Abstract
Background: The implementation of Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESSs) and carbon capture units can effectively reduce the total carbon emissions of distribution networks. However, their widespread adoption has been hindered by the high investment costs associated with the BESSs and power generation costs of carbon capture units.
Objective: The objective of this paper is to optimize the location and sizing of BESSs in distribution networks that comprise renewable power plants and coal-fired power units with carbon capture systems. The optimization process aims to minimize the grid’s impact from the configuration while maximizing economic cost savings and the benefits of reducing carbon emissions.
Methods: A bi-layer optimization model is proposed to determine the configuration of BESSs. The upper layer of the model optimizes the size and operation strategy of the BESSs to minimize the configuration and power generation costs, using YALMIP and CPLEX optimization tools. Carbon emission reduction benefits are considered through deep peak-shaving and carbon tax. The lower layer of the model aims to optimizes the placement of the BESSs to minimize voltage fluctuation and network loss in the power grid. To achieve this, we improved the efficiency of the Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) to update the BESS’s placement.
Results: The IEEE33-bus and IEEE118-bus systems were utilized for simulation and comparison in various scenarios. The findings demonstrate that the proposed configuration method can decrease the cost of investment and power generation. Furthermore, it reduces the degree of node voltage fluctuation and network loss in the distribution network.
Conclusion: The study reveals that determining the optimal scale of BESSs can mitigate high energy consumption in carbon capture systems and improve the overall performance of power systems that integrate carbon capture technology and renewable power plants.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.3460]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.003]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2018.2828991]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.068]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2019.100847]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.127]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10311-020-01133-3]
Chengdu, China, 2020. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICCS51219.2020.9336521]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.085]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132860]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2967435]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2020.106665]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.104716]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICEEE49618.2020.9102603]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.119]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c00161] [PMID: 32212696]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.05.019]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/2352096513999200422142041]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app9245399]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.011]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/2215083808666220324144603]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.02.047]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en13030513]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2013.0887]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-10189-0]