Simulation Studies to Quantify the Impact of Demand Side Management on Environmental Footprint

Sustainability

Siddharth Suryanarayanan¹  Sulaiman A. Almohaimeed²  Peter O’Neill³ 

[1] Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007, USA;Department of Electrical Engineering, College of Engineering, Qassim University, Unaizah 56452, Saudi Arabia;Retired Electrical Engineer, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA;

关键词: carbon dioxide;    cost benefit analysis;    demand response;    demand side management;    energy storage system;    environmental footprint;   

DOI  :  10.3390/su13179504

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

The increased use of energy leads to increased energy-related emissions. Demand side management (DSM) is a potential means of mitigating these emissions from electric utility generating units. DSM can significantly reduce emissions and provide economic and reliability benefits. This work presents some DSM techniques, such as load shifting, energy conservation, and valley filling. Furthermore, this work explains the most common DSM programs. To quantify the effect of DSM in diminishing carbon footprint, this paper performs power flow analysis on a yearly load profile corresponding to Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S. This work used the IEEE 13-node test system to simulate several scenarios from the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) alternatives, both individually and integrated. For the base case, emissions decrease by 16% from the 2005 level. The “energy conservation” option achieved a 20% reduction in emissions, integrating both alternatives increased the emissions mitigation up to 22%. Simulation of the residential sector shows the “communication and intelligence” option reduces emissions about 14% from the 2005 level. A scenario that combines “electric stationary storage” with “communication and intelligence” diminishes the emissions by more than 15%. The last scenario examined all MCDM alternatives combined into one option, resulting in a 20% emissions reduction. We also conducted a cost benefit analysis (CBA) to investigate economic, technical, and environmental costs and benefits associated with each alternative. The economic evaluation shows that “electric stationary storage” is the best option since it charges during lower electricity prices and discharges during peaking demand. The economic analysis presents a trade-off chart, so the decision maker can select the alternative based on their preference.

【 授权许可】

Unknown