No abstract

In this paper, a risk‐based probabilistic short‐term scheduling of a smart energy hub (SEH) is presented considering the uncertain variables and the correlation between them. Neglecting the uncertainty of renewable energy sources (RESs), demands and market prices can make the obtained results unusable. In addition, correlations among uncertain variables may have similar importance on final solutions. To have a more realistic view, the stochastic nature of solar irradiation, wind generation, energy demands, and electrical/thermal/gas market prices are taken into consideration through uncertainty modeling. For this purpose, a probabilistic scenario‐based approach is implemented. The Monte Carlo simulation technique is employed to generate an adequate number of scenarios and the Cholesky decomposition technique combined with Nataf transformation is used to make the samples correlated. In addition, the k‐means data clustering technique is used to reduce the initial number of scenarios to the most representative 10 scenarios. The addressed SEH comprises photovoltaic panels/a wind turbine/a combined heat and power generation unit/a fuel‐cells power plant (FCPP)/a thermal/hydrogen storage system and plug‐in electric vehicles (PEVs). This study aims to optimize the economic aspects while reducing the pollution emissions of the SEH and controlling the risk level of SEH operation. To enhance the flexibility of the SEH in the management of supplying demands with lower costs, the thermal demand response program (DRP) is considered beside the electrical DRP. Two kinds of time of use (TOU) and real‐time pricing (RTP) DRPs are used for electrical and thermal loads. The conditional value at risk technique is taken into account to control the deviations of the SEH operation and emission costs. Simulation results show a reasonable reduction in operation and emission costs along with the risk level of the energy hub with the proposed approach. The operation emission, and risk costs are reduced by 37.39%, 32.11%, and 33.16%, respectively, with integrating PEVs, FCPP, and RTP‐DRPs. Moreover, integration of PEVs, FCPP along with TOU‐based DRPs contribute to reduce the operation emission, and risk costs by 10.47%, 9.03%, and 11.64%, respectively.

No abstract

Summary Smart grid mitigates the environmental concerns associated with the global warming and climate shifting and reduces the dependence of the power generation on conventional fossil fuels. This is done by energy efficiency improvement and renewable energy sources exploitation at large scales in the form of centralized systems as well as small‐scale systems in the form of microgrids and nanogrids. However, smart grid technology brings new challenges to the big data management of the new power system construction. Additionally, due to the large‐scale intermittent distributed renewable resources contribution and stochastic electric vehicles integration, the current energy management systems must undergo some improvements to handle the smart grid requirements. Cloud computing, as an intermittent based on‐demand computing model, serves an emerging solution to the aforementioned challenges. As a result, this paper presents a survey study on the smart grid and state of art energy management methods and the necessitation of the cloud computing incorporation in smart grid energy management. Then, the application of the cloud computing in energy management, demand side management programs, building energy management systems, energy hubs, and power dispatching systems have been discussed and associated models are addressed.

This paper presents a tri‐level stochastic coordinated transmission and distribution system expansion (CTDS) planning considering the deployment of energy hubs (EHs) across the distribution systems (DSs). The first level of the proposed optimization approach deals with transmission system expansion planning (TEP), while the second level develops distribution system expansion planning (DEP). Market clearing is done in the third level to update the locational marginal prices (LMPs) for different distribution system operators (DSOs). The EHs include photovoltaic cells (PVs), wind turbines (WTs), combined heating and power units (CHPs), boilers, and electrical and absorption chillers. The proposed tri‐level approach is solved with an iterative algorithm based on the diagonalization approach and tested on the modified IEEE 30‐bus transmission systems (TS) with several DSOs. Each DSO includes 18‐bus electrical, heating, and cooling energy systems. The numerical analysis shows that the total cost of the transmission system operator (TSO) is not changed with implementing the uncoordinated approach. However, the total cost of the whole system is reduced by 6.54% with accommodation of the EHs in the uncoordinated approach. Moreover, the total cost of the TSO as well as the whole system are reduced by 41.11% and 16.96%, respectively, with the proposed (CTDS) planning.