Joint Electricity and Heat Optimal Power Flow of Energy Hubs

  • Manijeh Alipour
  • Kazem Zare
  • Heresh SeyediEmail author


Energy hubs as the intermediate in multi-carrier energy systems would enable various carriers, to be stored and converted. This concept requires an infrastructure to investigate the new upcoming economical as well as technical impacts on the system performance. The development in utilization of distributed generations, especially co-generation systems, along with movement towards more efficient systems creates sufficient incentives to promote energy service networks by coordinating numerous energy networks. District electric and heating systems provide electrical and heat energies, the most common demands for end-users. On the other hand, the heating load profile of the multi-carrier energy network can be modified to handle the heat and power interdependency in combined heat and power units. In this regard, this chapter endeavors to arise a general modeling and optimization scheme for coupled power flow investigation on various energy networks. The presented optimal power flow model includes conversion and transmission of multiple energy carriers. The connections between the power and heat foundations are precisely considered based on the recent impression of energy hubs. A generic optimality situation for optimal scheduling of multiple energy carriers is acquired. Moreover, the multi-carrier energy network takes advantages of the curtailable and responsive heating demand of DHN by employing a demand response program. In the suggested energy hub framework, the energy and continuity laws as well as the characteristic of district heating system’s major elements comprising heat sources, heat-exchangers, and the network of pipelines are modeled. The district heat network analysis would specify the supply and return temperatures at each node and the mass flow rates in each pipe. In addition, electric network operation constraints such as voltage magnitude of buses and line flow limits have been taken into account. Finally, the simulation outcomes are deliberated for a test system to establish the applicability and effectiveness of suggested model in the multi-carrier energy systems.


Energy hubs Combined heat and power (CHP) District heating system 


  1. 1.
    Gebremedhin A (2014) Optimal utilisation of heat demand in district heating system—a case study. Renew Sust Energ Rev 30:230–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Geidl M, Andersson G (2007) Optimal power flow of multiple energy carriers. IEEE Trans Power Syst 22(1):145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Moeini-Aghtaie M, Abbaspour A, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M, Hajipour E (2014) A decomposed solution to multiple-energy carriers optimal power flow. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(2):707–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geidl M, Andersson G (2006) Operational and structural optimization of multi-carrier energy systems. Eur T Electr Power 16(5):463–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barbieri ES et al (2014) Optimal sizing of a multi-source energy plant for power heat and cooling generation. Appl Therm Eng 71(2):736–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Geidl M, Koeppel G, Favre-Perrod P, Klockl B, Andersson G, Frohlich K (2007) Energy hubs for the future. IEEE Power Energ Mag 5(1):24–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salimi M, Ghasemi H, Adelpour M, Vaez-ZAdeh S (2015) Optimal planning of energy hubs in interconnected energy systems: a case study for natural gas and electricity. IET Gener Transm Distrib 9(8):695–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anders GJ, Vaccaro A (2011) Innovations in power systems reliability. Springer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krause T, Andersson G, Frohlich K, Vaccaro A (2011) Multiple-energy carriers: modeling of production, delivery, and consumption. Proc IEEE 99(1):15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alipour M, Zare K, Mohammadi-Ivatloo B (2016) Optimal risk-constrained participation of industrial cogeneration systems in the day-ahead energy markets. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:421–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parisio A, Del Vecchio C, Vaccaro A (2012) A robust optimization approach to energy hub management. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 42(1):98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martinez-Mares A, Fuerte-Esquivel CR (2012) A unified gas and power flow analysis in natural gas and electricity coupled networks. IEEE Trans Power Syst 27(4):2156–2166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shabanpour-Haghighi A, Seifi AR (2015) Energy flow optimization in multicarrier systems. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 11(5):1067–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Medina J, Muller N, Roytelman I (2010) Demand response and distribution grid operations: opportunities and challenges. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 1(2):193–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mathieu JL, Price PN, Kiliccote S, Piette MA (2011) Quantifying changes in building electricity use, with application to demand response. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2(3):507–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wu H, Shahidehpour M, Al-Abdulwahab A (2013) Hourly demand response in day-ahead scheduling for managing the variability of renewable energy. IET Gener Transm Distrib 7(3):226–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mosaddegh A, Canizares CA, Bhattacharya K (2017) Optimal demand response for distribution feeders with existing smart loads. IEEE Trans Smart Grid:1Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pazouki S, Haghifam MR, Olamaei J (2013) Economical scheduling of multi carrier energy systems integrating renewable, energy storage and demand response under energy hub approach. In: Smart Grid Conference (SGC), IEEE, pp 80–84Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bahrami S, Sheikhi A (2016) From demand response in smart grid toward integrated demand response in smart energy hub. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 7(2):650–658Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Liu X, Wu J, Jenkins N, Bagdanavicius A (2016) Combined analysis of electricity and heat networks. Appl Energy 162:1238–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhao H (1995) Analysis, modelling and operational optimization of district heating systems. PhD Thesis, Technical University of DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Awad B, Chaudry M, Wu J, Jenkins N (2009) Integrated optimal power flow for electric power and heat in a microgrid. In: 20th international conference and exhibition on electricity distribution-part 1, 2009. CIRED 2009, IET, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grant I (2010) Flow induced vibrations in pipes, a finite element approach. M.S. thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aghaei J, Alizadeh MI (2013) Multi-objective self-scheduling of CHP (combined heat and power)-based microgrids considering demand response programs and ESSs (energy storage systems). Energy 55:1044–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alipour M, Zare K, Abapour M (2017) MINLP probabilistic scheduling model for demand response programs integrated energy hubs. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 14:79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Alipour M, Zare K, Seyedi H (2017) Power flow constrained short-term scheduling of CHP units. In: Sustainable development in energy systems. Springer, Cham, pp 147–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brooke AD, Kendrick AM, Roman R (1998) GAMS: a user’s guide. GAMS Development, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of TabrizTabrizIran

Personalised recommendations