Dr. Brini Saoussen et al.

/ International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

DISPATCHING OF HYBRID WIND-

PHOTOVOLTAIC-MICROTURBINES-
STORAGE SYSTEM
Dr. BRINI SAOUSSEN
University of Sfax,
National School of Sfax, Dép. Génie Electrique, 3038 Sfax
ingenieurbrini@yahoo.fr

Dr. HSAN HADJ ABDALLAH

University of Sfax,
National School of Sfax, Dép. Génie Electrique, 3038 Sfax
hsan.haj@enis.rnu.tn

Dr. OUALI ABDERRAZAK

University of Sfax,
National School of Sfax, Dép. Génie Electrique, 3038 Sfax
abderrazak.ouali@enis.rnu.tn

Abstract :
This paper presents model for Economic Environmental Dispatching (EED) of Hybrid power system including
wind and photovoltaic energies. The model combines the stochastic data of the climate such as the wind speed
for wind energy, solar radiation and the temperature for photovoltaic energy. The penetration of wind and
photovoltaic powers into traditional network will cause some implications such as security concerns due to its
unpredictable nature. The production systems of renewable energy are generally coupled with the network with
energy storage devices and micro sources. In this paper, a bi-objective economic environmental dispatch
problem considering wind and photovoltaic penetration is formulated, which treats economic and environmental
impacts as conflicting objectives. It applied multiobjective optimization by approach SPEA to solve (EED)
problem.
Keywords: economic dispatch, renewable energies, storages battery, production cost, emission of polluting
gases, microturbine, evolutionary algorithms, SPEA.

1. Introduction
In the last years, the interest in the use of renewable energy sources for electric power generation has increased
considerably. Among the reasons for that interest, the need can be highlighted to search for alternatives to
substitute the use of fossil fuels due to its high cost and the necessity to reduce the emission of pollutant gases.

The economic environmental dispatch [1, 5, 6, 9] is a significant function in the modern energy system. It
consists in programming, correctly, the electric production in order to reduce the operational cost [11, 16, 20].
Recently, the wind power and photovoltaic power have attracted much attention as promising renewable energy
resources [2, 8, 12, 15].

The sources with renewable energies whose primary source is not easily foreseeable and very fluctuating cannot
ensure the dynamic stability of the network. Consequently, in order to carry out the compromise between the
risk of penetration of renewable energies and the total cost function, it is desirable to study how to distribute the
electric power in a suitable way in the network by holding account of the unforeseeable characteristics of these
sources.
The problem is formulated as a problem of multiobjective optimization [7, 10, 19] which consists in distributing
the active and renewable production between the power stations in the most economic way and to reduce the
emissions of polluting gases.

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2866

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

2. Electrical Network including renewable energies

renewable energy is generally coupled with the network with energy storage devices and microsources. The
renewable energy produced with the network, is used immediately or stored in energy storage devices to use it
in the need event. The energy storage devices must be limited by a minimal value in order to highlight the
minimal value of discharge of these devices and a maximum value indicating the maximum capacity of their
load. When there’s a lack of reserves powers, we use the power of the other microsources when it is available
[3, 4, 17, 18].

Figure1 presents an example of hybrid production architecture system of wind/photovoltaic coupled with the
classic network.

Photovoltaic system wind System

' '
Photovoltaic PS PS Pw Pw
station Network wind station

PSTOCK PSTOCK
Energy storage device Energy storage device
PMT PMT
Microturbine Microturbine

Fig.1. Synoptic diagram of a hybrid production system of wind photovoltaic coupled with the network

Where: PS' , Pw' , PSTOCK and PMT, are respectively the photovoltaic power station, the wind power station, the
power of the energy storage device and the power of the microturbine. PS is the photovoltaic power system and
Pw is the wind power system.
In this example of hybrid network, wind power station and photovoltaic power station are coupled with the
traditional network. Auxiliary elements are associated with each one of these renewable energy power stations.
We connect to each of the two renewable energy sources an energy storage device which is choosing a battery
and a microturbine. Where one of the renewable power stations provided a power superior to that required than
the excess of power will be stored in the batteries. In the contrary case, the batteries must provide the lack of
power and if the energy provided by the batteries is insufficient then the microtubine must ensure the remainder
of the power. We must control the load level of the storage device discharge as well as the evolution of the
power of the microturbine.

3. Economic Problem
Generally, the power cost consumed or produced F(t) by an element given at the moment t is define by the sum
of the investment cost F t  energy cost F t  and the use cost F t  [14, 16]:
I E U
F( t )  FI t   FE ( t )  FU t  (1)

3.1. Investment Cost

The capital cost depends on the maximum power of the elements; its expression is formulated as follows:
F
FI ( t )  FI0  I1 t A(t) (2)
8766

The parameter FI0 is defined as the part of the paid payment in the installation and FI1 represents the part of the
spread out payment in time; it is the annual cost on a number of damping year Nb with an annual interest rate TI.
Generally, this cost is according to the total cost of purchase and installation FT of an installation of maximum
capacity C max, we have:


F (CT max )  N
 FI0 .TI .(1  TI ) b
FI1 N
(3)
(1  TI ) b  1

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2867

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

The parameter A(t) is defined by the equation (4) and it is represented by Figure 2:

1 si t  8766.N b
A(t )   (4)
0 si t  8766.N b
A( t )

t (hour )

0 8766.N b

Fig. 2. Representation of the function A(t)

Where, 8766 represents the number of hours for one year.

3.2. Energy Cost

The energy cost varies in the course of time and depends on the maximum power Pmax and of the produced or
consumed power P(t), its expression is given by:
t
FE (t)   αPmax , signe(P( )), t .P( ). (5)
0
The term P( ). represents the value of the power produced or consumed for one period of operation  . The
parameter  represents the purchase or the sale price of an energy unit.

3.3. Use Cost

The use cost FU ( t ) is the sum of the costs respectively of annual maintenance which depends on the capacity
Cmax and the maintenance costs related to wear depending on the production P:

C max  t
FU ( t ) 
8766
.t   . P() .
0
(6)

Where,  is the average annual fixed price related to the servicing and  represents the average fixed price
related to wear.

4. Renewable Energies cost

In our study, we use wind power noted by w and photovoltaic power by S as renewable energy. We seek to
calculate the renewable energies costs after a number of year Nb=20 years of operation. The energy costs are
considered null; FE(t) =0.
We deduce:
F( t )  FI t   FU t  (7)

4.1. Approximation of FI(t)

Once that we fixed the number of damping year Nb, the A(t) term is equal to 1. If it is supposed that during the
20 years, the annual interest rate TI remains constant as well as the purchase and installation total cost keeps also
the same value for the same length of time Nb. Finally, we can consider that the capital cost is a constant value
during the damping years Nb.
Thus:
FI ( t )  FI (8)

4.2. Approximation of FU(t)

The result to fix the parameter Nb, the annual maintenance costs will be constant:

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2868

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

C max 
.N b   0 (9)
8766

If it is considered that during the operation years Nb the average fixed price related to wear is invariable in the
course of time, and then energy cost provided by a renewable source becomes:

FU ( N b )   0   0 .P  FU P  (10)

4.3. Total energy cost

After these approximations, the total energy cost becomes:

F(P)  FI  FU P  (11)

And thus,
F( P )   0   0 .P (12)
Where,
FI   0   0 and  0 are two constant parameters.

5. Formulation of EED problem

The resolution of the influence of wind and photovoltaic power penetration on the economic environmental
dispatch consists in minimizing two objective functions which represent operational cost and emission of
pollutant gases, under constraints.

5.1. Objective functions

5.1.1. Total production cost function

This function regrouped thermal cost, wind, photovoltaic, micro tubines and battery storage cost.

 Thermal cost
The fuel cost function FTH ( P g ) in $/h is represented by a quadratic function as follow [14, 20]:

Ng
  a
FTH P g  i  b i Pgi  c i Pgi2
(13)
i 1
The coefficients a i , b i and c i are appropriate to every production unit, Pgi is the real power output of i-th
generator and N g is the number of thermal generators.

 Wind cost
The wind cost function FW ( Pw' ) of a wind power station can be represented as follows [11]:

Fw (Pw' )  C w1  C w 2 .Pw' (14)

With, Cw1 is the original investment cost and Cw2 is the operation cost.

 Photovoltaic cost
The photovoltaic cost function FSV (PS' ) of photovoltaic power station can be defined by the following function
[20]:

FSV (PS' )  C SV (15)

With, CST1 includes the capital cost and the annual maintenance cost.

 Cost of microturbine
The function cost of a microturbine, can be represented by the following quadratic function [13]:

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2869

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

FMT PMT   d  e.PMT  f .PMT

2
(16)
The coefficients d, e and f are specific to the microturbine, PMT represents the power of the microturbine and the
function FMT is in $/h.
The coefficients of the function cost of the microturbine are as follows:
d  0.4333, e  0.2333 and f  0.0074

 Cost of battery storage

According to the equation (1), the function cost of the storage battery, is given by the following expression:

Fbat ( t )  FI _ bat t   FE _ bat ( t )  FU _ bat t  (17)

The energy cost of the battery is null:

FE _ bat (t )  0 (18)
The capital cost is given by the following expression [16]:

FI _ bat t   372,034.Eb ($) (19)

With Eb is the maximum storage energy capacity of the battery in Wh.

Concerning the cost of implementation of the battery:

 C  t
FU _ bat ( t )  bat max .t    bat . Pbat () . (20)
8766 0

It considers the annual maintenance cost null. With regard to the cost related to the wear of the battery, it recalls
which it is represented by the second part of the use cost function, according to [16], it takes:

 bat  0.1364 ($/KWh) (21)

Finally, the battery function cost is as follows:

t
Fbat ( Pbat , t )  372,034.10 -3 .E b  0,1364.10 -3. P
0
bat ( ). (22)

After Nb=20 years of wear of the battery, the function Fbat Pbat  becomes:

Fbat ( Pbat )  372,034.10 -3 .E b  2,7280.10 -3 .Pbat (23)

It can calculate the total function cost of the network, as the following equation shows it:

       
F1 P g , Pw' , PS' , PMT , Pbat  FTH P g  FW Pw'  FSV PS'  FMT PMT   Fbat (Pbat ) (24)

5.1.2. Emission function

The emission function in ton/h which represents SO2 and NOx emission is a function of the generator output and
is expressed as follow [9, 11]:

 
Ng
F2 ( P g )   i
2   exp  P
  i Pgi   i Pgi i i gi (25)
i 1
Where αi, βi, γi, ξi and  i are the coefficients of emission function corresponding to the i-th generator. These
three parameters are determined by adjustment techniques of curves based on real tests.

5.2. Problem constraints

The problem constraints are four types:

5.2.1. Production capacity constraints

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2870

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

The generated real power of each generator at the bus i is restricted by lower limit Pgimax and upper limit Pgimin :

Pgimin  Pgi  Pgimax , i  1,..., N g (26)

5.2.2. Power balance constraint

The sum of the active powers generated by the generators must cover the required total active power PD and the
active losses in the lines of transmission p. It has then:

Ng
PD  p  (  Pgi  Pw'  PS'  PMT  Pbat )  0 (27)
i 1

5.2.3. Renewable power constraint

The wind and thermal solar power should not exceed the 30% of total power demand:

PW  PS  0.3PD (28)

5.2.4. The battery storage capacity Constraint

max min
The battery power Pbat is limited by a higher limit Pbat and a lower limit Pbat :

min
Pbat  Pbat  Pbat
max
(29)

Thus, the problem to be solved is formulated as follow:

   
Minimize: ( F1 P g , Pw' , PS' , PMT , Pbat , F2 P g )
Under:

Pgimin  Pgi  Pgimax , i  1,......., N g

Ng
PD  p  ( P
i 1
gi  Pw'  PS'  PMT  Pbat )  0

Pw  PS  0.3PD
 Pbat  Optimisation
min
Pbatobjectives
6. Multi Pbat max

p0
6.1. Principle
The multi-objective optimization problem is formulated in general as follow:

Minimize f x    f x  , f x  , ... , f 
  1 N obj x  
 2


 Under : (30)
g j x   0 , j  1,..., M

h k x   0 , k  1,..., K

Where,
N obj : number of objectives functions.
M, K : number of equality and inequality respectively constraints.
x : decision vector.
Two solutions x1 and x2 of such optimization problem, we could have one which dominates the other or none
dominates the other.

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2871

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

In a minimization problem, a solution x1 dominates other solution x2 if the following two conditions are
satisfied:


i  1,2,..., N obj ,  f i  x1   f i  x 2 


j  1,2,..., N obj ,  f j  x1   f j  x 2 
(31)


Defined by X f the satisfiesability set, that is to say: X f  x  X / g ( x )  0 et h ( x )  0 
Where
g ( x )  (g 1 ( x ), g 2 ( x ),..., g M ( x )) T
and h ( x )  (h 1 ( x ), h 2 ( x ),..., h K ( x )) T
A decision vector x  X f is none dominated compared to a set A  X f , if:

a  A / a  x (32)

The optimize solutions set that are non-dominated within the entire search space are denoted as Pareto-optimal
and the set of objectives vectors corresponding constitute the Pareto-optimal set or Pareto-optimal front.

6.2. SPEA Approach (Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm)

In [3, 14], Zitzler and Thiele propose an elitist evolutionary approach to solve a multi objective problem which
is called Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm (SPEA). The Elitism is introduced by an external Pareto set.
This set stores the non-dominated solutions funded during the resolution of the problem. In order to reduce the
size of the external set, an average link based on hierarchical clustering algorithm is used without destroying the
characteristics of the trade-off front.
Noting by:
P : the current population.
Pt : the external population.
N pop : the size of current population.
Fi :the fitness of an individual i.
S i :the strength of an individual i.
The assignment procedure to calculate the fitness values is the following:

Step 1: For each individual i  Pt is assigned a real value S i  0 , 1 called strength. S i is proportional to the
number of individuals in the current population dominated by the individual i in the external Pareto set. It can be
calculated as follows:
For an individual j  Pt
j / j  Pt and individual j is dominated by i
Si  (33)
N pop  1

The strength of a Pareto solution is also its fitness: Fi  S i .

Step 2: The fitness of an individual j  Pt is the sum of the strengths of all external Pareto individuals i  Pt
dominated by j  Pt . We add one in odder to guarantee that Pareto solutions are most likely to be produced.
Fj  1   Si (34)
iPt , i dominate j

where F j  1 , N pop 
The clustering algorithm is described by the following steps:

Step 1: To initialise clustering set C; each individual i  Pt constitutes a distinct cluster:

C  i  .
iP t
(35)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2872

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Step 2: if the number of cluster is lower or equal to maximum size of external set ( N pop ), go to step 5. Else,
go to step 3.

Step 3: Calculate the distance between each pair of clusters. The distance dc between two clusters c1 and
c 2  C is defined as the average distance between two pairs of individuals from each cluster:


1
dc  d i1i2 (36)
n1 n2 i1c1 , i2c2

n 1 and n 2 are respectively the numbers of individuals in clusters c1 and c 2 .

Step 4: Find the pair of clusters corresponding to the minimal distance d c between them. Combine into a
large one C  c1  c . and return to step 2.
2

Step 5: Find the centroid of each cluster. Select the nearest individual in this cluster to the centroid as a
representative individual and remove all other individuals from the cluster.
Step 6: Thus, the reduced Pareto set Pt 1 is computed by uniting these representatives: Pt 1  cC c .

7. Numeric simulations and comments

7.1. Presentation of the Test Network

The structure of the test system is shown in Figure 3. This network is composed of 30 nodes, 41 lines and 8
generators.
In this study, we use the wind and photovoltaic coefficients cost as follows [20]:
Cw1= 20.728, Cw2= 0.0354, CSV= 2.3.

In simulation, we study the case already presented in the formulation part of the problem.

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2873

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

PV w

Fig.3. Single-line diagram of IEEE 30-bus test system with two renewable power stations

The minimal and maximal values of the active powers of the thermal generating nodes in per unit are indicated
by the equation (37):
0.05  Pgi  1.5, i  1,..., N g (37)

The minimal and maximal value of the energy storage power system in per unit is given by the equation (38):

0.015  Pbat  0.1 (38)

The maximum power of the microturbine is PMT  14 Mw [16]. In our study, we use 10 identical
microturbines.

7.2. Results and comments

7.2.1. Mono objective optimization

Figure 4 and Figure 5 represents the evolution of mono objective optimization during generations of emissions
and total cost for total power demand PD= 2.8pu.

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2874

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig. 4 . Convergence of cost objective function

Fig. 5 . Convergence of emission objective function

The analysis of two figures shows that by increasing the generations, emission and cost functions converge
towards their minimal values which are respectively 0.1864 ton/h and 487.5485 $/h.

The machines productions values in two cases of convergence are given in table 1.

Table1. Active power buses of two convergence cases

Minimal cost Minimal

($/h) emission
(ton/h)
487.5485 0.1864
Pw(pu) 0.8014 0.8141
PS(pu) 0.0384 0.0258
Pg1(pu) 0.2248 0.4698
Pg2(pu) 0.5998 0.6003
Pg3(pu) 0.4844 0.6210
Pg4(pu) 0.2131 0.4110
Pg5(pu) 0.3038 0.5579
Pg6(pu) 0.1333 0.5398

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2875

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

7.2.2. Bi objectives optimization

For the study of the bi objectives optimization of functions cost/emission, we select the total power demand PD
varies between 0.8pu and 4pu. We presents in the following some results of the Bi objectives optimization of
the emissions of polluting gases and the total cost functions by taking account of the participations of the
batteries systems and microturbines for the two renewable energies systems.

The Figure 6 represents the Pareto optimal front for a bi objectives optimization of the total cost and emission
functions for the total power demand PD = 1.5244 pu.

Fig. 6 . Pareto optimal front

From figure6, we present the limiting values for cost and emission as well as the powers to be generated relating
to the value of total power demand. The results are summarized by table 2.
Table2. The limit values of cost/emission Pareto front

PD (pu) 1.5244
Mini. cost ($/h) 362.2
Corres. emiss(ton/h) 0.2149
PD (pu) 1.5244
Mini.emiss(ton/h) 0.1885
Corres. cost ($/h) 697.9

By exploiting figures 7, we can note the participations of the renewable power stations as well as the storage
batteries and the microturbines in the wind and photovoltaic systems. It is also noticed that at minimal cost, if
the total power demand increases then the powers of the two systems of wind and photovoltaic energy
production increase by advantage.
Minim al cost Minim al em ission

0,5
0,45
0,4
0,35
Power (pu)

0,3
0,25
0,2
0,15
0,1
0,05
0
1

6
PS

_s
s
_w
w
Pw

s
w

Pg

Pg

Pg

Pg

Pg

Pg
P’

T_
P’

T_

at
at

PM
Pb
PM
Pb

Fig.7. Active power buses in the case of minimal cost and minimal emission for PD1=1.5244 pu.

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2876

 Dr. Brini Saoussen et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

8. CONCLUSION
This paper formulates the problem of the Dispatching Environmental Economic (DEE) of hybrid electrical
networks including wind power and photovoltaic power. The problem model is determined by posed objectives
functions which presented by total cost and emission of polluting gases function under constraints.
Mono-objective and bi-objective optimizations take account of the presence of the lead-acid batteries as devices
of energy storage and whole of microturbines. The resolution of the problem determines the distribution in
networks that comprise generating units that use renewable energy sources.

References
[1] GP. Granelli, M. Montagna, GL. Pasini, P. Marannino (1992), Emission constrained dynamic dispatch. Electr. Power syst. Res, PP.
56-64.
[2] Debasish Mondal, Abhijit Chakrabarti and Aparajita Sengupta (2010). Selection of optimum location of power system stabilizer in a
multimachine power system,Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering Research, pp. 001-013.
[3] A. Oudalov, D. Chartouni, and C. Ohler (2007), Optimizing a Battery energy Storage System for Primary Frequency Control. IEEE
Trans.Power Systems, vol. 22, n° 3, pp. 1259-1266.
[4] E. Omine, T. Senjyu, E. Billy Muhando, A. Yona, H. Ekine, T. Funabashi, A. Y.f Saber (2008). Coordinated Control of Battery
Energy Storage System and Diesel Generator for Isolated Power System Stabilization. 2nd IEEE International Conference on Power
and Energy(PECon 08), December 1-3, 2008.
[5] C.E. Lin and G.L. Viviani (1984). Hierarchical economic dispatch for piecewise quadratic cost functions. IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 103, No. 6, pp. 1170-1175.
[6] M.A. Abido, (2003). A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multi objectives environmental/economic dispatch. Electrical power and
energy systems. PP. 97-105
[7] D. Saheb-Koussaa, M. Haddadib, M. Belhamel (2009). Economic and technical study of a hybrid system (wind–photovoltaic–diesel)
for rural electrification in Algeria. Electr. Power sys . Res., vol. 86, n°7-8, p. 1024-1030.
[8] L. Wang and C. Singh (2006). Tadeoff between Risk and Cost in Economic Dispatch Including Wind Power Penetration Using
Praticle Swarm Optimisation. International Conference on Power System Technology.
[9] V. Miranda and P. S. Hang (2005). Economic dispatch model with fuzzy constraints and attitudes of dispatchers. IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 2143-2145.
[10] L. F. Wang and C. Singh (2006). Multi-objective stochastic power dispatch through a modified particle swarm optimization algorithm,
Special Session on Applications of Swarm Intelligence to Power Systems, Proceedings of IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium,
Indianapolis. pp. 127-135.
[11] Zhao et al./ JZhejiang Univ SCI (2005). Multiple objective particle swarm optimisation technique for economic load dispatch 6A(5) :
420-427.
[12] M. Taghi Ameli, S. Moslehpour, M. Shamlo (2008). Economical load distribution in power networks that include hybrid solar power
plants, Electric Power Systems Research 78, 1147–1152.
[13] A. M. Faisal, N. K. Heikki (2007). Online Management of MicroGrid with Battery Storage Using Multiobjective Optimization,
POWERENG, 12-14, Setubal, Portugal.
[14] R. Bhatnagar and S. Rahmen (1986). Dispatch of direct load control for fuel cost minimisation. IEEE Trans. on PS, Vol-PWRS-1, pp.
96-102.
[15] Brini S., Hadj Abdallah H., and Ouali A (2007). Influence of Wind Power Penetration on the Economic Dispatch,. International
Conference on Electical Engineering Design and Technologies (ICCEEDT), Hammamet Tunisia.
[16] O.Gergaud, (2002). Modélisation énergétique et optimisation économique d'un système de production éolien et photovoltaïque couplé
au réseau et associé à un accumulateur. Thèse de Doctorat de l’École Normale Supérieure de Cachan.
[17] J.M. Pearce (2009), Expanding photovoltaic penetration with residential distributed generation from hybrid solar photovoltaic and
combined heat and power systems. Electr. Power sys . Res., vol. 34, n°11, p. 1947-1954.
[18] S.N.singh, SUMIT Kumar Jha, SUDHIR Kumar Sinha (2011), Wind driven mobile charging of automobile battery, International
Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST), Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 68-74.
[19] J. Zahavi, L. Eisenberg, (1985). Economic–environmental power dispatch. IEEE Trans. Syst., Vol. 5, No. 5, PP. 485–489.
[20] Warsono, D. J. King, and C. S. Özveren, (2007). Economic load dispatch for a power system with renewable energy using Direct
Search Method, 1228-1233.

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.06 June 2012 2877