Advertisement

A Multi-Objective Optimization Approach for Water–Energy–Food Grids in Isolated Communities

  • Xaté Geraldine Sánchez-Zarco
  • Brenda Cansino-Loeza
  • José María Ponce-OrtegaEmail author
Original Research Paper

Abstract

This paper evaluates the applicability of different multi-objective optimization methods such as goal programming, weighted sum, and epsilon constraint in a polygeneration system. The problem under study aims to meet the water, energy, and food demands in an isolated community. The model includes three fundamental objectives, which are the maximization of the economic benefit, the minimization of the greenhouse gas emissions, and the minimization of freshwater consumption. Because the objectives are in conflict, it is necessary to implement strategies that allow to obtain trade-off solutions. To show the applicability of the proposed approach, a case study for the community of Mexico with the lowest human development index is presented. The results show feasible solutions for satisfying the needs of the community considering the trade-offs of the different objectives, with the goal programming method the one that provides the most attractive solution except for the economic objective, unlike the Epsilon Constraint method that provides the best solutions with respect to the economic objective.

Keywords

Optimization Process integration Isolated communities Simulation Multi-objective problems 

Nomenclature

GHGEAD

greenhouse gas emissions associated to the anaerobic digestion plant

GHGECHP

greenhouse gas emissions associated to the cogeneration units

GHGEGAS

greenhouse gas emissions associated to the gasification plant

GHGEIN

greenhouse gas emissions associated to the incineration plant

GHGEPEL

greenhouse gas emissions associated to the pelletization plant

GHGEPYR

greenhouse gas emissions associated to the pyrolysis plant

SalesA

sales of animals

SalesAd

Sales of biogas

SalesC

sales of crops

SalesGas

sales of natural gas

SalesOil

sales of pyrolysis oil

SalesPellets

sales of pellets

SalesRP

sales of recyclable wastes

TAC

total annual cost

WtFresh-T

flow of freshwater sent to the thermal storage tank

d+PROFIT

surplus value over the goal for profits

dPROFIT

remaining value to achieve an objective goal for profits

d+TotFresh

surplus value over the goal for freshwater

dToWFresh

remaining value to achieve an objective goal for freshwater

d+GHGE

surplus value over the goal for greenhouse gas emissions

dGHGE

remaining value to achieve an objective goal for greenhouse gas emissions

ωPROFIT

weight for profits

ωTotFresh

weight for freshwater

ωGHGE

weight for greenhouse gas emissions

TotWFreshmin

minimum for freshwater

TotWFreshmax

maximum for freshwater

GHGEmin

minimum for greenhouse gas emissions

GHGEmax

maximum for greenhouse gas emissions

PROFITmin

minimum for profits

PROFITmax

maximum for profits

εPROFIT

value of the objective function profits

εTotWFresh

value of the objective function freshwater

εGHGE

value of the objective function greenhouse gas emissions

Notes

Funding information

This study was financial supported by the Mexican Council for Science and Technology (CONACyT).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bamufleh HS, Ponce-Ortega JM, El-Halwagi MM (2013) Multi-objective optimization of process cogeneration systems with economic, environmental, and social. Clean Techn Environ Policy 15:185–197.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0996-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbieri E, Spina P, Venturini M (2012) Analysis of innovative micro-CHP systems to meet household energy demands. Appl Energy 97:723–733.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bazilian M, Rogner H, Howells M, Hermann S, Arent D, Gielen D, Yumkella K (2011) Considering the energy, water and food nexus: towards an integrated modelling approach. Energy Policy 39(12):7896–7906.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggs E, Bruce E, Boruff B, Duncan J, Horsley J, Pauli N, Haworth B (2015) Sustainable development and the water–energy–food nexus: a perspective on livelihoods. Environ Sci Policy 54:389–397.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.08.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blok K, Turkenburg W (1994) CO2 emission reduction by means of industrial CHP in the Netherlands. Energy Convers Manag 35(4):317–340.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0196-8904(94)90064-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cansino-Loeza B, Ponce-Ortega JM (2018) Involving the water–energy–food nexus in integrating low-income and isolated communities. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 7(1):1399–1418.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b05134 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Charnes A, Cooper WW (1977) Goal programming and multiple objective optimizations: part 1. Eur J Oper Res 1(1):39–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(77)81007-2 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Chun S, Chen B (2016) Urban energy-water nexus: a network perspective. Appl Energy 184:905–914.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colombo E, Masera D, Bologna S (2013) Renewable energies to promote local development. Renewable Energy for Unleashing Sustainable Development, 3–25Google Scholar
  10. CONEVAL (2016) Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social. https://www.coneval.org.mx/Medicion/MP/Paginas/Pobreza_2016.aspx Accessed: February 2016
  11. Cui Y, Geng Z, Zhu Q, Han Y (2017) Multi-objective optimization methods and application in energy saving. Energy 125:681–704.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.174 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diaz-Barriga-Fernandez A, Santibañez-Aguilar J, Radwan N, Nápoles-Rivera F, El-Halwagi MM, Ponce-Ortega JM (2017) Strategic planning for managing municipal solid wastes with consideration of multiple stakeholders. ACS Sustain Chem Eng. 5(11):10744–10762.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02717 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elango D, Pulikesi M, Baskaralingam P, Ramamurthi V, Sivanesan S (2007) Production of biogas from municipal solid waste with domestic sewage. J Hazard Mater 141(1):301–304.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.07.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fuentes-Cortes LF, Ponce-Ortega JM (2017) Optimal design of energy and water supply systems for low-income communities involving multiple-objectives. Energy Convers Manag 151:43–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.08.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fuentes-Cortes LF, Ávila-Hernández A, Serna-Gonzalez M, Ponce-Ortega JM (2015a) Optimal design of CHP systems for housing complexes involving water and electric market variations. Appl Therm Eng 99:889–906.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00941 Google Scholar
  16. Fuentes-Cortes LF, Ponce-Ortega J, Nápoles-Rivera F (2015b) Optimal design of integrated CHP systems for housing complexes. Energy Convers Manag 99:252–263.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00941 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuentes-Cortes LF, Zavala V, González-Campos JB, Ponce-Ortega JM (2017) Optimal coupling of demand patterns for improving the performance of CHP systems. Comput Aided Chem Eng 40:1909–1914.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63965-3.50320-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuentes-Cortes, LF, Flores-Tlacuahuac A, Ponce-Ortega JM (2019). Integrated utility pricing and design of water-energy rural off-grid systems. Energy 177:511–529.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.026
  19. Garcia D, You F (2017) Systems engineering opportunities for agricultural and organic waste management in the food–water–energy nexus. Curr Opin Chem Eng 18:23–31.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coche.2017.08.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoff H (2011) Understanding the nexus: background paper for the Bonn 2011 conference: the water, energy and food security nexus. Stockholm Environment Institute, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  21. Lund H (2007) Renewable energy strategies for sustainable development. Energy. 32(6):912–919.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.10.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mago P, Chamra L, Hueffed A (2009) A review on energy, economical, and environmental benefits of the use of CHP systems for small commercial buildings for the North American climate. Int J Energy Res 33(14):1252–1265.  https://doi.org/10.1002/er.1630 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Morales-Durán V, Fuentes-Cotes LF, González-Brambilia M, El-Halwagi M, Ponce-Ortega JM (2017) Involving environmental assessment in the optimal design of domestic cogeneration systems process integration and optimization for sustainability. Process Integr Optim Sustain 1(1):15–32.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-017-0002-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Núñez-Lopez JM, Rubio-Castro E, El-Halwagi MM, Ponce-Ortega JM (2018a) Optimal design of total integrated residential complexes involving water-energy-waste nexus. Clean Techn Environ Policy 20(5):1061–1085.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-018-1537-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Núñez-Lopez LM, Villicaña-Garcia E, Cansino-Loeza B, Rubio-Castro E, Ponce-Ortega JM (2018b) Involving acceptability in the optimal design of total integrated residential complexes involving the water-energy-waste nexus. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 6(6):7390–7402.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b04854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Scanlon B, Ruddell B, Reed P, Hook R, Zheng C, Tidwell V, Siebert S (2017) The food-energy-water nexus: transforming science for society. Earth Space Sci 53:3550–3556.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020889 Google Scholar
  27. Zhang X, Li H, Deng Z, Ringler C, Gao Y, Hejazi M, Leung L (2018) Impacts of climate change, policy and water-energy-food nexus on hydropower development. Renew Energy 116:827–834.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.10.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemical Engineering DepartmentUniversidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de HidalgoMoreliaMexico

Personalised recommendations