Energy management on a stand-alone power system for the ...
Energy management on a stand-alone power system for the ...
Energy management on a stand-alone power system for the ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Energy</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>management</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> a <strong>stand</strong>-al<strong>on</strong>e <strong>power</strong> <strong>system</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> producti<strong>on</strong> of electrical<br />
energy with hydrogen l<strong>on</strong>g term storage<br />
3.4. Effect of key variables to <strong>the</strong> operati<strong>on</strong> of <strong>the</strong> <strong>stand</strong>-al<strong>on</strong>e <strong>power</strong> <strong>system</strong><br />
The study of <strong>the</strong> integrated <strong>system</strong> requires <strong>the</strong> analysis of <strong>the</strong> effect of <strong>the</strong> limit SOC min<br />
as well as of <strong>the</strong> hydrogen c<strong>on</strong>straint and diesel use. Table 1 shows that, reducti<strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
SOC min causes less hydrogen to produce and to c<strong>on</strong>sume but <strong>the</strong> total hydrogen is<br />
higher. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong>re was part of energy that was lost during <strong>the</strong> analysis of <strong>the</strong> 3 rd<br />
strategy at 7.75, 3.15 and 2.62kWh <strong>for</strong> SOC min at 84, 80 and 76% respectively.<br />
H 2 ,-Elec, Νm 3 H 2 -FC, Νm 3 H 2 –Tot, Νm 3<br />
1 st Strategy 92.1 102.8 49.8<br />
SOC min<br />
84%<br />
SOC min<br />
80%<br />
SOC min<br />
76%<br />
2 nd Strategy 106.7 144.4 22.8<br />
3 rd Strategy 118 185.6 -7.2<br />
1 st Strategy 75.2 53.9 81.8<br />
2 nd Strategy 75.9 58.6 77.8<br />
3 rd Strategy 74.6 61.5 73.6<br />
1 st Strategy 71 38.3 93.2<br />
2 nd Strategy 71.2 41.2 90.5<br />
3 rd Strategy 69.3 42.3 87.5<br />
Table 1: Results <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> hydrogen producti<strong>on</strong> and c<strong>on</strong>sumpti<strong>on</strong> during a typical four<br />
m<strong>on</strong>th period <strong>for</strong> various values of SOC min and of fuel cell output <strong>power</strong><br />
From <strong>the</strong> analysis of <strong>the</strong> three strategies, it was found that <strong>the</strong>re were cases where <strong>the</strong><br />
demand <strong>for</strong> hydrogen was more than it was stored in <strong>the</strong> storage tanks. Especially <strong>for</strong> an<br />
increase in <strong>the</strong> output <strong>power</strong> of <strong>the</strong> fuel cell <strong>the</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sumpti<strong>on</strong> was higher and <strong>the</strong> stored<br />
hydrogen was less [5, 6]. This outcome resulted in <strong>the</strong> use of commercial hydrogen with<br />
an additi<strong>on</strong>al cost in <strong>the</strong> <strong>system</strong>. For <strong>the</strong> next case study, a hydrogen c<strong>on</strong>straint is used<br />
in all algorithms. If <strong>the</strong> hydrogen stored is higher than <strong>the</strong> 95% of nominal capacity of<br />
<strong>the</strong> storage tanks <strong>the</strong> excess of energy is used to charge <strong>the</strong> accumulator (until 100%)<br />
and if excess energy still exists <strong>the</strong>n it is lost (driven to <strong>the</strong> dump load). In case that<br />
shortage of energy exists <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> fuel cell meets <strong>the</strong> energy demand without taking into<br />
c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> SOC of <strong>the</strong> accumulator. Similarly, when <strong>the</strong> hydrogen stored is lower<br />
than <strong>the</strong> 5% of <strong>the</strong> nominal capacity of <strong>the</strong> storage tanks and shortage of energy exists<br />
(SOC