MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361760000 · doi:10.35682/jje.v1i1.59

Distributed Energy Resources Electrical Systems: Current status and Future prospective

2022· article· en· W4361760000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Khaled Alawasa

Bibliographic record

VenueJordan Journal of Energy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistributed generationEnvironmental economicsPayback periodElectricityReliability engineeringInvestment (military)Electricity generationComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Electric power systemBusinessAutomotive engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Power (physics)Production (economics)EngineeringEconomicsElectrical engineeringRenewable energyMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed generation (DG) is an approach that utilizes small scale technologies to generate electricity close to the consumer side. Generally, DG can provide high reliability, high security, low cost electricity, and less environment impact. This paper gives an overview of some of the most significant issues related to the distributed generation (DG). It discusses different aspects of DG, such as definitions, technologies, motivation for moving to DG, some drawbacks associated with the centralized systems which have led to DG. DGs challenges, standards and polices are also presented. In addition, the economic impact and a price comparison between central power plants and DGs are discussed. Also a case study was conducted in order to study the impact of using distributed generations in Edmonton downtown. Three distributed generations, combustion turbine types with 25 MW capacities each have been implemented in Edmonton power system. The total cost estimations have been studied in this case, and the results have revealed that this type of distributed generation is inexpensive and more economic compared with price from the utility. It was estimated from the calculation that the price for the energy is about ¢6.27/kWh while the current electricity price from the utility is ¢8.561/kWh, for long term estimation it is found that the proposed CTs in this project has 11 years for a payback period, after that the project start earning money which is relatively good and wroth investment. The second part of the study analyses the impact of DGs on the system losses using Power-World software, and the result have proven that the loss is significantly decreases when the DG systems are in operation, hence DGs help reducing the costs that associated with the system’s losses.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJordan Journal of EnergySame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207