Multi-Objective Profit-Based Unit Commitment with Renewable Energy and Energy Storage Units Using a Modified Optimization Method

Abstract

The unit commitment (UC) problem aims to reduce the power generation costs of power generation units in the traditional power system structure. However, under the current arrangement, the problem of cutting the cost of producing electricity has turned into an opportunity to boost power generation units’ profits. Emission concerns are now given considerable weight when talking about the performance planning of power generation units, in addition to economic objectives. Because emissions are viewed as a limitation rather than an objective function in the majority of recent research that has been published in the literature, this paper solves the multi-objective profit-based unit commitment (PBUC) problem while taking into account energy storage systems (ESSs) and renewable energy systems (RESs) in the presence of uncertainty sources, such as demand and energy prices, in order to minimize generated emissions and maximize profits by power generation units in the fiercely competitive energy market. Owing to the intricacy of the optimization problem, a novel mutation-based modified version of the shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA) is suggested as a way to get around the PBUC problem’s difficulty. A 10-unit test system is used for the simulation, which is run for a whole day to demonstrate the effectiveness of the suggested approach. The proposed algorithm’s output is compared with the best-known approaches from various references. The simulated results generated by the suggested algorithms and the previously reported algorithms to solve the PBUC problem show that the proposed method is better than other evolutionary methods utilized in this study and prior investigations. For example, the overall profit from the suggested MSFLA is around 4% and 5.5% higher than that from other algorithms like the ICA and Muller methods in the presence and absence of reserve allocation, respectively. Furthermore, the MSFLA emissions value is approximately 2% and 8% lower than the optimum emissions values obtained using the PSO and ICA approaches, respectively.