, A. Ahmad, M. M. Iqbal, S. Ali, and J. M. Guerrero, “Optimal Operation of Energy Storage
1045 System for a Prosumer Microgrid Considering Economical and Environmental Effects,” RAEE 2019 - International
1046 Symposium on Recent Advances in Electrical Engineering, no. January 2020, 2019, doi: 10.1109/RAEE.2019.8887002.
[61]
1047 L. Bin et al., “Scheduling and Sizing of Campus Microgrid Considering Demand Response and Economic Analysis,”
1048 Sensors, vol. 22, no. 16, 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22166150.
[62]
1049 H. Javed, “Design, Model & Planning of Prosumer Microgrid for MNS UET Multan Campus,” Sir Syed University Re-
1050 search Journal of Engineering & Technology, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1–7, 2021, doi: 10.33317/ssurj.381.
[63]
1051 H. A. Muqeet, A. Ahmad, I. A. Sajjad, R. Liaqat, A. Raza, and M. M. Iqbal, “Benefits of Distributed Energy and Storage
1052 System in Prosumer Based Electricity Market,” Proceedings - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Environment and
1053 Electrical Engineering and 2019 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe, EEEIC/I and CPS Europe 2019 , 2019,
1054 doi: 10.1109/EEEIC.2019.8783636.
[64]
1055 O. Erdinc, N. G. Paterakis, T. D. P. Mendes, A. G. Bakirtzis, and J. P. S. Catalão, “Smart Household Operation Consid -
1056 ering Bi-Directional EV and ESS Utilization by Real-Time Pricing-Based DR,” IEEE Trans Smart Grid, vol. 6, no. 3, pp.
1057 1281–1291, 2015, doi: 10.1109/TSG.2014.2352650.
[65]
1058 H. A. U. Muqeet and A. Ahmad, “Optimal scheduling for campus prosumer microgrid considering price based de -
1059 mand response,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 71378–71394, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2987915.
[66]
1060 M. Mehedi Hasan, S. Ali Pourmousavi, F. Bai, and T. K. Saha, “The impact of temperature on battery degradation for
1061 large-scale BESS in PV plant,” 2017 Australasian Universities Power Engineering Conference, AUPEC 2017, vol. 2017-
1062 Novem, pp. 1–6, 2018, doi: 10.1109/AUPEC.2017.8282448.
[67]
1063 M. Ali, M. A. Abdulgalil, I. Habiballah, and M. Khalid, “Optimal Scheduling of Isolated Microgrids with Hybrid Re-
1064 newables and Energy Storage Systems Considering Demand Response,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, no. July, pp. 80266–
1065 80273, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3296540.
[68]
1066 NEPRA, “National Electric Power Regulatory Authority Islamic Republic of Pakistan NEPRA/RIADG(Tariff)/TRF-
1067 100/XWDISCOs/1080- 1082,” pp. 3–5, 2021.
[69]
1068 M. A. Saeed, Z. Ahmed, S. Hussain, and W. Zhang, “Wind resource assessment and economic analysis for wind en-
1069 ergy development in Pakistan,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 44, no. January 2020, p. 101068,
1070 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2021.101068.
[70]
1071 S. H. Shami, J. Ahmad, R. Zafar, M. Haris, and S. Bashir, “Evaluating wind energy potential in Pakistan’s three prov-
1072 inces, with proposal for integration into national power grid,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 53, pp.
1073 408–421, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.08.052.
[71]
1074 J. Faraji, A. Ketabi, H. Hashemi-Dezaki, M. Shafie-Khah, and J. P. S. Catalao, “Optimal day-ahead scheduling and op-
1075 eration of the prosumer by considering corrective actions based on very short-term load forecasting,” IEEE Access, vol.
1076 8, pp. 83561–83582, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2991482.
[72]
1077 L. Park, Y. Yoon, S. Cho, and S. Choi, “Prosumer Energy Management Considering Contract with Consumers under
1078 Progressive Pricing Policy,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 115789–115799, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3004643.
[73]
1079 H. Chen, H. Wu, T. Kan, J. Zhang, and H. Li, “Low-carbon economic dispatch of integrated energy system containing
1080 electric hydrogen production based on VMD-GRU short-term wind power prediction,” International Journal of Electri-
1081 cal Power and Energy Systems, vol. 154, no. July, p. 109420, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2023.109420.
1082

Sustainability 2836462

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 2836462

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

1 Residential Prosumer Energy Management System with

Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.

3 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

6 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

74 grid, especially at peak loads. Furthermore, intelligent use of energy by consumer

9 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

12 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

15 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

18 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

21 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

24 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

27 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

361 3.4. Modeling of BESS

30 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

33 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

36 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

39 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Parameters Value Parameters Value

BSO Emax 16 kWh BSO C max (Li−Ion) 90%

BSOC BES ( 0 ) (Li−Ion) 50% BSO C min (Li−Ion) 10%

BSOC BES (24 ) ( Li−Ion) 50% ∅ EV ,∅ BES 0.001

42 Sustainability 2024, 16, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Scenerio 1 Mean STD Scenerio 2

474 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Scenario 9 Scenario 10

479 4. System Description

497 Figure 4: Energy Generation of PV & Wind

Check the current scenario

Check the available

Use the Electric Vehicle Charge battery

Yes Yes Shed Load

Supply from the Grid

532 Figure 7: State of Charge of Batteries

550 Figure 8: Power Exchange with Grid

0 Energy Storage Power (Li-ion )

SOC1: EV charged with grid. Time (Hour)

SOC 1 (Li-ion ) SOC 2 (Li-ion )

601 Figure 11: State of Charge of Li-Ion Battery

0 Energy Storage Power (Li-ion )

Grid Power (Lead acid)

Energy Storage Power (Lead

40 SOC 1 (Lead Acid)

BESS (Li-ion) Grid Power Electric Vehicle (ESS Charged)

20 SOC1: EV charged with grid.

675 Figure 17: State of Charge of Li-Ion Battery

Disparate Cases Lithium Ion BESS Lead Acid BESS

780 7. Discussion and Challenges

Ref Year Technique Application Remarks Savings

Two Level Load

and carbon emission is

Considering demand response and DERs & Operational cost is re-

Pro- Operational cost is re-

848 Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

850 Pt g Import Power from the grid (kW)

871 BSO C max Maximum State of Charge of Battery (%)

882 vw Variation of wind speed in particular area

883 t Hourly time interval (h)

You might also like