This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
1

Hybrid Energy Sharing for Multiple Microgrids in

an Integrated Heat-Electricity Energy System
Nian Liu, Member, IEEE, Jie Wang, and Lingfeng Wang, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—In order to facilitate energy sharing and improve Cair The specific heat ratio of air.
system flexibility, a hybrid energy sharing framework of multiple t
Ei,j The electrical energy sold by MG i to MG j at time
microgrids (MGs) is proposed for a heat-electricity integrated slot t (MWh).
energy system (HE-IES) with combined heat and power (CHP) t
and demand response (DR). First, considering the multi-timescale Hair The input thermal energy at time slot t (MWh).
t
characteristics, an electrical and thermal energy sharing model Hchpi The thermal power of MT in MG i at time slot t
of interconnected MGs with CHP and PV systems is built, in (MW).
which CHP can operate in a hybrid mode by selecting the max
Hchp The maximum heat power of MT (MW).
operating point flexibly. Moreover, the local subproblem of each min
Hchp The minimum heat power of MT (MW).
MG is formulated and solved considering a comprehensive set t
of factors including the generating heat and power cost, trading Hi,j The thermal energy sold by MG i to MG j at time
cost with utility grid, trading electrical and thermal energy cost slot t (MWh).
loss
with other MGs, load characteristic, power consumption utility, Hj,i The heat loss in heat pipes caused by purchasing heat
thermal discomfort cost. In addition, a distributed optimization from MG j by MG i (MWh).
algorithm is used to solve the hybrid energy sharing problem,
HRP The rated thermal power of CHP (MW).
where the electrical and thermal energy prices can be obtained.
Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed energy sharing method ki The utility parameter of MG i.
is demonstrated by a case study simulation. Lhvng The low calorific value of natural gas.
t
Index Terms—Energy sharing, interconnected microgrids,
Pchpi The electrical power of MT in MG i at time slot t
combined heat and power, demand response, integrated energy (MW).
max
system, distributed algorithm. Pchp The upper bound of electrical power of MT (MW).
min
Pchp The lower bound of electrical power of MT (MW).
N OMENCLATURE PEmax
i
The upper bound of power consumption (MWh).
PEt i The power consumption of MG i at time slot t (MWh).
λti The electrical price of MG i selling to other MGs at
pgas The price of natural gas (CNY/m3 ).
time slot t (CNY/MWh).
(s) Pgb The buying price of the utility grid (CNY/MWh).
εi,t The total amount of selling electricity in MG i
Pgs The selling price of utility gird (CNY/MWh).
(MWh). loss
t Pj,i The power loss due to purchasing electricity from MG
ξj,i The heat loss coefficient between MG i and MG j.
j by MG i (MWh).
PPt V i The PV power of MG i at time slot t (MWh).
t PRP The rated electrical power of CHP (MW).
Tin The indoor temperature of the building at time slot t
Qf uel The total fuel input.
(◦ C).
QtTi The thermal load of MG i at time slot t (MWh).
αi The sensitivity coefficient indicating the willingness
QtTset The equivalent thermal load when the indoor temper-
of adjustment of temperature.
ature is Tset (MWh).
A,B The adjacency matrix with N rows and N columns.
R Thermal resistance (Ω).
∆E t The amount of insufficient or excess electrical power t
Tout The outdoor temperature at time slot t (◦ C).
at time slot t (MWh).
U The voltage of interconnection lines (V).
∆H t The amount of insufficient or excess thermal power at
uti The power utility of MG i at time slot t .
time slot t (MWh).
xtgrid The trading energy with utility grid at time slot t
∆T The length of time slot (h).
(MWh).
∆t The transmission delay in the heat pipes (h).
δheat The heating coefficient. I. I NTRODUCTION
t
ηchp The power generation efficiency of MT at time slot t.
With the increasing concerns on energy consumption and
ηloss The heat loss coefficient.
environmental protection, how to improve the energy efficien-
ηsys The system efficiency.
cy is becoming one of the most critical and pressing issues
µti The thermal price of MG i selling to other MGs at
around the globe [1]. Recently, optimal energy management
time slot t (CNY/MWh).
(s) of microgrids (MGs) with electrical and thermal demands
φi,t The total amount of selling heat in MG i (MWh).
has become a compelling and much needed research topic
N. Liu and J. Wang are with the State Key Laboratory of Alternate Electrical [2]. In particular, combined heat and power (CHP) [3] can
Power System with Renewable Energy Sources, North China Electric Power provide electrical and thermal energy for MGs simultaneously,
University, Beijing 102206, China. (e-mail: nian liu@163.com). which improves energy supply efficiency. Moreover, renewable
L. Wang is with the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Science, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA. energy has been regarded as an important factor to address
(e-mail: l.f.wang@ieee.org). energy and environmental issues, such as photovoltaic (PV)

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
systems [4]. In some areas, due to the capacity limitation
of an individual MG, multiple neighboring MGs can share
energy with one another to drive the total cost down and
improve the power supply reliability [5]. More recently, heat-
electricity integrated energy systems (HE-IES) [6], [7], [8]
composed of multiple interconnected MGs with CHP and PV
systems are being proposed. Thus far, the optimal electrical
and thermal energy sharing problem of multiple MGs in a
HE-IES remains a problem to be solved for achieving cost
reduction and improving energy efficiency.
Recently, two common types of CHP units are being ex-
plored: back pressure units and extraction condensing units
[9], [10]. For extraction condensing units with adjustable heat-
to-electric ratio, they are usually large-scale generating units,
whose power is several hundreds of megawatts in general [9],
[11]. As for the integrated energy system (IES) involving mul-
tiple extraction condensing units, a linear model is proposed
in [11] for the centralized dispatch for IES, which increases
the flexibility of CHP units using electrical boilers and heat
storage tanks in a centralized model. In terms of back pressure
units, they are usually small-scale generating units, whose
heat-to-electric ratio is constant. With regard to operating
strategy of the back pressure CHP units, it can be divided
into following electric load (FEL) and following thermal load
(FTL) modes [12]. Furthermore, following hybrid electric-
thermal load (FHL) is proposed as a hybrid mode, in which
the CHP system can select FTL or FEL mode dynamically
[13]. However, the operation mode of back pressure units is
limited to the FTL or FEL mode. In this paper, we focus on
the energy sharing problem of multiple interconnected MGs.
According to the policy in China [14], the maximum electrical
load of grid-connected MG is limited to 20MW. Due to the
research target of multiple MGs in this paper, back pressure
units are taken into consideration in our work.
Meanwhile, the optimization of back pressure CHP units has
drawn wide attention. For optimal operation of MGs consisting
of the CHP system, its optimal objective is generally set as the
minimum operation cost, maximum energy efficiency or mini-
mum environmental impact [15], [1]. However, most research
mainly focuses on the optimal operation of individual CHP
system. With the number of CHPs increasing, the optimization
of HE-IES with multiple CHPs is one of the key elements to
reduce the overall cost. For instance, an optimal joint-dispatch
scheme of energy and reserve is proposed in [16] for combined
cooling, heating and power (CCHP)-based MGs. Additionally,
an optimization procedure for day-ahead scheduling of a CHP-
based MG is developed in [1] to minimize operation and
emission costs. In [17], the economic operation model of MGs
is built to minimize total operation cost of the CCHP-based
systems. In the above literature, the optimization of multiple
CHPs is solved by a centralized method. Since the CHPs
may belong to different economic entities, the hybrid energy
sharing of multiple CHPs belonging to different MGs is a
significant issue to be solved to minimize cost of each MG
and the overall cost.
Much effort has been focused on the optimization of
multiple MGs [18], and the relevant studies can be divided
into two categories: centralized optimization and distributed
1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
2
optimization. As for the centralized optimization [19], all the
data need to be transmitted to the central coordinator, which
may result in the leakage of privacy information of MGs
and high data communication requirements. To overcome the
drawbacks, there has been some research focusing on the
distributed optimization. For instance, a distributed convex
optimization framework is developed in [20] to enable en-
ergy trading between islanded MGs. A self-organizing and
decentralized energy management strategy is proposed for a
microgrid cluster which is islanded from the main grid [21].
A cooperative power dispatching algorithm of interactions
among microgrids is proposed in [5] for facilitating power
sharing within the grid. The optimal control problem of
microgrids in [22] is modeled as a decentralized partially-
observable Markov decision process. Nevertheless, the shared
energy among multiple MGs in the above studies is limited to
electrical energy.
In the HE-IES with multiple MGs, the energy sharing
problem is different from the aforementioned studies. First,
there are two physical networks in the system, which means
both heat and electricity can be shared among different parties.
Second, by sharing the heat, multiple CHP systems can
perform cooperation to meet the total heat demand of the IES.
Thus, the the traditional FTL mode of a single CHP system
should be changed. In the existing literature, there has been
no such a solution for addressing these two differences.
To this end, this paper focuses on an electrical and thermal
energy sharing method for multiple MGs in a HE-IES. The
main contributions of this work are summarized as follows:
1) An electrical and thermal energy sharing framework of
multiple MGs with multi-time scale characteristics in a HE-
IES based on electrical and thermal prices is proposed consid-
ering a comprehensive set of factors such as the cost of power
and heat generation, trading cost with utility grid, trading
cost with other MGs, load characteristics, power consumption
utility, and discomfort cost.
2) Through electrical and thermal energy trading, CHP can
choose the operating point flexibly to reduce the operation cost
considering multiple CHP systems, which is not limited by the
rigid constraint in the FTL or FEL mode.
3) The distributed optimization algorithm is extended from
a single electric energy transaction mode between MGs to
the hybrid transaction mode with both electrical and thermal
energy.
II. E NERGY SHARING FRAMEWORK WITH ELECTRICAL
AND THERMAL ENERGY
A. System Architecture
The hybrid energy sharing framework of multiple intercon-
nected MGs in a HE-IES is shown in Fig.1. The interconnected
MGs can exchange electrical and thermal energy through an
interconnection infrastructure and a communication network.
Each MG may be composed of the PV system, CHP, electrical
and thermal loads and MG energy management system (MG-
EMS). From the point view of Transactive Energy, each MG
can be regarded as a buyer or a seller for both electrical and
thermal energy. The optimal scheduling of each MG is imple-
mented in MG-EMS, which can decide the power generation,
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
3

heat generation, power consumption and heat consumption,

and receive the trading data from other MGs, including the Heat-to-electric
expected purchasing energy and prices. The users in each MG 1 Ratio
are assumed to have a certain amount of shiftable loads, which Esell A"
enable them to participate in DR with electricity and heat. B B'

Power line
18 19 20 21
Communication H chp H he
MG1 MG2 Heat line
H RP H waste
110kV/10kV
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 B"
MG3
MG
Utility grid
A'
A

Ebuy
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
22 23 24 FTL Pchp 1
FEL
Ă
PRP
MG5 MGN
MG4 Fig. 2. Operation mode of CHP in the independent mode

Fig. 1. The electrical and thermal energy sharing framework of multiple of MGs can be satisfied by choosing to generate heat by CHP
interconnected MGs in a HE-IMS or trade with other MGs.

III. BASIC MODEL OF MG S

B. System Operation Mode
A. CHP system
1) Independent mode: Generally, the MGs can be operated
CHP system has become a type of economical and
in an independent mode, in which each MG generates elec-
environmentally-friendly power generation technology, which
tricity by itself or trades with the utility grid to satisfy its own
improves the system efficiency effectively. The key device of
electrical load demand. As for the thermal demands, each MG
a CHP system is the micro turbine (MT) powered by natural
can only generate heat by itself.
gas. Generally, the CHP operates in the FTL or FEL mode.
In the independent mode, the CHP in MG may operate in
1) The FTL mode: In the FTL mode, the priority is given
the FTL or FEL mode, as shown in Fig.2. In Fig.2, the slope
to the thermal load, so the MT generates thermal energy to
of the bold line in the middle represents the heat-to-electric
satisfy heat loads and it is not necessary to meet the electrical
ratio, which means that the electrical load and thermal load
demand. If there is surplus electrical energy generated, the
are matched for the point on the bold line and there is no need
excess portion of the electrical energy will be fed back to the
to add extra energy. The point in the area above the bold line
utility grid; if the generated electrical energy is insufficient,
indicates that the thermal load is more than the electrical load,
MG would purchase electricity from the utility grid.
while the point in the area below the bold line indicates the
t
electrical load is more than the thermal load. Hchpi = QtTi (1)
For points above the bold line (e.g., B), if the CHP operates
′ ∆E = t
− PEt i t
Pchpi (2)
in the FTL mode to meet electrical and thermal demands at B ,
the MG needs to sell Esell electricity to the utility grid. When t
(1 − ηchp
t
− ηloss )δheat Pchpi
t
′′ Hchpi = t (3)
the CHP operates in the FEL mode at B , the insufficient ηchp
thermal energy Hhe should be provided by the heat-only unit. Moreover, the power generation efficiency of MT can be
With regard to the points below the bold line such as A, the expressed as [23]
CHP can operate in the FTL mode or the FEL mode, that is
′ t t t
the point A or A” . If CHP operates in the FTL mode, the MG t
Pchpi Pchpi Pchpi
ηchp = ρ + σ( ) + τ( )2 + ν( )3 (4)
needs to purchase Ebuy electrical energy from the utility grid. PRP PRP PRP
If CHP operates in the FEL mode, the excess heat Hwaste In addition, the electrical and heat power of CHP should be
would be dumped. constrained as follows:
2) Operation mode of CHP in the interconnected mode:
Different from the independent mode, MGs can exchange min
Pchp ≤ Pchpi
t
≤ Pchp
max
(5)
energy in the interconnected mode based on the energy sharing min
Hchp ≤ t
Hchpi ≤ max
Hchp (6)
framework. For electrical energy, each MG gives priority to
t
the utilization of renewable energy. If renewable energy is where Hchpi is the thermal power of MT in MG i at time slot
t t
insufficient, the MG can choose to generate power by CHP, t; QTi is the thermal load of MG i at time slot t; Pchpi is the
t
trade with other MGs or the utility grid. The thermal demand electrical power of MT; PEi denotes the power consumption of

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
4

MG i at time slot t; ∆E t denotes the amount of insufficient C. Thermal load

t
or excess electrical power at time slot t; ηchp is the power According to the model of thermal load and temperature
generation efficiency of MT at time slot t; ρ, σ, τ and ν proposed in [28], the building temperature in each time slot is
are constant coefficients; PRP is the rated electrical power of represented by
CHP; ηloss is the heat loss coefficient; δheat is the heating
t −1/RCair
min
coefficient; Pchp max
and Pchp are the lower and upper bounds
t+1
Tin = Tin e + (RHair t t
+ Tout )(1 − e−1/RCair )
min
of electrical power of MT, respectively; and Hchp max
and Hchp (12)
t
are the minimum and maximum heat power values of MT, where Tin denotes the indoor temperature of the building at
respectively. time slot t; R is the thermal resistance; Cair denotes the
t
2) The FEL mode: In FEL, MT is in charge of generating specific heat ratio of air; Hair is the input thermal energy
t
electrical energy according to power loads, and the thermal at time slot t; and Tout is the outdoor temperature at time slot
t t t+1
demand is not a demand that must be met. If the generated t. Since Tin , R, Cair and Tout are known, Tin approximately
t
thermal energy is superfluous, the excess part would be has a linear relationship with the input thermal energy Hair .
wasted; if the generated thermal energy cannot satisfy the D. Discomfort cost
thermal load, other heating equipment can be used to supply Combined with [13], the degree of discomfort is defined as
the insufficient thermal energy, such as the heat-only unit.
ort = αi (QTi − QTset )
t t t 2
Cdiscomf (13)
Then we have: Pt = Pt (7)
chpi Ei t
where Cdiscomf ort is the discomfort cost incurred by the
∆H t = QtTi − Hchpi
t
(8) deviation of indoor temperature and comfort temperature;
where ∆H t denotes the amount of insufficient or excess QtTi denotes the equivalent thermal load when the indoor
thermal power at time slot t. temperature is set as Ti at time slot t; QtTset is the equivalent
t
3) Cost model: The cost Cchp of CHP is given by thermal load when the indoor temperature is the comfort
temperature Tset at time slot t; αi is the sensitivity coefficient,
t
t
Pchpi ∆T which indicates the willingness of adjustment of temperature.
Cchp = pgas (9)
t
ηchpi Lhvng For a larger αi (αi > 0), MG i is more sensitive to temperature
variations and is less willing to adjust the temperature.
where pgas denotes the price of natural gas; ∆T is the length The limitations of thermal load QtTi are expressed by
of time slot; and Lhvng represents the low calorific value of
natural gas. Qmin
Ti ≤ QtTi ≤ Qmax
Ti (14)
B. Electrical load where Qmin
Ti and Qmax
Ti are lower and upper bounds of the
Each MG is an autonomous entity which can adjust its thermal load.
loads flexibly. The power consumption utility uti of MG i is E. Cost of trading with utility grid
expressed by
If the renewable energy is insufficient, each MG can perform
uti = ki ln(1 + PEt i ) (10)
energy trade with the utility grid to satisfy the electrical
where ki is the utility parameter, which can be adjusted load. The cost of energy trading with the utility grid can be
according to the power consumption customers of MG i in expressed by
each time slot. The power consumption utility increases with a {
t Pgs xtgrid xtgrid ≥ 0
larger ki . The limitation on power consumption is represented Cgrid = (15)
Pgb xtgrid xtgrid < 0
by
0 ≤ PEt i ≤ PEmax
i
(11) where xtgrid is the trading electrical energy with utility grid
at time slot t; Pgs is the selling price of utility gird; and Pgb
where PEmax i
is the upper bound imposed on the amount of is the buying price of the utility grid; if xtgrid ≥ 0, the MG
power consumption. purchases electricity from the utility grid; otherwise, the excess
For the source of this definition, the natural logarithm ln(·) electricity in MG is fed back to the utility grid.
function has been widely used in economics for modeling the
F. Network cost
preference ranking of users and for decision making, which
is also turned out to be suitable for designing the utility of Due to the cost of investment as well as the cost for
power consumers [24]. The motivation behind choosing this operation and maintenance of distribution network, the fees
utility function is that it is closely related to the utility function charged by the utility grid are given as follows: [20]
ki ln(PEt i ) which leads to proportionally fair demand response γe (xt1 ) = a1 xt1 + b1 (xt1 )3 (16)
[25], [26]. And ki ln(1 + PEt i ) is a typical modified form to
avoid the undesired utility of −∞. where a1 and b1 are the cost coefficients; and xt1 is the trading
Note that ki is the combination of the weight coefficient and electrical energy.
preference parameter [27], which reflects the weight of energy Similarly, considering the cost of investment and mainte-
consumption utility and the energy consumption preference of nance of heat pipes, the fees charged by the heat pipeline
users. It can be derived from (10) that the user with a higher company can be expressed in the same form:
ki will be more likely to consume more energy to attain the γh (xt2 ) = a2 xt2 + b2 (xt2 )3 (17)
maximum utility compared with the user with a lower ki .

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
5

where a2 and b2 are the cost coefficients; and xt2 is the trading Then we have
thermal energy. (b) [ ]T
Note that the particular functions (16) and (17) are chosen Ei,t = t
E1,i · · · EN,i
t (20)
(b) [ ]T
arbitrarily, which may depend on the physical parameters and Hi,t = H1,it
· · · HN,i
t (21)
business model. The basic principle is that the cost of a (b) [ ]T
t
γe (Ei,t ) = γ(E1,i ) · · · γ(EN,i
t
) (22)
network generally increases with the increase of the traded [ ]T
(b)
energy for both electricity and heat. Moreover, similar results
t
γh (Hi,t ) = γ(H1,i ) · · · γ(HN,i
t
) (23)
are expected with other forms of the function (e.g., linear where ∆t denotes the transmission delay in the heat pipes;
function and quadratic function.) t
Ei,j is the electrical energy sold by MG i to MG j at time
t
slot t; Hi,j is thermal energy sold by MG i to MG j at time
G. Energy efficiency slot t; ei is a column vector with N columns, in which the N th
element is 1 and other elements are 0. A is an adjacency matrix
As for energy efficiency, energy utilization factor (EUF) is
with N rows and N columns, whose element aij indicates
the most commonly used performance indicator to quantify
the connection in power network between MG i and MG j. If
system’s energy efficiency, which is based on the first law of
there is a connection between MG i and MG j in the power
thermodynamics and is built on the basis of energy balance.
network, aij = 1; otherwise, aij = 0. Similarly, B is an
For a particular system, EUF is defined as the ratio of effective
adjacency matrix with N rows and N columns, in which bij =
output energy to the input energy. The total system energy
1 indicates there is a connection between MG i and MG j in
efficiency ηsys is represented as [29]
the thermal network. Otherwise, bij = 0.
∑ ∑
i Pchpi + i Hchpi
The electrical power balance constraint in MG i of the above
ηsys = (18) optimal problem is given by
Qf uel (b) (s)
t
Pchpi + PPt V i + xtgridi + eTi AT Ei,t = PEt i + eTi AEi,t + Pj,i
loss

where Qf uel denotes the total fuel input. (24)

Moreover, the power loss is shown as follow:
t 2
loss
(Pj,i )
IV. H YBRID ENERGY SHARING MODEL Pj,i = Rij (25)
U2
A. Hybrid energy sharing model of interconnected MGs with t
where Pchpi is the power generation of CHP in MG i at time
multi-time scale characteristics
slot t; PP V i is the PV power of MG i at time slot t; xtgridi is
t

In a HE-IES, consider N MGs constituting an interconnect- the trading electrical energy between MG i and the utility grid
(s)
ed energy system, in which all MGs agree to coordinate with at time slot t. Ei,t is a vector with N columns, and we have
one another to reduce the total operation cost, including the (s) [ ]T
Ei,t = Ei,1 t
· · · Ei,N t loss
; Pj,i is the power loss due
cost of energy trading with the main grid, power generation to purchasing electricity from MG j by MG i, which is born
cost, heat generation cost, network cost, power consumption by MG i; U is the voltage of interconnection lines; and Rij is
utility and discomfort cost. MGs are able to trade with the the resistance of the distribution line between MG i and MG
utility grid. In addition, MG i can purchase electrical energy j.
t
Ej,i (j ̸= i) from MG j, and sell energy Ei,k t
(k ̸= i) to MG The thermal power constraint in MG i requires
k at time slot t. Moreover, MG i is allowed to trade thermal
(b) (s)
energy so that it can purchase thermal energy Hj,i t
(j ̸= i) t
Hchpi + eTi BT Hi,t = Qt+∆t
Ti + eTi BHi,t + Hj,i
loss (26)
from MG j and sell thermal energy Hi,k (k ̸= i) to MG k at
t
In addition, the heat loss in heat pipes can be defined as
time slot t.
follows:
The HE-IES is a complex system, in which the electrical and loss t t
thermal subsystems take different amounts of time to transmit Hj,i = ξj,i Hj,i (27)
electricity and heat, respectively. Obviously, the response t
where Hchpi is the heat generation of CHP in MG i at time
speed of electrical network is faster as it only takes seconds to loss
slot t; Hj,i is the heat loss in heat pipes caused by purchasing
transmit electricity. For the thermal network, the steam or hot heat from MG j by MG i, which is paid by MG i; and ξj,i t
is
water is transmitted at a lower speed, so the transmission delay the heat loss coefficient between MG i and MG j.
in the heat pipes may vary from minutes to hours. Therefore, For the optimization problem in (19), the electrical power
the hybrid energy sharing model of interconnected MGs with balance (24) and heat power balance (26) should be satisfied,
multi-timescale characteristics is proposed, and the objective and other constraints in (3), (5), (6), (11) and (14) also need
function is expressed as follows: to be enforced.
∑N
t B. Operation mode of CHP based on energy sharing frame-
Ct = min (Cgridi (xtgridi ) + Cchpi
t t
(Pchpi t
, Hchpi ))
{Ei,j i,j } i=1
t ,H t
work
∑N
(b) ∑N
(b) In the FEL or FTL mode, there may be excess electrical or
+ eTi AT γe (Ei,t ) + eTi BT γh (Hi,t )−
i=1 i=1 thermal energy generated due to the mismatch of electrical and
∑
N ∑
N
thermal loads for satisfying power and heat demands. In the
ki ln(1 + PEt i ) + αi (Qt+∆t
Ti − Qt+∆t
Tset )
2
i=1 i=1 energy sharing framework, a hybrid mode (HM) is proposed
(19) to reduce the operation cost and improve the energy efficiency.

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
6

∑
N
Ct = { min }
t
(Cchpi t
(Pchpi t
, Hchpi )
(s) (s) t ,H t
Heat-to-electric εi,t ,ηi,t ,Ei,j i,j
i=1
1 Ratio ∑
N
A" t (b)
A'" + Cgridi (xtgridi )) + eTi AT γe (Ei,t )
Esell i=1 (30)
B B'
∑
N
(b) ∑
N
+ eTi BT γh (Hi,t ) − ki ln(1 + PEt i )
¢
Ebuy i=1 i=1
H chp
¢
H buy ∑N
H buy + αi (Qt+∆t
Ti − Qt+∆t
Tset )
2
H RP ¢
H sell
i=1
¢
Esell B'" H sell
We assume
B"
(s) (s)
εi,t = eTi AEi,t i = 1...N (31)
A'
A (s) (s)
φi,t = eTi BHi,t i = 1...N (32)
Ebuy

FTL Pchp
Then the constraints can be expressed by
FEL
1
HM PRP (b)
t
∆Ehm = PPt V i + xtgridi + eTi AT Ei,t
Fig. 3. Operation mode of CHP based on the proposed energy sharing (s)
(33)
framework − εi,t − Pj,i
loss
i = 1...N

(b)
For the hybrid mode proposed in this paper, we have
t
Pchpi + PPt V i + xtgridi + eTi AT Ei,t =
(s)
(34)
PEt i + εi,t + Pj,i
loss
i = 1...N
t
∆Ehm = PEt i − t
Pchpi (28)
t
∆Hhm = Qt+∆t − Hchpi
t
(29) (b) (s)
Ti t
∆Hhm = eTi BT Hi,t − φi,t − Hj,i
loss
i = 1...N (35)
t
where ∆Ehm denotes the amount of insufficient or excess
(b) (s)
electrical power in the hybrid mode at time slot t; and ∆Ehm t t
Hchpi + eTi BT Hi,t = Qt+∆t
Ti
loss
+ φi,t + Hj,i i = 1...N
denotes the amount of insufficient or excess thermal power in (36)
the hybrid mode at time slot t. Combined with the dual theory, the Lagrange multipliers λt
As shown in Fig.3, taking point B as an example, the ther- and µt are introduced, then the dual problem is formed:
mal load is more than the electrical load. In the interconnected
′ ′′
mode, CHP can operate at an arbitrary point, such as B , B ∑
N
′′′ ′
and B . When CHP operates at point B , CHP operates in
t
C = max
t
Cit (λt , µt ) (37)
λ ,µt
the FTL mode and the extra electrical energy will be sold to i=1
′′
other MGs or the utility grid. If CHP operates at point B , Cit (λt , µt ) = { min t (s) (s) (b) (b) t t
} Ci (εi,t , φi,t , Ei,t , Hi,t , λ , µ )
CHP operates in the FEL model and the thermal energy can be (s) (s) (b) (b)
εi,t ,φi,t ,Ei,t ,Hi,t
traded with other MGs. When CHP operates at a point except
′ ′′ ′′′ [ ]T t [ t ](38)
T
for B and B , such as B , CHP operates in the hybrid mode where λt = λt1 · · · λtN ; µ = µ1 · · · µtN .
which is neither the FTL nor the FEL mode. In this case, this Then each subproblem is solved for the local MG, which is
MG purchases partial heat from other MGs, and sells partial expressed as
electricity to other MGs or the utility grid. By comparison, it
′′
purchases less heat compared to B and sells less electricity (s) (s) (b) (b)
Cit (εi,t , φi,t , Ei,t , Hi,t , λt , µt ) = Cchpi
t t
(Pchpi t
, Hchpi )
′
compared with B . The operation point of CHP is obtained (b) (b)
t
based on the optimal scheduling algorithm by minimizing the + Cgridi (xtgridi ) + eTi AT γe (Ei,t ) + eTi BT γh (Hi,t )−
operation cost. (b)
ki ln(1 + PEt i ) + αi (Qt+∆t
Ti − Qt+∆t
Tset ) + ei A diag{λ }Ei,t
2 T T t

(b) (s) (s)

V. D ISTRIBUTED OPTIMIZATION
A. Problem Decoupling
To protect the privacy of MGs, the energy management
problem of interconnected MGs with electrical and ther-
mal energy sharing is solved by the distributed optimization
algorithm. For reducing the computational complexity, the
optimization problem (19) is decoupled into N subproblems
solved for each MG, which needs little information to derive
the optimal scheduling scheme. The problem (19) can be
transformed into
1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
+ eTi BT diag{µt }Hi,t − λti εi,t − µti φi,t
(39)
where λti is the electrical price of MG i selling to other MGs
at time slot t; and µti denotes the thermal price of MG i selling
to other MGs at time slot t. As shown in (39), the objective
of each MG is composed of the following components: 1)
cost of CHP; 2) cost/profit of trading with the utility grid;
3) electrical network cost due to purchasing electricity and
thermal network cost incurred by purchasing heat; 4) power
consumption utility; 5) discomfort cost; 6) cost of purchasing
electricity and heat from other MGs; and 7) profit of selling
electrical and thermal energy.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
7

B. Distributed optimization algorithm 1

To solve the aforementioned optimization problem, a dis-

Electrical energy (MWh)

0.8
tributed algorithm based on the subgradient method is used to
derive the optimal scheduling scheme [20]. In each round of 0.6
iterations, MG i decides the expected purchasing electricity
(b) (b) (s) (s)
Ei,t and heat Hi,t , electricity εi,t and heat φi,t it is willing 0.4
to sell by solving (39). Then MG i informs MG j of its
0.2
expected purchasing electricity and heat. Referring to the
expected purchasing energy from other MGs, MG i computes
(s) 0
the expected selling electricity eTi AEi,t and expected selling 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00
Time slot
(s) (a) Electrical energy
heat eTi BHi,t . Next, λti and µti of MG i are updated according 1
(s) (s)
to the electricity εi,t and heat φi,t that MG i is willing to sell, 0.9

Thermal power (MWh)

(s) (s)
and the expected selling electricity eTi AEi,t and heat eTi BHi,t , 0.8
which can be expressed as follows: 0.7
 (s) (s)

eT1 AE1,t [k] − ε1,t [k] 0.6
 
λt [k + 1] = λt [k] + ρ[k] 

..
.
 (40)

0.5

(s) (s)
eTN AEN,t [k] − εN,t [k] 0.4

 (s) (s)
 0.3
12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00
eT1,t BH1 [k] − φ1,t [k] Time slot
  (b) Thermal energy
µt [k + 1] = µt [k] + σ[k]   (41)
.. PV1 PV2 PV3
Power load of MG1 Power load of MG2 Power load of MG3
 .  Thermal load of MG1 Thermal load of MG2 Thermal load of MG3
(s) (s)
eTN BHN,t [k] − φN,t [k]
Fig. 4. The electrical load, thermal load and PV power of each MG in time
Finally, the optimal scheduling scheme at this iteration is slot 12:00 to 17:00
obtained after the convergence condition is satisfied.
TABLE II
R ELATED PARAMETERS OF CHP S IN MG S
VI. C ASE STUDIES CHP PRP a b c d ηloss δheat
A. Basic data CHP1 200kW 0.16 0.57 -0.41 0.09 0.05 0.8
CHP2 800kW 0.15 0.51 -0.37 0.09 0.05 0.8
In this paper, a real HE-IES consisting of 3 interconnected CHP3 1MW 0.15 0.54 -0.39 0.09 0.05 0.8
MGs is chosen as the case study. All MGs have installed
PV panels. Based on the historical data collected from smart
meters of the buildings in Beijing, China, the load data is B. Optimal results in time slot 12:00-16:00
obtained using the method in [30]. The PV power data is also According to the proposed method in this paper, the optimal
from the buildings in Beijing. There is a CHP in each MG. results of trading energy in time slots 12:00-16:00 are obtained
The simulation is conducted using MATLAB. Pgs and Pgb are by simulations based on forecast data. The results of Fig.5 (a)
set as 0.8 CNY/kWh and 0.35 CNY/kWh, respectively. pgas is show that MG3 acts as a electricity seller and trades electrical
set as 2.2 CNY/m3 . The electrical load, thermal load and PV energy with MG1 and MG2. In contrast, the results of Fig.5
power of each MG in time slot 12:00 to 17:00 are presented (b) show that MG2 acts as a heat seller and trades thermal
in Fig.4. The profiles of MGs and the related parameters of energy with MG1 and MG3. The coupling constraints in (31)
CHPs in MGs are listed in Table.I and Table.II, respectively. and (32) are also satisfied, as shown by the balances of energy
Combined with model in [31], the transmission delay in the trading.
heat pipes is calculated approximately, which varies with Moreover, for the energy scheduling results inside a MG,
parameters of pipes and distance of heat transmission. For MG2 is taken as an example. Figs. 6 and 7 show the results
distance of 3 km between MGs, it may take about one hour for of optimized thermal and electrical variables, respectively. In
thermal network to transmit heat. Thus ∆t = 1h is assumed. In Fig. 6, the upper part shows the generated heat by CHP2
addition, the time of heat transmission to local MG is assumed and the trading heat with other MGs, while the lower part
to be the same as the time of heat transmission to other MGs shows the original thermal load and the adjusted thermal load
in general. after implementing the DR. Considering the thermal energy
transmission delay, the results show that the produced heat at
TABLE I time slot t is consistent with the thermal load at time slot t+1.
P ROFILES OF ALL MG S
Meanwhile, in Fig. 7, the upper part shows the PV energy,
MG PV capacity (kWp) αi
MG1 100 1000 generated electrical energy Pchp2 of CHP2 and purchased
MG2 150 1200 electrical energy E32 from MG3, and the lower part shows
MG3 120 1100 the original electrical load and the adjusted electrical load after
implementing the DR. In MG2, the supplied electric power on

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
8

0.8
0.4

Electrical energy (MWh)

Electrical energy (MWh)
0.6
0.3
0.4

0.2 0.2

0
0.1 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00
Time slot

Electrical energy (MWh)

0 0.95
12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00
0.9
Time slot
(a) Trading electrical energy 0.85
0.2 0.8
Thermal energy (MWh)

0.75
0.15 0.7
0.65
0.1 0.6
12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00
Time slot
0.05 PV2 P chp2 E 3,2
Original net electrical load in MG2 Power consumption in MG2

0
12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00
Fig. 7. Optimized electrical variables of MG2
Time slot
(b) Trading thermal energy
E E e H H j
3,1 3,2 3 2,1 2,3 2
C. Optimal results and analysis at time slot 12:00
Fig. 5. The optimal results of trading energy in time slot 12:00-16:00 (E3,1 1) Electrical and thermal price: Using the distributed op-
denotes the electrical energy purchased by MG1 from MG3)
timization method, the iterative processes of electrical and
thermal prices at time slot 12:00 are obtained, which are shown
in Fig.8 and Fig.9, respectively. We can find that the electrical
the source side is the same as the power consumption of MG2 and thermal prices can converge in about 80 iterations. In terms
at time slot t, due to the faster response speed of electrical of the electrical price, the electrical price of CHP3 in MG3 is
network. the lowest among MGs. Note that the electrical price of MG3
is lower than the selling price of utility grid and is higher
than the purchasing price of utility grid. Therefore, to reduce
the operation cost, MG1 and MG2 purchase electrical energy
1
from MG3 instead of the utility grid. In addition, MG3 gets
Thermal energy (MWh)

0.8 revenues by selling electricity to other MGs.

0.6

0.4
500
0.2

0
Electrical price (CNY/MWh)

12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 400

Time slot

0.85
Thermal energy (MWh)

300
0.8

0.75
200
0.7

0.65
100 MG1
0.6
12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 MG2
Time slot MG3
H chp2 j 0
Original thermal load in MG2 Adjusted thermal load in MG2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Iteration number

Fig. 6. Optimized thermal variables of MG2 Fig. 8. Iterative process of electrical price

As for the thermal price, the thermal price of MG2 is the

In the following section, in order to test the performance lowest among MGs so that MG1 and MG3 purchase heat from
of algorithm, iterative process and optimal results of time slot MG2 for ensuring cost minimization. MG2 gains profits by
12:00 are given in details. selling excess thermal energy to other MGs.

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
9

100 0.4

90 0.35

Electrical energy (MWh)

0.3
Thermal price (CNY/MWh)

80
70 0.25

60 0.2

50 0.15
E
40 0.1 2,1
E
3,1
30 0.05
e
1
20 MG1 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
10 MG2 Iteration number
MG3 (a) Trading electrical energy of MG1
0 0.5
E
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1,2
Iteration number E
3,2

Electrical energy (MWh)

0.4
e
2
Fig. 9. Iterative process of thermal price
0.3

2) Trading electrical and thermal energy: The iterative 0.2

processes of trading electrical and thermal energy in each MG

are depicted in Fig.10 and Fig.11, respectively. 0.1

As shown in Fig.10, after the convergence is achieved, MG1

and MG2 purchase 0.2266 MWh and 0.0874 MWh electrical 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
energy from MG3, respectively. The total electricity sold by Iteration number
(b) Trading electrical energy of MG2
MG3 is 0.3140 MWh. It is clear that the electricity purchased 0.4
by MG1 and MG2 from MG3 is equal to the electricity 0.35
Electrical energy (MWh)

sold by MG3, which is due to the coupling constraint in 0.3

(31). Similarly, according to Fig.11, MG1 and MG3 purchase
0.25
0.1431 MWh and 0.0240 MWh thermal energy from MG2,
respectively. The heat sold by MG3 is 0.1670 MWh, which 0.2

is consistent with the thermal energy purchased by MG1 0.15

and MG3 within the error tolerance. Therefore, the coupling 0.1
E
1,3
constraint in (32) is also satisfied. E
2,3
0.05
e
3) Demand response with power and heat: Each MG is an 3
0
independent entity which can participate in DR with power 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
and heat. As for the electrical DR, the ratios of the optimized Iteration number
(c) Trading electrical energy of MG3
power consumption to the original electrical load of MGs are
85.18%, 97.14% and 106.27%, respectively. Considering the
Fig. 10. Iterative process of trading electrical energy in each MG
power generation cost, cost of trading with other MGs or
the utility grid, network cost and power consumption utility,
each MG has different power consumptions for reducing the TABLE III
operational cost. For instance, MG3 consumes more power O PTIMAL SCHEDULING RESULTS OF DR ON THERMAL ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
with a larger power consumption utility while MG1 consumes
MG Initial thermal load Optimized thermal Adjusted temper-
less power to decrease the operation cost. (MWh) load (MWh) ature (◦ C)
In terms of the thermal DR, as previously mentioned, MG1 0.40 0.34 21.77
adjusting the indoor temperature is equivalent to adjusting MG2 0.75 0.72 21.94
MG3 0.88 0.83 21.90
the thermal load. The comfort temperature is set to be 22◦ C.
The optimal scheduling results of DR on thermal energy
consumption is shown in Table.III, which can be interpreted
from two aspects. influenced by the deviation between the comfort temperature
On the one hand, the deviation of comfort temperature from and the adjusted temperature. The degree of deviation mainly
the adjusted temperature increases with the larger difference depends on αi . For instance, MG2 is more sensitive to the
between the initial thermal load and the optimized thermal temperature change with the largest α2 . Therefore, it has the
load. Taking MG2 as an example, the deviation of the initial lowest willingness to adjust the temperature, whose equivalent
thermal load and the optimized thermal load is the least, thus thermal discomfort cost is the highest. To reduce the total
its adjusted indoor temperature is the closest to the comfort operation cost, the deviation of the adjusted temperature from
temperature. On the other hand, the thermal comfort of MGs is the comfort temperature of MG2 is the lowest.

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
10

0.35
in which the inadequate electricity should be purchased from
H
2,1 the utility grid. In interconnected mode, the MG2 generates
0.3 H more electricity by CHP2 and purchases partial electrical
3,1
Thermal energy (MWh)

j energy from MG3 at a lower price, which avoids purchasing

0.25 1
insufficient electrical energy from the utility grid at a higher
0.2
price. Considering the heat and power coupling of the CHP
0.15 system, the CHP generates a larger amount of heat, which
results in more revenue by selling excess heat to other MGs.
0.1
As a result, the operation cost of the MG2 could be finally
0.05 minimized. Therefore, through energy trading among MGs,
0
the CHP can choose the arbitrary operating point, which is
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 not limited by the rigid constraint of the FTL or FEL mode.
Iteration number
(a) Trading thermal energy of MG1 In terms of MG3, different from the traditional FTL and
0.35
H
1,2 FEL modes, the CHP in MG3 also operates in the hybrid
0.3 H
3,2 mode, which is an interesting finding. Considering the heat-
j
Thermal energy (MWh)

0.25 2 to-electric ratio of CHP, the thermal load of MG3 is more

than the electrical load. Combined with Fig.3, the CHP in
′ ′′′
0.2
MG3 operates at a point between B and B ” , such as B .
0.15 To interpret this phenomenon, the CHP3 in MG3 operates in
FTL mode in independent mode, in which the excess electrical
0.1
energy should be fed back in to the utility grid uneconomically.
0.05 In terms of interconnected mode, MG3 purchases partial
thermal energy from MG2 and produces less heat, resulting
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 in the reduced generation cost of CHP. Considering the cou-
Iteration number
(b) Trading thermal energy of MG2 pling characteristics of CHP, the generated electrical power
0.5
H
1,3
decreases with the reduction of thermal power. However, there
H
2,3
is a higher price for MG3 in selling electricity to other MGs,
0.4
j instead of the utility grid. Based on above analysis, a decreased
Thermal energy (MWh)

3
operation cost is eventually resulted in.
0.3
Hence, energy sharing of multiple MGs can resolve the
conflicts among electrical load, thermal load and heat-to-
0.2
electric ratio of CHP, which is not limited by the rigid
constraint imposed on the FTL or FEL mode. Based on the
0.1
proposed energy sharing framework in this paper, the CHP in
MG can select the operating point flexibly, which facilitates
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 electrical and thermal energy sharing and results in the reduced
Iteration number
(c) Trading thermal energy of MG3 operation cost.
5) Comparison with the independent mode: Furthermore,
the cost comparison of MGs between independent mode and
Fig. 11. Iterative process of trading thermal energy in each MG
interconnected mode is shown in Table.IV. According to Table
IV, energy sharing of interconnected MGs can reduce the total
4) Decision-making behavior of each MG: The decision- operation cost by 19.87%, and the operation cost of each MG
making behavior of each MG can be interpreted in the is reduced accordingly.
following.
As for MG1, the CHP1 in MG1 reaches the limitation TABLE IV
C OST COMPARISON OF MG S BETWEEN INDEPENDENT MODE AND
of power generation so that the insufficient power should INTERCONNECTED MODE
be purchased. Based on aforementioned price analysis, MG1 Cost(CNY) Independent mode Interconnected mode
purchases electrical energy from MG3 at a lower price to MG1 353.21 223.04
reduce power generation cost. Moreover, due to the lowest MG2 569.52 467.99
MG3 286.12 277.61
thermal price of MG2, MG1 purchases partial thermal energy Total cost 1208.85 968.64
from MG2 to decrease the heat generation cost.
With regard to MG2, the results show that the CHP in MG2 Based on the energy sharing framework, the electrical and
operates in a hybrid mode by selecting its operating point thermal loads of multiple MGs in the HE-IES can be satisfied.
flexibly, which is different from the conventional operation To reduce the total operation cost, each MG can choose to
modes (i.e., the FTL mode and FEL mode). Combined with produce electricity, generate heat, trade electricity with the
′
Fig.3, the CHP in MG2 operates at a point between A and A” , utility grid, trade electricity or heat with other MGs, whether
′′′
such as A . Having gained the insight into this phenomenon, to participate in DR with electrical and thermal energy consid-
the CHP in MG2 operates in FTL mode in independent mode, ering cost of CHP, trading cost with utility grid, trading cost

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
11

with other MGs, power consumption utility, and discomfort insight into this phenomenon, in the independent mode the
cost. CHP2 operates in the FTL mode, and insufficient electricity
6) System energy efficiency: The energy efficiency compar- should be purchased from the utility grid at a higher price. In
ison of MGs between independent mode and interconnected interconnected mode which breaks the rigid constraint of FTL,
mode is shown Table.V. CHP2 can generate more electricity and sell the excess heat
to MG1 and MG3, which leads to the rise of operation point.
TABLE V As for CHP3 in MG3, it also uses FTL mode when operating
S YSTEM ENERGY EFFICIENCY COMPARISON BETWEEN INDEPENDENT
MODE AND INTERCONNECTED MODE
independently, in which the surplus electricity should be fed
Operation mode Independent mode Interconnected mode back to the utility grid. However, in the interconnected mode
Energy efficiency 86.91% 87.11% CHP3 purchases partial thermal energy from MG2 and sells
excess electricity to MG1 and MG2 for the reduction of
According to Table.V, we can find that energy efficiency in generation cost and improvement of electricity sale revenue,
interconnected mode can be improved through the proposed which breaks the rigid constraint of FTL. As a result, the
energy sharing method. Compared with the independent mode, operation point of CHP3 shows a slight drop.
the operation point of CHPs in MGs varies in interconnected Based on the above analysis, energy efficiency in the
mode, which leads to the difference of generation efficien- interconnected mode shows a minor improvement, which may
cy and operation point. Fig.12 shows the operating point be due to that the energy efficiency is not considered in the
comparison of each CHP between interconnected mode and objective function. In order to improve the energy efficiency, it
independent mode. could be accounted for in the objective function in our future
work.
1
VII. C ONCLUSION
0.8
In this paper, a new hybrid energy sharing management
RP
/H

0.6 framework for multiple MGs in a HE-IES with multi-timescale

chp

0.4 characteristics is developed. For the CHP in MGs, it has been

H

shown that CHP can select the operating point within the
0.2
capacity limitation flexibly to reduce the operation cost, which
0 is not limited by the rigid constraint imposed on the FTL
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
P /P or FEL mode. Through the proposed hybrid energy sharing
chp RP
(a) CHP in MG1 scheme, the total operation cost of interconnected MGs in the
1 HE-IES can be reduced effectively. Meanwhile, the local cost
0.8 of each MG is also decreased. In addition, the hybrid energy
sharing scheme based on electrical and thermal energy prices
RP

0.6
/H

is derived by a distributed optimization algorithm, which is

chp

0.4 an effective way to reduce operation cost and improve system

H

flexibility.
0.2
The proposed work can be extended in multiple directions.
0 The multi-objective optimization model can be built, which
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
P /P may include operation cost, energy efficiency, and emissions.
chp RP
(b) CHP in MG2 Considering different parameters of heat pipes and distances
1
between CHP and consumers, the time delay scales are differ-
0.8 ent. An interesting extension would be integrating the diverse
thermal time scales into the distributed iteration process.
RP

0.6
/H

Furthermore, the transient behavior of the CHP system and

chp

0.4 the heat and electricity correlations on the consumer side (e.g.,
H

0.2
some appliances or industrial devices) could be considered,
which may have different effects on the performance of energy
0 management systems.
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
P /P R EFERENCES
chp RP
(c) CHP in MG3
Interconnected mode Independent mode [1] B. Aluisio, M. Dicorato, G. Forte, and M. Trovato, “An optimization
procedure for microgrid day-ahead operation in the presence of chp
facilities,” Sustainable Energy Grids & Networks, 2017.
Fig. 12. The operating point comparison of each CHP between interconnected [2] W. Gu, Z. Wu, R. Bo, W. Liu, G. Zhou, W. Chen, and Z. Wu, “Modeling,
mode and independent mode planning and optimal energy management of combined cooling, heating
and power microgrid: A review,” International Journal of Electrical
As shown in Fig.12, the operation point of CHP1 in MG1 is Power & Energy Systems, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 26–37, 2014.
constant, which is due to operating at the rated power in both [3] X. Zhang, G. G. Karady, and S. T. Ariaratnam, “Optimal allocation of
chp-based distributed generation on urban energy distribution networks,”
modes. In addition, the operation point of CHP2 raises more IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 246–253,
while the operation point of CHP3 is cut a little. Having gained 2013.

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
[4] M. H. G. Rehmani, M. G. Reisslein, A. Rachedi, M. G. Erol-Kantarci,
and M. G. Radenkovic, “Integrating renewable energy resources into
the smart grid: Recent developments in information and communication
technologies,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. PP,
no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2018.
[5] M. Fathi and H. Bevrani, “Statistical cooperative power dispatching in
interconnected microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy,
vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 586–593, 2013.
[6] C. Shao, Y. Ding, J. Wang, and Y. Song, “Modeling and integration of
flexible demand in heat and electricity integrated energy system,” IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2017.
[7] C. Shao, Y. Ding, P. Siano, and Z. Lin, “A framework for incorporat-
ing demand response of smart buildings into the integrated heat and
electricity energy system,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2017.
[8] H. R. Massrur, T. Niknam, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, “Investigation of
carrier demand response uncertainty on energy flow of renewable-based
integrated electricity-gas-heat systems,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Informatics, vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2018.
[9] D. D. Andrews, A. Krook-Riekkola, E. Tzimas, J. Serpa, J. Carlsson,
N. Pardo-Garcia, and I. Papaioannou, “Background report on eu-27 dis-
trict heating and cooling potentials, barriers, best practice and measures
of promotion,” 2012.
[10] C. Lin, W. Wu, B. Zhang, and Y. Sun, “Decentralized solution for
combined heat and power dispatch through benders decomposition,”
IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1–1,
2017.
[11] X. Chen, C. Kang, M. O’Malley, Q. Xia, J. Bai, C. Liu, R. Sun, W. Wang,
and H. Li, “Increasing the flexibility of combined heat and power for
wind power integration in china: Modeling and implications,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 1848–1857, 2015.
[12] L. Ma, N. Liu, J. Zhang, W. Tushar, and C. Yuen, “Energy management
for joint operation of chp and pv prosumers inside a grid-connected
microgrid: A game theoretic approach,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Informatics, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1930–1942, 2016.
[13] N. Liu, L. He, X. Yu, and L. Ma, “Multi-party energy management
for grid-connected microgrids with heat and electricity coupled demand
response,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. PP, no. 99,
pp. 1–1, 2017.
[14] “Proposed regulation on promoting construction
of grid-connected microgrids,” National Developmen-
t and Reform Commission, 2017. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201707/t20170724 855213.html
[15] D. Zhang, S. Evangelisti, P. Lettieri, and L. G. Papageorgiou, “Optimal
design of chp-based microgrids: Multiobjective optimisation and life
cycle assessment,” Energy, vol. 85, pp. 181–193, 2015.
[16] J. Wang, H. Zhong, Q. Xia, C. Kang, and E. Du, “Optimal joint-dispatch
of energy and reserve for cchp-based microgrids,” Iet Generation Trans-
mission & Distribution, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 785–794, 2017.
[17] N. Nikmehr and S. Najafi-Ravadanegh, “Optimal operation of distributed
generations in micro-grids under uncertainties in load and renewable
power generation using heuristic algorithm,” IET Renewable Power
Generation, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 982–990, 2015.
[18] Z. Xu, P. Yang, C. Zheng, Y. Zhang, J. Peng, and Z. Zeng, “Analysis
on the organization and development of multi-microgrids,” Renewable
& Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 81, 2017.
[19] Y. Li, N. Liu, and J. Zhang, “Jointly optimization and distributed control
for interconnected operation of autonomous microgrids,” in Innovative
Smart Grid Technologies - Asia, 2016, pp. 1–6.
[20] D. Gregoratti and J. Matamoros, “Distributed energy trading: The
multiple-microgrid case,” Industrial Electronics IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 2551–2559, 2013.
[21] M. He and M. Giesselmann, “Reliability-constrained self-organization
and energy management towards a resilient microgrid cluster,” in Inno-
vative Smart Grid Technologies Conference, 2015, pp. 1–5.
[22] J. Wu and X. Guan, “Coordinated multi-microgrids optimal control al-
gorithm for smart distribution management system,” IEEE Transactions
on Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 2174–2181, 2013.
[23] L. Wang, Q. Li, M. Sun, and G. Wang, “Robust optimisation scheduling
of cchp systems with multi-energy based on minimax regret criterion,”
Iet Generation Transmission & Distribution, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 2194–
2201, 2016.
[24] S. Maharjan, Q. Zhu, Y. Zhang, S. Gjessing, and T. Basar, “Dependable
demand response management in the smart grid: A stackelberg game
approach,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 120–
132, March 2013.
1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
12
[25] F. P. Kelly, A. K. Maulloo, and D. K. H. Tan, “Rate control for commu-
nication networks: shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability,”
The Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 49, no. 3, pp.
237–252, 1998.
[26] T. Basar and R. Srikant, “Revenue-maximizing pricing and capacity
expansion in a many-users regime,” in Joint Conference of the IEEE
Computer and Communications Societies. Proceedings. IEEE, 2002, pp.
294–301 vol.1.
[27] W. Tushar, B. Chai, C. Yuen, and D. B. Smith, “Three-party energy
management with distributed energy resources in smart grid,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 2487–2498,
2014.
[28] M. Tasdighi, H. Ghasemi, and A. Rahimi-Kian, “Residential microgrid
scheduling based on smart meters data and temperature dependent
thermal load modeling,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 1,
pp. 349–357, 2014.
[29] P. Hanafizadeh, J. Eshraghi, P. Ahmadi, and A. Sattari, “Evaluation and
sizing of a cchp system for a commercial and office buildings,” Journal
of Building Engineering, vol. 5, pp. 67–78, 2016.
[30] N. Liu, Q. Tang, J. Zhang, W. Fan, and J. Liu, “A hybrid forecasting
model with parameter optimization for short-term load forecasting of
micro-grids,” Applied Energy, vol. 129, pp. 336–345, 2014.
[31] X. Liu, J. Wu, N. Jenkins, and A. Bagdanavicius, “Combined analysis
of electricity and heat networks,” Applied Energy, vol. 162, pp. 1238 –
1250, 2016.
Nian Liu (S’06–M’11) received the B.S. and M.S.
degrees in electric engineering from Xiangtan Uni-
versity, Hunan, China, in 2003 and 2006, respective-
ly, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from North China Electric Power University, Bei-
jing, China, in 2009.
From 2015 to 2016, he was a Visiting Research
Fellow with RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor in the School
of Electrical and Electronic Engineering of North
China Electric Power University, Beijing, China.
His research interests include demand side energy management, microgrids,
electric vehicles, and cyber security of smart grid.
He serves as Associate Editor of Journal of Modern Power Systems and
Clean Energy (MPCE), reviewers for more than 10 top-tier international and
Chinese journals, and Technical Track Co-chair of IEEE IECON2017.
Jie Wang received the B.S. degree from Hebei
University of Technology, Tianjin, China, in 2016.
She is currently working toward the M.S. degree in
the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
North China Electric Power University, Beijing, Chi-
na.
Her research interests include energy management
of microgrids and the optimal operation of integrated
energy system.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2018.2861986, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
13

Lingfeng Wang (S’02–M’09–SM’18) received the

B.E. degree in measurement and instrumentation
from Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in
1997; the M.S. degree in instrumentation science and
engineering from Zhejiang University, Hangzhou,
China, in 2000; the M.S. degree in electrical and
computer engineering from the National University
of Singapore, Singapore, in 2002; and the Ph.D.
degree from the Electrical and Computer Engineer-
ing Department, Texas A&M University, College
Station, TX, USA, in 2008. He is currently a Pro-
fessor with the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee (UWM), WI, USA, where he
directs the cyber-physical energy systems research group. He also serves as
a Co-Director for the Department of Energy (DOE)’s Industrial Assessment
Center. He was a faculty member with the University of Toledo, Toledo, OH,
USA, and an Associate Transmission Planner with the California Independent
System Operator, Folsom, CA, USA. His current research interests include
power system reliability and resiliency, smart grid cybersecurity, critical
infrastructure protection, energy-water nexus, renewable energy integration,
intelligent and energy-efficient buildings, electric vehicles integration, micro-
grid analysis and management, and cyber-physical systems.
Dr. Wang is an Editor of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART
GRID, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, and IEEE POWER
ENGINEERING LETTERS, and serves on the Steering Committee of the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CLOUD COMPUTING. He is also an Editorial
Board Member for several international journals, including Journal of Modern
Power System and Clean Energy, Sustainable Energy Technologies and
Assessments, and Intelligent Industrial Systems. He served as a Co-chair for
IEEE SmartGridComm’15 Symposium on Data Management, Grid Analytics,
and Dynamic Pricing. He is a recipient of the Outstanding Faculty Research
Award of College of Engineering and Applied Science at UWM in 2018.

1949-3029 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.