Optimization of Isolated Microgrid Sizing Considering the Trade-Off Between Costs and Power Supply Reliability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolated microgrids with green hydrogen storage offer a promising solution for supplying electricity to remote communities where conventional grid expansion is infeasible. Designing such systems requires balancing two conflicting objectives: minimizing installation and operation costs while maximizing supply reliability. This paper proposes a multi-objective optimization methodology, based on the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II, to determine the optimal sizing of multiple microgrid components. This sizing explicitly addresses both the power capacities (kW) (for photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, electrolyzers, and fuel cells) and the energy storage capacities (kWh and kg) (for batteries and hydrogen tanks, respectively), aiming to generate Pareto-optimal solutions that explore this trade-off. The proposed method evaluates the trade-off by minimizing two objectives: the Net Present Value, which includes investment, replacement, and maintenance costs, and the total expected interruption hours, derived from an hourly energy balance analysis. The methodology’s effectiveness is validated using four distinct case studies. Three of these are based on real locations with specific load profiles and climate data. To test the method’s robustness, a fourth case study uses a fictitious load profile, designed with pronounced seasonal variations and a clear distinction between weekday and weekend consumption. Our results demonstrate the method’s ability to identify efficient hybrid renewable topologies combining photovoltaic and/or wind generation, batteries, and hydrogen systems (electrolyzer, storage tank, and fuel cell). The obtained cost–reliability curves provide practical decision-support tools for system planners.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".