# Optimal Sizing and Assessment of a Renewable Rich Standalone Hybrid Microgrid Considering Conventional Dispatch Methodologies

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{4}

^{5}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

_{2}discharge of 3375 kg/year and cost of energy of 0.208 USD /kWh along with a steady voltage-frequency output. Combined dispatch is determined as the worst strategy for the proposed microgrids with the highest energy cost of 0.532 USD /kWh, the operational cost of 15,394 USD, net present cost of 415,030 USD, and high CO

_{2}discharge. At the end of this work, a comparative analysis between the proposed design, another hybrid, and traditional generation plant is also presented. The findings of this work will be appropriate for any location with an identical demand profile and meteorological estate.

## 1. Introduction

#### 1.1. Core Contribution of This Research Work

- HOMER optimization is utilized for the evaluation and design of the proposed Integrated Hybrid Microgrid System (IHMS), which will guarantee the least CO
_{2}production, Cost of Energy (COE), and Net Present Cost (NPC) for the planned areas for different dispatch methodologies; - Microgrids’ response (voltage and frequency) is evaluated in Simulink to guarantee achievable, effective, and reliable performance;
- Five alternative dispatch techniques have been considered in this study and on the basis of their performances in terms of minimum cost, GHG release and power system responses, the worst and best dispatch approaches for the proposed microgrids have been declared.

#### 1.2. Paper Organization

## 2. Proposed IHMS Modeling

#### 2.1. Site and Load Profile

#### 2.2. Proposed IHMS Model

## 3. Methodology

#### 3.1. Dispatch Algorithms

#### 3.2. Formulation of Problem

#### 3.2.1. Objective Function

_{gen}= number of generator units, a

_{j}, b

_{j}, c

_{j}are fuel cost coefficients of the j

^{th}generator, F

_{j}(P

_{j}) = cost function of fuel of the j

^{th}generator in USD/hour, P

_{j}= power output of the j

^{th}generator in MW.

#### 3.2.2. Equality Inequality Constraints

#### Active Power Balance Constraint

_{loss}) plus the net consumer demand (P

_{demand}) must equal net power output [18]:

_{loss}is evaluated utilizing B coefficients:

_{ij}, B

_{0i}, B

_{00}are coefficients of loss.

#### Constraints for Generation Capacity

^{th}generator must equal to or higher than the lowest generation range, ${P}_{gen.min\left(i\right)}$ and equal to or less than the highest source capacity ${P}_{gen.max\left(i\right)}$ [18,42,44]:

#### 3.2.3. Cost Function Minimization and Optimal Sizing

_{1}, f

_{2}, f

_{3}are weights to mean the corresponding component’s significance. NPC refers to the corresponding equipment’s net present cost, LCOE refers to the corresponding equipment’s levelized cost of energy, eCO

_{2}and GHG refer to the quantity of carbon-di-oxide and greenhouse gas release by the hybrid microgrid, respectively.

#### 3.2.4. COE Calculation

_{annual}= yearly net cost, L

_{primary}= net primary demand, E

_{gs}= net energy brought by the traditional grid each year, L

_{d}= net deferrable demand.

#### 3.2.5. NPC Calculation

_{annual}= annual net cost, T

_{project}= longevity of the project, CRF (.) = capital recovery factor.

#### 3.2.6. Evaluation of CO_{2} Release

_{2}release from the IHMS can be quantified by the equation below [46]:

_{2}= amount of CO

_{2}gas, m

_{fuel}= amount of fuel in Liter, FHV = Fuel heating value in MJ/L, CEF

_{fuel}= carbon emission factor in ton carbon/TJ, X

_{c}= oxidized carbon fraction. To estimate the carbon emission, the fact “3.667 g of CO

_{2}contains 1 g of carbon” needs to be taken into consideration.

#### 3.2.7. Evaluation of ED

_{GI}refers marginal cost of every generation unit and P

_{GI}refers to the quantity of power that produces. Equation (15) demands that all generation units must stay within their max or min limits, and Equation (16) stipulates that the net produced energy must be equal to demand, P

_{D}

_{.}

#### 3.2.8. Stabilization of Frequency

^{nadir}) and the post-fault RoCoF (Rate of Change of Frequency), must both be kept within their inceptions to achieve a stable microgrid frequency [48]:

_{Gi}(t) and ΔP

_{Sj}(t) power differences of generation unit i and battery j respectively, P

_{M}= microgrids power imbalance.

#### 3.2.9. Voltage Stabilization

_{i}

_{,}and the reference voltage is V

_{set,i}. The quadratic objective function, for the situation, assists in limiting voltage deviations from the reference voltage.

## 4. Results and Discussion

#### 4.1. The IHMS’s Techno-Economic Study and Optimum Sizing

_{2}release for different strategies for the proposed locations found from the HOMER analysis. LF has the least LCOE, NPC, and CO

_{2}release of USD 0.208/kWh, USD 152,023 and 3375 kg/year and CD has the highest as respectively USD 0.532/kWh, USD 415,030, and 17,266 kg per year for Rajendro bazar and Kushighat.

_{2}release for five dispatch approaches for the proposed locations found from HOMER study in a per unit fashion. The result shows clear differences in expenses and emissions despite the identical load demand, due to variations in dispatch mechanism.

#### 4.2. Dispatch Strategy Based Voltage–Frequency Response of the Microgrids

#### 4.2.1. Voltage Outputs

#### 4.2.2. Frequency Output and Feasibility Study

#### 4.3. Comparison

_{2}release, NPC, operating costs and COE. It can be deduced from the comparative table that there is a considerable difference between the proposed IHMS and other HRES. The comparison study respectively shows the COE of the developed IHMS is 88.92%, the NPC is 47.25%, the operating cost is 80.85%, and the CO

_{2}release of the developed IHMS is 99.99% reduced than other optimized HRES. The comparison shown in Table 5 demonstrates that the COE of the optimized microgrid is 45.26%, the NPC is 48.80% and the CO

_{2}release is 99.99% reduced compared to traditional power generation plants, respectively. The reason behind this improvement lies in the implementation of a dispatch strategy based control, and limiting the usage of diesel generator and keeping it only for backup power supply. The researchers in [46] did not implement DS based control which resulted in higher usage of diesel generator. On the other hand, conventional fossil fuel-based power generation stations do use fossil fuels and thus produce a huge amount of GHG.

#### 4.4. Determining the Best and Worst Dispatch Approaches

#### 4.5. Discussion on Results

#### 4.6. Advantages of the Proposed System

_{2}release and NPC. Selection of the best dispatch controller was achieved through the comparative analysis of several dispatch techniques for the optimum operation of the islanded microgrid.

## 5. Conclusions

_{2}release, net present cost and generally consistent voltage-frequency performances, the study of simulation data from HOMER and Matlab/Simulink for several dispatch algorithms suggests that load following is the best dispatch approach for the proposed locations. Combined dispatch is determined as the worst dispatch approach based on the highest net present cost, CO

_{2}release, cost of energy and relatively poor voltage-frequency responses for the proposed microgrids. The energy cost of the planned hybrid microgrid is 88.92%, the net present cost is 47.25%, the cost of operation is 80.85% and the CO

_{2}emission is 99.99% reduced compared to the other hybrid microgrid, respectively. The comparison study also shows that the energy cost of the proposed system is 45.26%, the net present cost is 48.80%, and the CO

_{2}emission is 99.99% reduced compared to traditional power generation station. The power system (voltage and frequency) performance for the proposed microgrids, found through Simulink analysis, has also been studied in this research work. To guarantee a continuous power supply for the planned sites of Rajendro bazar and Kushighat, the proposed microgrids have met three primary requirements, including techno-economic feasibility and system stability (stable voltage and frequency outputs). This hybrid islanded microgrids, which have been designed and optimized, will be used mostly in islanded and isolated areas with similar load demand and meteorological status.

## 6. Limitations and Future Research Recommendations

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## Abbreviations

Abbreviation | Elaborative form |

HOMER | Hybrid Optimization of Multiple Electric Renewables |

NPC | Net Present Cost |

COE | Cost of Energy |

GHG | Green House Gas |

BESS | Battery Energy Storage System |

AC | Alternating Current |

DC | Direct Current |

ED | Economic Dispatch |

RTED | Real Time Economic Dispatch |

IHMS | Integrated Hybrid Microgrid System |

WT | Wind Turbines |

DG | Diesel Generator |

PV | Photo Voltaic |

CC | Cycle Charging |

LF | Load Following |

CD | Combined Dispatch |

PS | HOMER Predictive dispatch |

GO | Generator Order |

RoCoF | Rate of Change of Frequency |

HRES | Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems |

Nomenclature | |

N_{gen} | number of generator units |

a_{j}, b_{j}, c_{j} | fuel cost coefficients of the j^{th} generator |

F_{j}(P_{j}) | cost function of fuel of the j^{th} generator in USD/hour |

P_{j} | power output of the j^{th} generator in MW |

P_{loss} | net system loss |

P_{demand} | net consumer demand |

B_{ij}, B_{0i}, B_{00} | coefficients of loss |

${\mathrm{P}}_{\mathrm{gen}\left(\mathrm{i}\right)}$ | electricity generated from the i^{th} generator |

${\mathrm{P}}_{\mathrm{gen}.\mathrm{min}\left(\mathrm{i}\right)}$ | lowest generation range, |

${\mathrm{P}}_{\mathrm{gen}.\mathrm{max}\left(\mathrm{i}\right)}$ | highest source capacity |

${\mathrm{P}}_{\mathrm{storage}}$ | storage power |

a, b, c, d | corresponding capacities of various microgrid components |

f_{1}, f_{2}, f_{3} | weights to mean the corresponding component’s significance |

C_{annual} | yearly net cost |

L_{primary} | net primary demand |

E_{gs} | net energy brought by the traditional grid each year |

L_{d} | net deferrable demand |

i | rate of interest (annualized) |

C_{annual} | annual net cost |

T_{project} | longevity of the project |

CRF (.) | capital recovery factor |

eCO_{2} | amount of CO_{2} gas |

m_{fuel} | amount of fuel in Liter |

FHV | Fuel heating value in MJ/L |

CEF_{fuel} | carbon emission factor in ton carbon/TJ |

X_{c} | oxidized carbon fraction |

f^{nadir} | frequency nadir |

RoCoF | Rate of Change of Frequency |

H | microgrid’s inertia |

D | load damping factor |

Δf (t) | frequency deviation |

P_{M} | microgrids power imbalance |

ΔP_{Sj} (t) | power differences of generation unit i |

ΔP_{Gi} (t) | power differences of battery j |

## References

- Ma, Y.; Chen, Y.; Chen, X.; Deng, F.; Song, X. Optimal Dispatch of Hybrid Energy Islanded Microgrid Considering V2G Under TOU Tariffs. E3S Web Conf.
**2019**, 107, 02007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nwani, C.; Omoke, P.C. Does bank credit to the private sector promote low-carbon development in Brazil? An extended STIRPAT analysis using dynamic ARDL simulations. Env. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int.
**2020**, 27, 31408–31426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chang, X.; Xu, Y.; Gu, W.; Sun, H.; Chow, M.-Y.; Yi, Z. Accelerated distributed hybrid stochastic/robust energy management of smart grids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.
**2020**, 17, 5335–5347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mohamed, S.; Shaaban, M.F.; Ismail, M.; Serpedin, E.; Qaraqe, K.A. An efficient planning algorithm for hybrid remote microgrids. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy
**2018**, 10, 257–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Papari, B.; Edrington, C.S.; Bhattacharya, I.; Radman, G. Effective energy management of hybrid AC–DC microgrids with storage devices. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid
**2017**, 10, 193–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Duan, J.; Yi, Z.; Shi, D.; Lin, C.; Lu, X.; Wang, Z. Reinforcement-learning-based optimal control of hybrid energy storage systems in hybrid AC–DC microgrids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.
**2019**, 15, 5355–5364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Dabbaghjamanesh, M.; Kavousifard, A.; Mehraeen, S.; Zhang, J.; Dong, Z.Y. Sensitivity Analysis of Renewable Energy Integration on Stochastic Energy Management of Automated Reconfigurable Hybrid AC-DC Microgrid Considering DLR Security Constraint. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.
**2019**, 16, 120–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shezan, S.A.; Ishraque, M.F. Assessment of a Micro-grid Hybrid Wind-Diesel-Battery Alternative Energy System Applicable for Offshore Islands. In Proceedings of the 2019 5th International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering (ICAEE), Dhaka, Bangladesh, 26–28 September 2019; pp. 457–462. [Google Scholar]
- Barbaro, M.; Castro, R. Design optimisation for a hybrid renewable microgrid: Application to the case of Faial island, Azores archipelago. Renew. Energy
**2020**, 151, 434–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ishraque, M.F.; Shezan, S.A.; Nur, J.N.; Islam, M.S. Optimal Sizing and Assessment of an Islanded Photovoltaic-Battery-Diesel Generator Microgrid Applicable to a Remote School of Bangladesh. Eng. Rep.
**2021**, 3, e12281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ishraque, M.F.; Ali, M.M. Optimized Design of a Hybrid Microgrid using Renewable Resources Considering Different Dispatch Strategies. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Automation, Control and Mechatronics for Industry 4.0 (ACMI), Rajshahi, Bangladesh, 8–9 July 2021; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, B.; Liu, S.; Guo, S.; Zhang, S. Economic study of a large-scale renewable hydrogen application utilizing surplus renewable energy and natural gas pipeline transportation in China. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2020**, 45, 1385–1398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shezan, S.A.; Saidur, R.; Ullah, K.; Hossain, A.; Chong, W.T.; Julai, S. Feasibility analysis of a hybrid off-grid wind–DG-battery energy system for the eco-tourism remote areas. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy
**2015**, 17, 2417–2430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, P.; Liu, Y.; Xin, H.; Jiang, X. A Robust Distributed Economic Dispatch Strategy of Virtual Power Plant Under Cyber-Attacks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.
**2018**, 14, 4343–4352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Barley, C.D.; Winn, C.B. Optimal dispatch strategy in remote hybrid power systems. Sol. Energy
**1996**, 58, 165–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jiang, K.; Wu, F.; Zong, X.; Shi, L.; Lin, K. Distributed Dynamic Economic Dispatch of an Isolated AC/DC Hybrid Microgrid Based on a Finite-Step Consensus Algorithm. Energies
**2019**, 12, 4637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Coelho, L.S.; Mariani, V.C. Combining of chaotic differential evolution and quadratic programming for economic dispatch optimization with valve-point effect. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
**2006**, 21, 989–996. [Google Scholar] - Xiong, G.; Shi, D.; Duan, X. Multi-strategy ensemble biogeography-based optimization for economic dispatch problems. Appl. Energy
**2013**, 111, 801–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Augustine, N.; Suresh, S.; Moghe, P.; Sheikh, K. In Economic dispatch for a microgrid considering renewable energy cost functions. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT), Washington, DC, USA, 16–20 January 2012; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, J.; Zhu, T.; Mo, X.; Liu, M. A spatiotemporal decomposition algorithm for fully decentralized dynamic economic dispatch in a microgrid. Electr. Power Syst. Res.
**2020**, 185, 106361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gil-González, W.; Montoya, O.D.; Grisales-Noreña, L.F.; Cruz-Peragón, F.; Alcalá, G. Economic Dispatch of Renewable Generators and BESS in DC Microgrids Using Second-Order Cone Optimization. Energies
**2020**, 13, 1703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Ross, D.W.; Kim, S. Dynamic economic dispatch of generation. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst.
**1980**, 6, 2060–2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Tang, C.; Zhang, F.; Zhao, Z. Real-Time Economic Dispatch and Subinterval Coordination Strategy to Benefit System Operations. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies-Asia (ISGT Asia), Chengdu, China, 21–24 May 2019; pp. 2881–2886. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, W.; Zhuang, P.; Liang, H.; Peng, J.; Huang, Z. Distributed economic dispatch in microgrids based on cooperative reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst.
**2018**, 29, 2192–2203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mohy-ud-din, G.; Muttaqi, K.M.; Sutanto, D. An Effective Power Dispatch Strategy to Improve Generation Schedulability by Mitigating Wind power Uncertainty with a Data Driven flexible Dispatch Margin for a Wind Farm using a Multi-Unit Battery Energy Storage System. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting (IAS), Portland, OR, USA, 23–27 September 2018; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, R.; Li, Q.; Li, G.; Liu, H. A Gossip-Based Distributed Algorithm for Economic Dispatch in Smart Grids With Random Communication Link Failures. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
**2019**, 67, 4635–4645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Das, B.K.; Zaman, F. Performance analysis of a PV/Diesel hybrid system for a remote area in Bangladesh: Effects of dispatch strategies, batteries, and generator selection. Energy
**2019**, 169, 263–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xu, Y.; Sun, H.; Gu, W.; Xu, Y.; Li, Z. Optimal distributed control for secondary frequency and voltage regulation in an islanded microgrid. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.
**2018**, 15, 225–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fatin Ishraque, M.; Shezan, S.A.; Ali, M.M.; Rashid, M.M. Optimization of load dispatch strategies for an islanded microgrid connected with renewable energy sources. Appl. Energy
**2021**, 292, 116879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ishraque, M.F.; Shezan, S.A.; Rashid, M.M.; Bhadra, A.B.; Hossain, M.A.; Chakrabortty, R.K.; Ryan, M.J.; Fahim, S.R.; Sarker, S.K.; Das, S.K. Techno-Economic and Power System Optimization of a Renewable Rich Islanded Microgrid Considering Different Dispatch Strategies. IEEE Access
**2021**, 9, 77325–77340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - NASA. Available online: https://power.larc.nasa.gov/ (accessed on 20 February 2021).
- He, Y.; Wang, W.; Wu, X. Multi-Agent Based Fully Distributed Economic Dispatch in Microgrid Using Exact Diffusion Strategy. IEEE Access
**2020**, 8, 7020–7031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ashari, M.; Nayar, C.V. An optimum dispatch strategy using set points for a photovoltaic (PV)–diesel–battery hybrid power system. Sol. Energy
**1999**, 66, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xu, H.; Meng, Z.; Zhao, R.; Wang, Y.; Yan, Q. Optimal Dispatching Strategy of an Electric-Thermal-Gas Coupling Microgrid Considering Consumer Satisfaction. IEEE Access
**2020**, 8, 173169–173176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wu, N.; Wang, H.; Yin, L.; Yuan, X.; Leng, X. Application Conditions of Bounded Rationality and a Microgrid Energy Management Control Strategy Combining Real-Time Power Price and Demand-Side Response. IEEE Access
**2020**, 8, 227327–227339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, Z.; Wang, Z.; Wang, H.; Zhang, H.; Yang, W.; Cao, R. Research on Bi-Level Optimized Operation Strategy of Microgrid Cluster Based on IABC Algorithm. IEEE Access
**2021**, 9, 15520–15529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Dong, X.; Li, X.; Cheng, S. Energy Management Optimization of Microgrid Cluster Based on Multi-Agent-System and Hierarchical Stackelberg Game Theory. IEEE Access
**2020**, 8, 206183–206197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xi, L.; Zhang, L.; Liu, J.; Li, Y.; Chen, X.; Yang, L.; Wang, S. A Virtual Generation Ecosystem Control Strategy for Automatic Generation Control of Interconnected Microgrids. IEEE Access
**2020**, 8, 94165–94175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Malik, M.M.; Kazmi, S.A.A.; Asim, H.W.; Ahmed, A.B.; Shin, D.R. An Intelligent Multi-Stage Optimization Approach for Community Based Micro-Grid Within Multi-Microgrid Paradigm. IEEE Access
**2020**, 8, 177228–177244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pro, H. Available online: https://www.homerenergy.com/products/pro/docs/latest/predictive_dispatch.html#:~:text=Under%20the%20HOMER%20Predictive%20dispatch,dispatch%20strategies%20in%20HOMER%20Pro (accessed on 20 October 2020).
- Moretti, L.; Polimeni, S.; Meraldi, L.; Raboni, P.; Leva, S.; Manzolini, G. Assessing the impact of a two-layer predictive dispatch algorithm on design and operation of off-grid hybrid microgrids. Renew. Energy
**2019**, 143, 1439–1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xu, Q.; Xiao, J.; Wang, P.; Wen, C. A decentralized control strategy for economic operation of autonomous AC, DC, and hybrid AC/DC microgrids. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.
**2017**, 32, 1345–1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ahmad, J.; Tahir, M.; Mazumder, S.K. Dynamic economic dispatch and transient control of distributed generators in a microgrid. IEEE Syst. J.
**2018**, 13, 802–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhou, Q.; Shahidehpour, M.; Li, Z.; Che, L.; Alabdulwahab, A.; Abusorrah, A. Compartmentalization Strategy for the Optimal Economic Operation of a Hybrid AC/DC Microgrid. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
**2019**, 35, 1294–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Arefin, S.S. Optimization Techniques of Islanded Hybrid Microgrid System. In Renewable Energy-Resources, Challenges and Applications; IntechOpen: Hague, The Netherlands, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Shezan, S.A.; Julai, S.; Kibria, M.A.; Ullah, K.R.; Saidur, R.; Chong, W.T.; Akikur, R.K. Performance analysis of an off-grid wind-PV (photovoltaic)-diesel-battery hybrid energy system feasible for remote areas. J. Clean. Prod.
**2016**, 125, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chatzivasileiadis, S. Optimization in modern power systems. Lecture Notes Tech. Univ. Den.
**2018**. Available online: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.00943.pdf (accessed on 20 June 2021). - Wen, Y.; Chung, C.; Liu, X.; Che, L. Microgrid dispatch with frequency-aware islanding constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
**2019**, 34, 2465–2468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 2.**Influence of sustainable resources and diesel generator for various dispatch strategies for proposed IHMS.

Rajendro Bazar | ||||

Dispatch Methodology | NPC (USD) | Operating Cost(USD/year) | COE (USD/kWh) | CO_{2} Emission (kg/year) |

LF | 152,023 | 3738 | 0.208 | 3375 |

CD | 343,996 | 14,654 | 0.440 | 20,961 |

CC | 302,953 | 18,850 | 0.388 | 38,272 |

GO | 171,678 | 2760 | 0.236 | 0 |

PS | 191,593 | 9405 | 0.245 | 16,797 |

Kushighat | ||||

Dispatch Methodology | NPC (USD) | Operating Cost(USD/year) | COE (USD/kWh) | CO_{2} Emission (kg/year) |

LF | 157,561 | 4456 | 0.215 | 5035 |

CD | 415,030 | 15,394 | 0.532 | 17,266 |

CC | 311,015 | 19,349 | 0.398 | 39,159 |

GO | 181,449 | 3039 | 0.250 | 0 |

PS | 202,677 | 10,263 | 0.259 | 18,891 |

Rajendro Bazar | |||||

Dispatch Methodology | PV (kW) | Wind (kW) | DG (kW) | Battery (kWh) | Converter (kW) |

LF | 55 | 3 | 3 | 138 | 13.9 |

CD | 25 | 4 | 12 | 388 | 21.9 |

CC | 10 | 2 | 8 | 132 | 15.6 |

GO | 75 | 1 | 1 | 158 | 41.8 |

PS | 30 | 1 | 7 | 110 | 13.9 |

Kushighat | |||||

Dispatch Methodology | PV (kW) | Wind (kW) | DG (kW) | Battery (kWh) | Converter (kW) |

LF | 55 | 1 | 4 | 129 | 14.3 |

CD | 30 | 7 | 12 | 578 | 12.6 |

CC | 10 | 1 | 8 | 141 | 16.3 |

GO | 75 | 1 | 1 | 181 | 39.4 |

PS | 30 | 1 | 7 | 110 | 13.9 |

Rajendro Bazar | |||||

Dispatch Methodology | PV (kW) | Wind (kW) | DG (kW) | Battery (kWh) | Converter (kW) |

LF | 60 | 5 | 8 | 638.7 | 13.9 |

CD | 25 | 4 | 12 | 386.8 | 21.9 |

CC | 10 | 2 | 8 | 132 | 15.6 |

GO | 75 | 1 | 1 | 180 | 41.8 |

PS | 30 | 1 | 7 | 110.8 | 13.9 |

Kushighat | |||||

Dispatch Methodology | PV (kW) | Wind (kW) | DG (kW) | Battery (kWh) | Converter (kW) |

LF | 60 | 5 | 8 | 638.7 | 14.3 |

CD | 30 | 7 | 12 | 275.4 | 12.6 |

CC | 10 | 1 | 8 | 139 | 16.3 |

GO | 75 | 1 | 1 | 181 | 39.4 |

PS | 30 | 1 | 7 | 110.8 | 13.9 |

Parameters | Designed IHMS | Other HRES [46] |
---|---|---|

CO_{2} release/Year (Kt) | 0.003375 | 198,347.984 |

Operating Cost (USD) | 3738 | 19,516 |

NPC/Year (USD) | 152,023 | 288,194 |

COE (USD/kWh) | 0.208 | 1.877 |

Parameters | Designed IHMS | Traditional Power Station [46] |
---|---|---|

COE (USD/kWh) | 0.208 | 0.380 |

NPC/Year (USD) | 152,023 | 297,000.00 |

CO_{2} release/Year (Kt) | 0.003375 | 198,348.00 |

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |

© 2021 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Ishraque, M.F.; Shezan, S.A.; Rana, M.S.; Muyeen, S.M.; Rahman, A.; Paul, L.C.; Islam, M.S.
Optimal Sizing and Assessment of a Renewable Rich Standalone Hybrid Microgrid Considering Conventional Dispatch Methodologies. *Sustainability* **2021**, *13*, 12734.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212734

**AMA Style**

Ishraque MF, Shezan SA, Rana MS, Muyeen SM, Rahman A, Paul LC, Islam MS.
Optimal Sizing and Assessment of a Renewable Rich Standalone Hybrid Microgrid Considering Conventional Dispatch Methodologies. *Sustainability*. 2021; 13(22):12734.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212734

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Ishraque, Md. Fatin, Sk. A. Shezan, Md. Sohel Rana, S. M. Muyeen, Akhlaqur Rahman, Liton Chandra Paul, and Md. Shafiul Islam.
2021. "Optimal Sizing and Assessment of a Renewable Rich Standalone Hybrid Microgrid Considering Conventional Dispatch Methodologies" *Sustainability* 13, no. 22: 12734.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212734