Risk Explicit Interval Linear Programming Model for CCHP System Optimization Under Uncertainties

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 849)

Abstract

A risk explicit interval linear programming model for CCHP system optimization was proposed to provide better system cost-risk tradeoff for decision making. This method is an improved interval parameter programming, which can overcome the shortages of traditional interval parameter programming. The proposed approach can provide explicit system cost-risk tradeoff information by introducing aspiration level and system risk metric objective function. The explicit optimal strategies for decision maker with certain risk tolerance degree is more executable than the interval solutions in practice. The developed approach was applied to the CCHP system for a residential area. The results indicated that the aspiration level would have great effects on the system investment and operation decision making. For the pessimistic decision maker, the total cost would be higher with less system risk and safer system operation. For the optimistic decision maker, the total cost would be lower with higher system risk.

Keywords

CCHP Risk explicit Interval programming Energy management optimization 

Classified Index

C931.6 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71603016) and Natural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality (No. 9174028).

References

  1. 1.
    Kim, I., James, J., Critternden, J.: The case study of combined cooling heating and power and photovoltaic systems for building customers using HOMER software. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 143, 490–502 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhu, Q., Luo, X., Zhang, B., Chen, Y.: Mathematical modelling and optimization of a large-scale combined cooling, heat, and power system that incorporates unit changeover and time-of-use electricity price. Energy Convers. Manag. 133, 385–398 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Piacentino, A., Gallea, R., Catrini, P., Cardona, F., Panno, D.: On the reliability of optimization results for trigeneration systems in buildings, in the presence of price uncertainties and erroneous load estimation. Energies 9 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.3390/en9121049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jabari, F., Nojavan, S., Ivatloo, B.M.: Designing and optimizing a novel advanced adiabatic compressed air energy storage and air source heat pump based μ-Combined Cooling, heating and power system. Energy 116, 64–77 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akbari, K., Jolai, F., Ghaderi, S.F.: Optimal design of distributed energy system in a neighborhood under uncertainty. Energy 116, 567–582 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ünal, A.N., Ersöz, I., Kayakutlu, G.: Operational optimization in simple tri-generation systems. Appl. Therm. Eng. 107, 175–183 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sheng, W., Peang, S., Tang, Y., Meng, X., Wang, D., Wu, Z., Gu, W.: Stochastic multi-objective scheduling of a cooling, heating and power microgrid containing a fuel cell. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 7 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4937471
  8. 8.
    Hu, M., Cho, H.: A probability constrained multi-objective optimization model for CCHP system operation decision support. Appl. Energy 116, 230–242 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McLean, K., Li, X.: Robust scenario formulations for strategic supply chain optimization under uncertainty. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52, 5721–5734 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jing, Y.Y., Bai, H., Wang, J.J.: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model for CCHP systems driven by different energy sources. Energy Policy 42, 286–296 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nieto-Morote, A., Ruz-Vila, F.: A fuzzy AHP multi-criteria decision making approach applied to combined cooling, heating, and power production systems. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 10(3), 497–517 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xie, Y.L., Xia, D.H., Ji, L., Zhou, W.N., Huang, G.H.: An inexact cost-risk balanced model for regional energy structure adjustment management and resources environmental effect analysis – a case study of Shandong province, China. Energy 126, 374–391 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ji, L., Huang, G.H., Huang, L.C., Xie, Y.L., Niu, D.X.: Inexact stochastic risk-aversion optimal day-ahead dispatch model for electricity system management with wind power under uncertainty. Energy 109, 920–932 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ji, L., Niu, D.X., Huang, G.H.: An inexact two-stage stochastic robust programming for residential micro-grid management-based on random demand. Energy 67, 186–199 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boloukat, M.H.S., Foroud, A.A.: Stochastic-based resource expansion planning for a grid-connected microgrid using interval linear programming. Energy 113, 776–787 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang, P., Dong, F., Liu, Y., Zou, R., Chen, X., Guo, H.: A refined risk explicit interval linear programming approach for optimal watershed load reduction with objective-constraint uncertainty tradeoff analysis. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 10(1), 129–140 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simic, V., Dimitrijevic, B.: Risk explicit interval linear programming model for long-term planning of vehicle recycling in the EU legislative context under uncertainty. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 73, 197–210 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang, X., Huang, K., Zou, R., Liu, Y., Yu, Y.: A risk explicit interval linear programing model for uncertainty-based environmental economic optimization in the Lake Fuxian watershed, China. Sci. World J. (2013). Article ID 824078.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/824078
  19. 19.
    Liu, Y., Zou, R., Guo, H.C.: Risk explicit interval linear programming model for uncertainty-based nutrient-reduction optimization for the Lake Qionghai watershed. J. Water Resour. Planning Manag. 137(1), 83–91 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tong, S.C.: Interval number, fuzzy number linear programming. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 66, 301–306 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Huang, G.H., Baetz, B.W., Patry, G.G.: A grey fuzzy linear programming approach for waste management and planning under uncertainty. Civ. Eng. Syst. 10, 123–146 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huang, G.H., Loucks, D.P.: An inexact two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Civ. Eng. Environ. Syst. 2(17), 95–118 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zou, R., Liu, Y., Liu, L., Guo, H.C.: A risk explicit interval linear programming approach for uncertainty based decision making. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 24(4), 357–364 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Farzan, F., Farzan, F., Jafari, M.A.: Integration of demand dynamics and investment decisions on distributed energy resources. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 7(4), 1886–1895 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Suchitra, D., Jegatheesan, R., Deepika, T.J.: Optimal design of hybrid power generation system and its integration in the distribution network. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 82, 136–149 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Base of Beijing Modern Manufacturing Development, College of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of TechnologyBeijingChina
  2. 2.College of Economics and ManagementNorth China Electric Power UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations