# Integration of Hydrogen into Multi-Energy Systems Optimisation

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

- 1)
- It incorporates modelling of the hydrogen system into a combined optimization multi-energy systems model considering both investment and operation at the system level.
- 2)
- It assesses the system implications, economic, and environmental impact of different hydrogen production infrastructures across the whole system level.
- 3)
- It also investigates the impacts of hydrogen integration on each individual energy sector under different carbon targets.

## 2. Integrated Multi-Energy Systems Model

#### 2.1. Interactions in the Multi-Energy Systems

#### 2.2. Objective Function

#### 2.3. Constraints

## 3. Case Studies

#### 3.1. System Description and Assumptions

- 1)
- REF: This is the counterfactual scenario assuming that there is no hydrogen integration across the whole energy system.
- 2)
- P2G: Hydrogen is integrated into the energy system, which is produced only by the P2G process (i.e., electrolyser).
- 3)
- G2G: Similar to Equation (2), but hydrogen is produced only by G2G process (i.e., GHR-CCS).
- 4)
- OPT: The model was used to optimise the capacity of different hydrogen production processes (G2G and P2G).

#### 3.2. The Economic Benefit of Hydrogen Integration

#### 3.3. Impact of Hydrogen Integration on the Electricity System

#### 3.4. Impact of Hydrogen Integration on the Heating System

#### 3.5. Impact of Hydrogen Integration on the Transport Sector

#### 3.6. Impact of Hydrogen Integration on Carbon Emission

#### 3.7. Hydrogen Production Technologies Deployment

#### 3.8. The Relation between the P2G Facility and Wind Power

#### 3.9. Sensitivity Studies

#### 3.9.1. Sensitivity Analysis of Wind Power Capital Cost

#### 3.9.2. Sensitivity Analysis of Natural Gas Price

## 4. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Conflicts of Interest

## Abbreviations

G2G | Gas-to-gas |

CCS | Carbon capture and storage |

P2G | Power-to-gas |

GB | Great Britain |

RES | Renewable energy sources |

CHP | Combined heat and power |

MILP | Mixed-integer linear programming |

CAPEX | Capital expenditures |

OPEX | Operative expenditures |

GHR-CCS | Gas-heated reformers combined with carbon capture storage (GHR-CCS) |

EL | Electrolyser |

H2S | Hydrogen storage |

EV | Electric vehicle |

HFCV | Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle |

PV | Photovoltaics |

HV | High voltage |

LV | Low voltage |

DHN | District heating network |

IGB | Industrial natural gas boiler |

IHP | Industrial heat pump |

IHB | Industrial hydrogen boiler |

HP | End-use heat pump |

NGB | End-use natural gas boiler |

HB | End-use hydrogen boiler |

HP-B | Hybrid end-use heat pump and natural gas boiler |

HP-HB | Hybrid end-use heat pump and hydrogen boiler |

HB | End-use hydrogen boiler |

COP | Coefficient of performance |

Notation | |

Sets | |

$I$ | Set of locations |

$R$ | Set of regions |

$T$ | Set of operating time intervals |

$D$ | Set of operating days |

$G$ | Set of conventional generators |

$PV$ | Set of PV generation units |

$HV$ | High voltage distribution network |

$LV$ | Low voltage distribution network |

$L$ | Set of transmission/interconnection corridors |

$DHN$ | Set of district heating network |

Functions | |

$Z(\xb7)$ | Generation operating cost function |

$F(\xb7)$ | Power flow function |

$D(\xb7)$ | District heating network cost function |

Parameters | |

$\mathrm{\Delta}t$ | Time interval (h) |

${\pi}_{g}$ | Generation investment cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{f}$ | Transmission network cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{hv}$ | Electricity high-voltage distribution network cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{lv}$ | Electricity low-voltage distribution network cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{hp}$ | Industrial heat pump cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{ehp}$ | End-use heat pump cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{ngb}$ | Industrial natural gas boiler cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{engb}$ | End-use natural gas boiler cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{hb}$ | Industrial hydrogen boiler cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{ehb}$ | End-use hydrogen boiler cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{el}$ | Electrolyser investment cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{smr}$ | GHR-CCS investment cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{hs}$ | Hydrogen storage investment cost (£/GW/year) |

${\pi}_{ht}$ | Hydrogen pipeline investment cost (£/GW/km/year) |

${\pi}_{nl}$ | Generation no-load cost (£/h) |

${\pi}_{st}$ | Generation start-up cost (£/start) |

$\gamma $ | The operation cost of each system (£/GWh) |

$DE$ | Electricity demand (GW) |

$DH$ | Heat demand (GW) |

$DT$ | Transport demand (GW) |

$\overline{f}$ | Existing electricity transmission capacity (GW) |

$\overline{hvs}$ | Existing high-voltage distribution network capacity (GW) |

$\overline{lvs}$ | Existing low-voltage distribution network capacity (GW) |

$\overline{P}$ | The power rating of a generation unit (GW) |

$\underset{\_}{P}$ | Minimum stable generation (GW) |

${R}^{up}$ | Ramping up limit (GW/h) |

${R}^{down}$ | Ramping down limit (GW/h) |

$\overline{rsp}$ | Frequency response limit (GW) |

$\overline{res}$ | Spinning reserve limit (GW) |

$\overline{SF}$ | System frequency response requirement (GW) |

$\overline{SR}$ | System operation reserve requirement (GW) |

$\eta $ | Energy conversion efficiency (%) |

$\epsilon $ | The ratio of flexible transport demand (%) |

$\kappa $ | The ratio of electricity demand at high-voltage distribution level (%) |

$\sigma $ | Reverse power flow coefficient (%) |

$SHST$ | Hydrogen storage duration (h) |

$CT$ | Carbon target (tCO_{2}/year) |

$C$ | Direct carbon emission of each technology (tCO2/GWh) |

Variables | |

$n$ | The additional capacity of technologies (GW) |

$f$ | Additional transmission network capacity (GW) |

${d}^{-}$ | Reduction in transport load due to DSR (GW) |

${d}^{+}$ | Increased transport load due to DSR (GW) |

$P$ | Electricity generation (GW) |

$st$ | Number of generating units being synchronized |

$dst$ | Number of generating units being de-synchronized |

$\mu $ | Number of units in operation |

$H$ | Heating production (GW) |

$Q$ | Hydrogen production (GW) |

$V$ | Transportation supply (GW) |

$\theta $ | Voltage angle |

$\lambda $ | Penetration of production technologies (%) |

$rsp$ | Frequency response (GW) |

$res$ | Spinning reserve (GW) |

$S{H}^{+}$ | Hydrogen production by storage (GW) |

$S{H}^{-}$ | Hydrogen consumed by storage (GW) |

$SHS$ | The energy content of hydrogen storage (GWh) |

## References

- Sanders, D.; Hart, A.; Ravishankar, M.; Brunert, J.; Strbac, G.; Aunedi, M. An Analysis of Electricity System Flexibility for Great Britain; Carbon Trust/Imperial College: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Strbac, G.; Pudjianto, D.; Sansom, R.; Djapic, P.; Ameli, H.; Shah, N.; Brandon, N.; Hawkes, A.; Qadrdan, M. Analysis of Alternative UK Heat Decerbonisation Pathways; Imperial College London: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Mancarella, P. MES (multi-energy systems): An overview of concepts and evaluation models. Energy
**2014**, 65, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pudjianto, D.; Aunedi, M.; Djapic, P.; Strbac, G. Whole-systems assessment of the value of energy storage in low-carbon electricity systems. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid
**2013**, 5, 1098–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, X.; Strbac, G.; Teng, F.; Djapic, P. Economic assessment of alternative heat decarbonisation strategies through coordinated operation with electricity system—UK case study. Appl. Energy
**2018**, 222, 79–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, X.; Strbac, G.; Shah, N.; Teng, F.; Pudjianto, D. Whole-system assessment of the benefits of integrated electricity and heat system. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid
**2018**, 10, 1132–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chaudry, M.; Jenkins, N.; Strbac, G. Multi-time period combined gas and electricity network optimisation. Electr. Power Syst. Res.
**2008**, 78, 1265–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Damen, K.; van Troost, M.; Faaij, A.; Turkenburg, W. A comparison of electricity and hydrogen production systems with CO2 capture and storage—Part B: Chain analysis of promising CCS options. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci.
**2007**, 33, 580–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Almansoori, A.; Shah, N. Design and operation of a future hydrogen supply chain: Snapshot model. Chem. Eng. Res. Des.
**2006**, 84, 423–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Samsatli, S.; Staffell, I.; Samsatli, N.J. Optimal design and operation of integrated wind-hydrogen-electricity networks for decarbonising the domestic transport sector in Great Britain. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2016**, 41, 447–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Samsatli, S.; Samsatli, N.J. The role of renewable hydrogen and inter-seasonal storage in decarbonising heat–Comprehensive optimisation of future renewable energy value chains. Appl. Energy
**2019**, 233, 854–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, G.; Zhang, R.; Jiang, T.; Chen, H.; Bai, L.; Li, X. Security-constrained bi-level economic dispatch model for integrated natural gas and electricity systems considering wind power and power-to-gas process. Appl. Energy
**2017**, 194, 696–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Clegg, S.; Mancarella, P. Integrated modeling and assessment of the operational impact of power-to-gas (P2G) on electrical and gas transmission networks. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy
**2015**, 6, 1234–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Qadrdan, M.; Ameli, H.; Strbac, G.; Jenkins, N. Efficacy of options to address balancing challenges: Integrated gas and electricity perspectives. Appl. Energy
**2017**, 190, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Li, J.; Lin, J.; Song, Y.; Xing, X.; Fu, C. Operation optimization of power to hydrogen and heat (P2HH) in ADN coordinated with the district heating network. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy
**2019**, 10, 1672–1683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fu, P.; Pudjianto, D.; Zhang, X.; Strbac, G. Evaluating strategies for decarbonising the transport sector in Great Britain. In Proceedings of the IEEE Milan PowerTech, Milan, Italy, 23–27 June 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Teng, F.; Strbac, G. Full stochastic scheduling for low-carbon electricity systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng.
**2017**, 14, 461–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Brandon, N.; Kurban, Z. Clean energy and the hydrogen economy. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.
**2017**, 375, 20160400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Speirs, J.; Balcombe, P.; Johnson, E.; Martin, J.; Brandon, N.; Hawkes, A. A greener gas grid: What are the options. Energy Policy
**2018**, 118, 291–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Heap, R. Potential Role of Hydrogen in the UK Energy System; Energy Research Partnership: Birmingham, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Villasana, R.; Garver, L.; Salon, S. Transmission network planning using linear programming. IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.
**1985**, PAS-104, 349–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - FICO Xpress Optimization. Available online: https://www.fico.com/en/products/fico-xpress-optimization (accessed on 28 March 2020).
- BEIS. Electricity Generation Costs; The Stationery Office: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Element Energy. Hy-Impact Series Study 3: Hydrogen for Power Generation Opportunities for hydrogen and CCS in the UK Power Mix; Element Energy: Cambridge, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Walker, I.; Madden, B.; Tahir, F. Hydrogen Supply Chain Evidence Base; Element Energy Ltd.: Cambridge, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Efficiency Compared: Battery-Electric 73%, Hydrogen 22%, ICE 13%. Available online: https://insideevs.com/news/332584/efficiency-compared-battery-electric-73-hydrogen-22-ice-13/ (accessed on 24 October 2019).
- Offer, G.; Howey, D.; Contestabile, M.; Clague, R.; Brandon, N. Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system. Energy Policy
**2010**, 38, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Chen, G.; Chen, B.; Zhou, H.; Dai, P. Life cycle carbon emission flow analysis for electricity supply system: A case study of China. Energy Policy
**2013**, 61, 1276–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kannan, R.; Leong, K.; Osman, R.; Ho, H. Life cycle energy, emissions and cost inventory of power generation technologies in Singapore. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2007**, 11, 702–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Generation | Capital Cost (£/kW) | Fixed O&M (£/kW/year) | Discount Rate (%) | Lifetime (Years) | Marginal Cost (£/MWh) | Carbon Emissions (kg/MWh) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Nuclear | 5191 | 83.4 | 9.5% | 40 | 5.0 | 0 |

CCGT | 581 | 16.6 | 7.5% | 25 | 37.7 | 318.8 |

OCGT | 312 | 8.2 | 7.5% | 30 | 54.2 | 520.6 |

Gas-CCS | 2361 | 41.6 | 13.8% | 25 | 33.1 | 31.9 |

Coal-CCS | 3403 | 82.0 | 13.5% | 25 | 35.4 | 80.5 |

H2-CCGT | 697 | 17.0 | 7.5% | 25 | 0 | 0 |

H2-OCGT | 374 | 8.5 | 7.5% | 30 | 0 | 0 |

Wind | 1642 | 30.9 | 8.9% | 23 | 0 | 0 |

PV | 452 | 6.2 | 5.8% | 25 | 0 | 0 |

Heating Technology | Capital Cost (£/kW) | Fixed O&M (£/kW/year) | COP (%) | Discount Rate (%) | Lifetime (Years) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

End-use HP | 600 | 22.0 | 200%–300% | 3.5% | 12 |

End-use NGB | 75 | 6.0 | 95% | 3.5% | 12 |

End-use HB | 75 | 6.0 | 95% | 3.5% | 12 |

Industrial HP | 480 | 17.6 | 380% | 3.5% | 12 |

Industrial NGB | 35 | 2.8 | 98% | 3.5% | 12 |

Industrial HB | 35 | 2.8 | 98% | 3.5% | 12 |

Hydrogen production | Capital Cost (£/kW) | Fixed O&M (£/kW/year) | Discount Rate (%) | Lifetime (Years) | Carbon Emission (kg/MWh) | Efficiency (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Electrolyser | 465 | 48.5 | 10% | 30 | 0 | 74% |

GHR-CCS | 384 | 24.4 | 10% | 40 | 21.9 | 84% |

Scenarios | Capacity (GW) | Proportion (%) | Production (TWh) | Proportion (%) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

EL | GHR | EL | GHR | EL | GHR | EL | GHR | ||

30 Mt | P2G | 19.3 | 0 | 100% | 0% | 93.4 | 0 | 100% | 0% |

G2G | 0 | 79.7 | 0% | 100% | 0 | 461.4 | 0% | 100% | |

OPT | 9.1 | 60.1 | 13.1% | 86.9% | 25.5 | 313.5 | 7.5% | 92.5% | |

10 Mt | P2G | 27.2 | 0 | 100% | 0% | 128.3 | 0 | 100% | 0% |

G2G | 0 | 103.0 | 0% | 100% | 0 | 353.5 | 0% | 100% | |

OPT | 11.4 | 95.5 | 10.7% | 89.3% | 39.6 | 301.3 | 11.6% | 88.4% |

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Fu, P.; Pudjianto, D.; Zhang, X.; Strbac, G.
Integration of Hydrogen into Multi-Energy Systems Optimisation. *Energies* **2020**, *13*, 1606.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en13071606

**AMA Style**

Fu P, Pudjianto D, Zhang X, Strbac G.
Integration of Hydrogen into Multi-Energy Systems Optimisation. *Energies*. 2020; 13(7):1606.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en13071606

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Fu, Peng, Danny Pudjianto, Xi Zhang, and Goran Strbac.
2020. "Integration of Hydrogen into Multi-Energy Systems Optimisation" *Energies* 13, no. 7: 1606.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en13071606