Author
Ahmed, Eihab E. E., Poyrazoglu, Gokturk, El Sayed, Ahmad
Publication Date
2024-03-01
Publication Place
-
Universitas Diponegoro
Subject
Framework, Sustainability, Energy dispatch, Capacity planning, Nano-grid
Type
Periodical
Language
English
Digital
Yes
Manuscript
No
Library
Özyeğin University
Library Asset ID
2252-4940
Record ID
b0977a43-5938-45f6-bde0-cdb4b7a32cff
Library Location
Electrical & Electronics Engineering
Date
2024-03-01
Sample Text
This paper presents an integrated framework designed for capacity planning of grid -connected nanogrid, a small solar and energy storage system that can provide kilowatt -level services to individual buildings. This framework comprehensively evaluates nanogrid cost-effectiveness, sustainability, and reliability, employing a multi -faceted techno-enviro-economic assessment approach. Traditional nanogrid capacity planning often prioritizes peak load requirements, which may lack optimality owing to occasional peak load occurrences. Conversely, optimizing solely for base load requirements might also fall short of effectiveness, compromising reliability and sustainability objectives. The proposed framework employs a threestep, integrated process for nanogrid (NG) capacity planning. Firstly, the Planner module identifies optimal asset sizing considering a two-day lookahead logic. Then, the Operator module serves as a digital twin for the system, conducting hourly calculations over a short-term horizon. Lastly, the Evaluator module evaluates technical, environmental, and economic metrics for each solution, assessing the effectiveness of asset -sizing decisions. A simulated case study has demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed framework. The technical assessment revealed that a PV size of 24 kW and a storage capacity of 91 kWh led to the most reliable solution, with a probability of local sufficiency of 95 percent. Furthermore, the environmental assessment showcased a renewable fraction of 94% with a PV size of 26 kW and a storage of 85 kWh. Economically, the analysis identified that a PV size of 12 kW and a storage size of 24 kWh led to the minimum total cost. In contrast, a PV size of 26 kW and a storage size of 85 kWh yielded a total operating savings of $4,801.
DOI
10.61435/ijred.2024.60001
Cilt
13
