4th International Conference on Electrical Engineering (ICEE 2015)

IGEE, Boumerdes, December 13th-15th 2015

Combined Economic Emission Dispatch With New

Price Penalty Factors
Ismail Ziane(1), Farid Benhamida, Amel Graa

Yacine Salhi

Irecom laboratory, dept. of electrotechnics

UDL university of Sidi Bel Abbes
Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria
(1)
ziane_ismail2005@yahoo.fr

Apelec laboratory, dept. of electrotechnics

UDL university of Sidi Bel Abbes
Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria
(2)
salhiyacine13@yahoo.fr

Abstract This paper presents combined of economic and

emission load dispatch (CEED). The price penalty factor is
considered in the multi-objective function of (CEED). In this
paper, we use various price penalty factors (Max/Max, Min/Max
and average). Simulated annealing method is our method to find
the optimal solution. The SA algorithm is used to minimize the
fuel cost and the gas emissions as SO2 and NOx in the power
systems. In this study, in order to evaluate the performance of
the SA algorithm, it is tested on 3-unit system with fuel cost and
emission functions. The results obtained from SA method are
compared with other method in literatures. The results show
that the SA algorithm is better than the others at solving such a
problem.
Keywordscombined economic and emission dispatch, price
penalty factor, simulated annealing.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Economic dispatch (ED) problem is one important task in

power system. The main objective of the ED problem can be
defined as meeting the power demand by operating power
generation units with the minimum cost while satisfying the
equality and inequality constraints of the system. [1]. The
cost of electrical production is described with three main
sources: facility construction, ownership cost, and operating
costs. The operating cost is the most significant of these
three, and so the focus will be on the economics of the
operation [2].
The fuel cost function optimizes the total cost of active
power generation, assuming that every generator has a
convex cost curve related to its own active power, every
generator has upper and lower active power generating limits
and it is also assumed that the sum of all active powers of
generator must be equal to a given total system load plus total
system losses [3].
On the other hand, the amendments of the world law of
1990 (clean Air Act Amendments) forced the producers of
energy and the engineers in charge of the electrical energy

management to modify their algorithms of standard

optimization by taking in consideration the pollution (to
reduce the emissions to the atmosphere of greenhouse gas by
the thermal power plants which are toxic gases (NOx, SO2, and
CO2) [4, 5].
A major challenge for all power utilities is to satisfy the
consumer demand for power at minimal cost and minimal gas
emission.
To solve the economic load dispatch problems,
researchers may use algorithms [6] that terminate in a finite
number of steps, Iterative methods [7] that converge to a
solution (on some specified class of problems), and heuristics
[8] that may provide approximate solutions (A good
feasible solution) to some problems.
SA is an effective method to find global minima for
optimization problem having cubic objective function with
linear constraints. In this paper the effectiveness of the
proposed algorithm is demonstrated using 6-unit test system.
II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF CEED
Generator cost curves are usually not smooth. However
the curves can usually be adequately approximated using
piece-wise smooth, functions. So that, the fuel cost curve can
be presented as a smooth function. The smooth fuel cost
function is defined by quadratic function:

FCi (Pi ) ai Pi 2 bi Pi c i

(1)

The criterion for minimization of the SO2 emission is

formulated as
E SO 2 i ( Pi ) aSO 2i Pi 3 bSO 2i Pi 2 c SO 2i

(2)

where aSO2i , bSO2i and cSO2i are the SO2 emission co-efficient
of unit i.

2015 IEEE

The criterion for minimization of the NOx emission is

formulated as
E NOxi ( Pi ) aNOxi Pi 3 b NOxi Pi 2 c NOxi

The criterion for minimization of the SO2 emission is

formulated as

where aCO2i , b CO2i, and c

efficient of unit i.

CO2i

(4)

hAvgSO 2i
hAvgNOxi

FTSO 2 i ( Pi )

FCi (Pi ) hSO 2i E SO 2i ( Pi )

(5)

FTNOxi ( Pi )

FCi (Pi ) hNOxi E NOxi ( Pi )

(6)

FTCO 2i (Pi )

FCi ( Pi ) hCO 2i E CO 2i ( Pi )

(7)

where hSO2, hNOx and hCO2 are price penalty factors for SO2,
NOx, and CO2, respectively, blending the emission costs
with the normal fuel costs.
The above mentioned multi- objective optimization
problem can be converted to a single objective optimization
problem by introducing price penalty factors as follows:
FCi ( Pi ) hSO 2i E SO 2i (Pi ) ..

...hNOxi E NOxi ( Pi ) hCO 2i E CO 2i ( Pi )

(13)

hCO 2 i

FCi ( PMini )
E CO 2 i ( PM axi )

(14)

Another price is used which can be calculated by the

average of price Max/Max and Min/Max penalty factors
as proposed in [ ] to solve the multi-objective economic
emission dispatch problem as follows:

are the CO2 emission co-

A multi-objective optimization is converted into a single

objective optimization problem by introducing price penalty
factor hi to the various pollutants. Three problems are
formulated for every pollutant separately as follows

FTi ( Pi )

FCi ( PMini )
E NOxi ( PMaxi )

(3)

where aNOxi , bNOxi and cNOxi are the NOx emission co-efficient
of unit i.

E CO 2 i ( Pi ) aCO 2i Pi 3 bCO 2i Pi 2 cCO 2i

hNOxi

(8)

hAvgCO 2i

FCi (PMaxi ) / ESO 2i (PMaxi )

2
FCi (PMaxi ) / E NOxi (PMaxi ) FCi (PMini ) / ENOxi (PMaxi )
2
FCi (PMaxi ) / ECO 2i (PMaxi ) FCi (PMini ) / ECO 2i (PMaxi )
2

FCi ( PMaxi )
E SO 2i ( PMaxi )

(9)

hNOxi

FCi ( PMaxi )
E NOxi ( PMaxi )

(10)

hCO 2 i

FCi ( PMaxi )
E CO 2 i ( PM axi )

(11)

hSO 2 i

FCi ( PMini )
E SO 2i ( PMaxi )

(16)
(17)

Pi

PD

PL

(18)

where PD is the load demand and PL is the total transmission

network losses.
Generator limit Constraints
Generators have limits on the minimum and maximum
amount of power they can produce. Often times the minimum
limit is not zero. This represents a limit on the generators
operation with the desired fuel type because of varying
system economics usually many generators in a system are
operated at their maximum MW limits.

Pi

Pi max

(19)

where Pi min is the minimum generation limit of unit i and Pi max

is the maximum generation limit of unit i.

Power balance constraints

This paper suggests a deferent price penalty factor

Min/Max considering the multi-objective dispatch
problem. It is formulated as follows:
hSO 2 i

(15)

Power balance constraints

Pi min
Commonly used form for the price penalty factor hi is the
ratio between maximum fuel cost and maximum emission of
corresponding generator

FCi (PMini ) / ESO 2i (PMaxi )

(12)

Pi

PD

PL

(20)

where PD is the load demand and PL is the total transmission

network losses.
The simplest form of loss equation is Georges formula,
which is given by:
n

PL

B ij Pi Pj
i 1 j 1

Bij is called the loss coefficient

(21)

Generator limit Constraints

The power generation of unit i should be between its
minimum and maximum limits.

Pi min

Pi

Pi max

(22)

where Pi min is the minimum generation limit of unit i and Pi max

is the maximum generation limit of unit i.
III. A SIMULATED ANNEALING ALGORITHM FOR
ECONOMIC DISPATCH PROBLEM
The simulated annealing method [9] is a heuristic
optimization technique and it has the ability to find
global or near global optimum solutions for large
combinatorial optimization problems. This method is similar
to the local search technique in optimization, which can only
guarantee a local optimum solution. Simulated annealing is
proposed in Kirkpatrick, Gelett and Vecchi in 1983 and
Cerny [10] in 1985 for finding the global minimum of a cost
function that may presses several local minima [11].
The name simulated annealing comes from an analogy
between combinatorial optimization and the physical process
of annealing. In physical annealing a solid is cooled very
slowly, starting from a high temperature, in order to achieve a
state of minimum internal energy. It is cooled slowly so that
thermal equilibrium is achieved at each temperature. Thermal
equilibrium can be characterized by the Boltzmann
distribution.

C 0; (Global iteration count)

T
T0; (T0 Initial system temperature)
Iterative Processes
Nbiter
0;
While (Nbiter < nb_iter)
C C+1; Nbiter
Nbiter+1;
Generate randomly a solution S ' N S ;
F F(S)-F(S);
if F <0) then
S S;
Otherwise
Prob ( F, T) exp (- F/T);
Generate q uniformly in the interval: [0,1];
If (q< prob ( F, T)) then
S S;
If F(S) < F(S*) then
S* S;
T= T ; (0 < <1 cooling coefficient).
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The proposed optimization algorithm is applied on 2
systems, a 3 unit and 6 unit systems to verify its effectiveness.
For conducting the test, the initial temperature is fixed at 10
C, alpha is fixed at 0.99 and max tries is 10000. The final
temperature is 1e-10 C.
In this paper, we consider three types of price penalty factor
Max/Max price penalty factor.
Min/Max price penalty factor.
Average price penalty factor.

(23)

The fuel cost coefficients,

SO2, and NOx emission
coefficients, and the real power limits of the generators are
taken from [13] with 1800 MW of load demand.

The SA algorithm for dispatch problem is stepped as follows

[12]:

Table I presents a comparison between our proposed

methods and other methods such as NSGA, OBBO, BBO, and
BB_BC for combined economic and emission load dispatch
with Max/Max price penalty factor. It can be seen that SA
gives the best solution (25035.1214 $).

Paccept x , y

1,
e

( E x E y )/ k BT

if E X

EY

if E X

EY

A. Simulated Annealing algorithm

Initialisation
Choose an initial solution S
S* S;
TABLE I.

X;
COMPARAISON OF CEED-SO2 -NOX EMISSION D ISPATCH (MAX/MAX PENALTY PRICE FACTOR)

P1
P2
P3
Losses(MW)
Fuel cost ($/h)
SO2 Emission (ton/h)
NOX Emission (ton/h)
Total cost ($/h)

NSGA-II[13]
496.328
260.426
108.144
14.898
8358.896
8.97870
0.09599
31234.99029

OBBO[14]
507.11971
251.64200
106.00030
14.76251
8364.30627
8.974195
0.0959248
31226.40958

BBO[14]
507.11954
251.64262
106.00042
14.76258
8364.31126
8.974201
0.0959248
31226.41898

BB_BC[15]
442.893
305.503
117.546
15.94
8345.813
9.01602
0.09776
25035.140

SA
442.1752
305.8545
117.9238
15.9535
8345.7469
9.0166
0.0978
25035.1214

Tables II, III and IV present the combined of economic and

emission load dispatch of SO2, NOx for Max/Max,
Min/Max, and Average price penalty factors respectively
with load variation.

TABLE II.

DYNAMIC CEED-SO2 -NOX EMISSION D ISPATCH OF 3 UNIT SYSTEM (MAX/MAX PENALTY PRICE FACTOR )
Load
P1
P2
P3
Losses(MW)
Fuel cost ($/h)
SO2 Emission (ton/h)
NOx Emission (ton/h)
Total cost ($/h)

TABLE III.

550
307.1316
160.3256
88.6287
6.0859
5581.4797
6.0071
0.0880
18760.5958

600
329.3203
184.6109
93.4374
7.3685
6028.7083
6.4941
0.0882
19660.5278

700
374.0706
233.1530
103.1433
10.3669
6939.2481
7.4855
0.0902
21633.8869

800
419.3435
281.6375
112.9646
13.9456
7871.4467
8.5004
0.0947
23841.8787

850
442.1716
305.8557
117.9262
15.9536
8345.7465
9.0166
0.0978
25035.1214

DYNAMIC CEED-SO2 -NOX EMISSION D ISPATCH OF 3 UNIT SYSTEM (MIN/MAX PENALTY PRICE FACTOR )
Load
P1
P2
P3
Losses(MW)
Fuel cost ($/h)
SO2 Emission (ton/h)
NOx Emission (ton/h)
Total cost ($/h)

TABLE IV.

550
297.8166
166.9111
91.4438
6.1716
5579.6607
6.0136
0.0881
9489.5798

600
320.3985
189.8446
97.2144
7.4574
6027.4533
6.5010
0.0883
10070.9167

700
365.9145
235.6758
108.8471
10.4374
6938.6103
7.4925
0.0906
11295.9982

800
411.9024
281.4606
120.6021
13.9651
7870.7391
8.5066
0.0952
12605.4117

850
435.0792
304.3310
126.5251
15.9354
8344.7479
9.0223
0.0985
13292.1702

DYNAMIC CEED-SO2 -NOX EMISSION D ISPATCH OF 3 UNIT SYSTEM (AVERAGE PENALTY PRICE FACTOR)

Load
P1
P2
P3
Losses(MW)
Fuel cost ($/h)
SO2 Emission (ton/h)
NOx Emission (ton/h)
Total cost ($/h)

550
304.6979
162.1333
89.2763
6.1075
5580.9171
6.0087
0.0881
14125.6180

600
327.0093
186.0701
94.3120
7.3914
6028.3028
6.4958
0.0882
14866.2649

700
371.9969
233.9175
104.4714
10.3857
6939.0150
7.4872
0.0903
16465.6246

800
417.5038
281.6956
114.7518
13.9512
7871.1966
8.5018
0.0948
18224.6205

850
440.4460
305.5663
119.9370
15.9493
8345.4170
9.0179
0.0979
19164.8259
P1
P2
P3
Losses

500

400

Power output (MW)

In figure 1, it can be seen the CEED-SO2-NOx for various

price penalty factors with load variation obtained by our
proposed. The dynamic of the power output for the three
units is presented in figure 2. The NOx emission output for
Max/Max, Min/Max, and Average price penalty factors
is shown in figure 3. We can see that the minimum total cost
is given by Min/Max factor price penalty and the minimum
of NOx emission is give by Min/Max factor price penalty.

300

200

100

Max/Max
Min/Max
Average

26000
24000

0
1

FT of CEED-SO2-NOx ($/h)

22000

Time interval (h)

20000
18000

Figure 2. Power output for each generator for the 5 load demands
(Max/Max).

16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
550

600

650

700

750

800

850

Load variation (MW)

Figure 1. CEED-SO2-NO x solution for various price penalty factors.

[3]

Max/Max
Min/Max
Average

0,098

NOx Emission (Ton/h)

0,096

[4]
0,094

0,092

[5]

0,090

0,088
550

600

650

700

750

800

850

[6]

Load variation (MW)

[7]
Figure 3. NOxEmission output of CEED-SO2 -NOx
penalty factors.

for various price

[8]

V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the combined of economic and emission
load dispatch problem of both fuel cost and emission
functions are formulated with fuel cost and emissions
functions. Simulated annealing algorithm is developed for the
solution of the dispatch problem. The 3 unit system multiobjective dispatch problem is solved separately for various
price penalty factors such as Max/Max, Min/Max, and
Average. The conclusion obtained is that the Min/Max
price penalty factor is good to yield the best total cost of
CEED SO2NOx- CO2. The Max/Max price penalty factor
can give the minimum emissions of NOx and SO2.

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

VI. REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

D. Aydin , S. zyn, C. Yasar , T. Liao, Arti cial bee colony algorithm

with dynamic population size to combined economic and emission
dispatch problem, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 54, 144153,
2014.
C. Mittal, Fuel cost function estimation for economic load dispatch
using evolutionary programming, Master thesis, electrical and

[14]

[15]

instrumentation engineering departement, Thapar university, Patalia,

2011.
F. Benhamida, I. Ziane, A. Graa S. Souag, Y. Salhi, An effective
GAMS optimization for dynamic economic load dispatch with ramp
rate limit, AMO - Advanced Modeling and Optimization, Vol. 15,
Number 2, pp. 477-485, 2013.
B. Mahdad, K. Srairi, B. Tarek, and A. Bensalem, Dispatching
Economique du Rseau Electrique Algrien en Prsence des dispositifs
Shunt FACTS avec Considration de la Pollution, confrence
internationale sur les rseaux lectriques ICEN10, Sidi bel-abbes,
Algeria, (2010).
U. Gven., Combined Economic and Emission Dispatch solution
using Genetic Algorithm based on similarity crossover, Scientific
Research and Essays, vol.5, no. 17, pp. 24512456, (2010).
Jean Cea, Optimization Theory and Algorithms, Lectures, Tata
Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, 1978.
C.T. Kelley, Iterative Methods for Optimization, Society for Industrial
and Applied Mathematics Philadelphia North Carolina State University
Raleigh, North Carolina.
M. Gilli, An Introduction to Optimization Heuristics, Seminar
University of Cyprus Department of Public and Business
Administration, 2004.
F. Kolahan, and M. Abachizadeh, Optimizing Turning Parameters for
Cylindrical Parts Using Simulated Annealing Method, World Academy
of Science Engineering and Technology, Vol.22, pp.436-439, 2008.
N. Metropolis, A. Rosenbluth, M. Rosenbluth, A. Teller, and E. Teller.,
Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines, Journal of
Chemical Physics, Vol. 21, pp. 1087-1092, 1953.
M. S. Kaurav, H. M. Dubey, M. Pandit and B. K. Panigrahi, imulated
Annealing Algorithm for Combined Economic and Emission Dispatch,
International Conference, ICACCN, pp. 631-636, 2011.
L. Abdou, O. Taibaoui, A. Moumen and A. Taleb Ahmed, Threshold
Optimization in Distributed OS-CFAR System by using Simulated
Annealing Technique, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference
on Systems and Control, Sousse, Tunisia,pp.295-301, 2015.
R. T. F. Ah King , H. C. S. Rughooputh, Elitist Multiobjective
Evolutionary Algorithm for Environmental/Economic Dispatch,
Congress on Evolutionary computation, vol. 2, pp: 1108-14, 2003.
A. B. Pranab, K.Chattopadhyay, Oppositional Biogeography-Based
Optimization for Multi-objective Economic Emission Load Dispatch,
Annual IEEE India Conference (INDICON),2010.
Y. Labbi, D. Ben Attous, Combined Economic and Emission Dispatch
Using Big BangBig Crunch Optimization Algorithm, ICEN2010
International Conference on Electrical Networks,2010.