sustainability

Article
Multi-Objective Energy Optimization with Load and
Distributed Energy Source Scheduling in the Smart Power Grid
Ahmad Alzahrani 1 , Ghulam Hafeez 2, * , Sajjad Ali 3 , Sadia Murawwat 4 , Muhammad Iftikhar Khan 5 ,
Khalid Rehman 6 and Azher M. Abed 7

1 Electrical Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Najran University, Najran 11001, Saudi Arabia;
[email protected]
2 Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Mardan 23200, Pakistan
3 Department of Telecommunication Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology,
Mardan 23200, Pakistan; [email protected]
4 Department of Electrical Engineering, Lahore College for Women University, Lahore 51000, Pakistan;
[email protected]
5 Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar 25000, Pakistan;
[email protected]
6 Department of Electrical Engineering, CECOS University of IT and Emerging Sciences,
Peshawar 25100, Pakistan
7 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Techniques Engineering Department, Al-Mustaqbal University College,
Babylon 51001, Iraq; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Multi-objective energy optimization is indispensable for energy balancing and reliable
operation of smart power grid (SPG). Nonetheless, multi-objective optimization is challenging due to
uncertainty and multi-conflicting parameters at both the generation and demand sides. Thus, opting
for a model that can solve load and distributed energy source scheduling problems is necessary.
This work presents a model for operation cost and pollution emission optimization with renewable
generation in the SPG. Solar photovoltaic and wind are renewable energy which have a fluctuating
Citation: Alzahrani, A.; Hafeez, G.; and uncertain nature. The proposed system uses the probability density function (PDF) to address
Ali, S.; Murawwat, S.; Khan, M.I.;
uncertainty of renewable generation. The developed model is based on a multi-objective wind-
Rehman, K.; Abed, A.M.
driven optimization (MOWDO) algorithm to solve a multi-objective energy optimization problem.
Multi-Objective Energy Optimization
To validate the performance of the proposed model a multi-objective particle swarm optimization
with Load and Distributed Energy
(MOPSO) algorithm is used as a benchmark model. Findings reveal that MOWDO minimizes the
Source Scheduling in the Smart
Power Grid. Sustainability 2023, 15,
operational cost and pollution emission by 11.91% and 6.12%, respectively. The findings demonstrate
9970. https://doi.org/10.3390/ that the developed model outperforms the comparative models in accomplishing the desired goals.
su15139970
Keywords: demand response; multi-objective optimization; distributed generation; solar; wind;
Academic Editors: Noradin Ghadimi
batteries; smart grid
and Navid Razmjooy

Received: 27 April 2023

Revised: 8 June 2023
Accepted: 12 June 2023 1. Introduction
Published: 22 June 2023
Around the globe, pollution emissions and global warming are major concerns to
the environment and sustainability causing climate change [1,2]. The demand response
(DR) and renewable energy sources (RES) emerged to control pollution emissions from
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
power system networks [3,4]. Thus, power sector regulatory bodies are attempting to
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. proliferate and penetrate RESs, such as wind, solar, fuel cell, etc., to meet growing electricity
This article is an open access article demand with low pollution emissions [5,6]. With the emergence of the smart power grid
distributed under the terms and (SPG) [7], the utility can accommodate RESs and initiate DR programs, contribute to
conditions of the Creative Commons reducing pollution emissions, operation cost minimization, power loss reduction, and
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// improved reliability [8]. The utility involves consumers in DR programs to engage in
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ the electricity market with the aim of addressing energy optimization issues, including
4.0/). contingency problems, RES output forecast errors, pollution emissions, operational cost,

Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15139970 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 2 of 21

and distributed grounding [9]. The DR programs encourage consumers to adapt their
energy consumption profile, including shifting load, and curtailing load during high-price
hours, to minimize pollution emissions and operation costs [10,11].
Numerous studies have been undertaken regarding energy optimization in the SPG,
covering various aspects and viewpoints such as dynamic pricing policies [12], recognition
methods [13], DFT phasor estimators [14], control algorithms [15], etc. However, RES
modelling, scheduling, and optimization are necessary before addressing the above aspects
and viewpoints in the literature. For instance, authors developed a model to cater for the
erratic and uncertain behaviour of RESs, such as the wind [16]. Likewise, PDF and CDF
are studied in [17,18] for the uncertainty modelling perspectives of RESs such as wind and
solar. Similarly, distributed generation and microgrid equal power sharing and control are
addressed in [19,20]. Moreover, consumers can reduce their bills by participating in DR pro-
grams. DR programs are implemented in [21] for SPG cost and carbon emission reduction.
The DR motivate domestic, industrial, and commercial consumers to schedule their load
demand and optimize energy via incentive-based payments for energy cost minimization.
Optimization methods such as Lyapunov optimization and distributed algorithm are used
to optimize the cost of microgrids with the high proliferation of RESs [22,23]. A multi-
objective optimization model for hybrid systems haseen developed using multi-criterion
decisions for environmental and economic aspect optimization [24]. Similarly, the NSGA-
II model was developed considering rural home’s flexible load scheduling for financial
benefit and user comfort maximization [25]. The authors of [26] introduced shuffle frog
leaping and teaching/learning-based optimization algorithms for different prospectives of
optimization such as energy utilization , energy cost reduction, and creating energy balance
between utility and consumers. A robust optimization via Monte Carlo simulations (MCS)
was introduced in [27] to accommodate the high penetration of RESs using storage batteries.
The primary goal of this research included reducing energy consumption, minimizing PAR,
optimizing electricity expenses at peak demand, and minimizing energy wastage through
various techniques: real-time pricing (RTP), time of use (TOU), optimum load management
(OLM), decision support tool (DST) and critical peak pricing (CPP). A multi-objective
optimization model was introduced in [28] for microgrid carbon capturing. Likewise, a
multi-objective approach was developed for intelligent decision making of PMU placement
in the grid [29].
The authors of [30] developed a residential sector energy optimization model to control
consumer load behaviour, balance supplied power, reduce electricity bills, and improve
reliability. A distributed algorithm was introduced in [31,32] to solve economic dispatch
problems via a multi-objective approach. The authors of [33] introduced a model consider-
ing electric vehicle (EV) scheduling for the charge and discharge process using an adaptive
simulated annealing particle swarm optimization algorithm to provide financial relief and
reduce emissions. A mixed integer non-linear programming (MINLP) model was proposed
to minimize pollution emissions and operational costs in a microgrid [34]. The obtained
results of the MINLP were compared with existing algorithms for validation. Optimizing
energy purchasing and selling with storage batteries was discussed in [35]. An optimization
model for DSM in a SPG was studied, optimizing the operation of shiftable/adjustable elec-
trical and thermal load considering RESs, battery storage, etc., to minimize cost and shave
peaks [36]. A stochastic multi-objective model considering RESs and EVs was presented
in [37] to minimize operating costs and voltage deviation. A fuzzy control mechanism was
introduced in [38–40] to balance microgrid and power grid voltage and current sharing.
Electricity theft detection and residential load decomposition was addressed in [41,42]. The
authors of [43] developed a chaotic hybrid sine cosine pattern search algorithm to solve
the optimization problem in power system stabilizers. The authors of [44] addressed the
golden search optimization algorithm for numerical function optimization. The devel-
oped model scheduled load using stochastic techniques under DR. Findings illustrated
that the developed model outperformed with/without DR in minimizing cost and peak
energy consumption. GA and MOGA were adopted in [45] for the single/multi-objective
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 3 of 21

optimization of environmental and economic aspects. Similarly, multi-objective stochastic

algorithms considering DR, energy storage, and RESs for retailer energy cost minimization
and clean energy utilization maximization were discussed in [46]. In the work [47], an
optimization model was implemented, modelling the erratic behaviour/uncertainty of
solar and wind energy. In [48], MOPSO was developed to minimize pollution emissions
and operational costs in the SPG. Both operating expenses and emissions were decreased
at the same time. The proposed model successfully optimized the operating expenses and
emissions compared to existing models. The model developed in this study is compared
with previously published models, as listed in Table 1.
The above-discussed works comprehensively analyse the existing literature, inves-
tigating different aspects, perspectives, and methodologies, and develop an in-depth
understanding of achieving objectives including operating cost, pollution emission, etc.
Nevertheless, how the multi-objective optimization problem is addressed differs from the
existing literature in terms of methodology, techniques, scenario, and validation. This work
develops a multi-objective optimization model for scheduling load and distributed energy
sources in the SPG to minimize operational costs and pollution emissions. Furthermore,
this work employs the multi-objective wind-driven optimization (MOWDO) method, incor-
porating the Pareto criterion and non-linear sorting based on a fuzzy mechanism to solve
the multi-objective optimization problem. The novelty and technical advancements of this
research are summarized below.
• The PDF is used to address the uncertainty of wind and PV renewable energy to
participate effectively in energy optimization.
• Optimization model using the MOWDO technique is devised with a fuzzy approach
to solve multi-objective optimization issues of industrial, residential, and commercial
consumers.
• The developed model’s results are better than the benchmark model in terms of both
operational expenses and pollution emissions.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 extensively describes the developed sys-
tem. The created multi-objective optimization algorithm MOWDO is presented in Section 3.
Finally, the simulation results are discussed in Section 4, followed by the conclusion in
Section 5.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 4 of 21

Table 1. Comparison of the developed model with existing models in the discussed literature.

Refs. Objectives Techniques Loads Optimization Uncertainty

Operation cost, pollution emission, and load curtailment
[16] MOWDO and MOGA Responsive and non-responsive Multi-objective PDF
cost minimization
[22,23] Energy cost minimization TLBO, SFL, EDGE Residential load Single-objective –
[49] Environmental, economic, and optimal shifting Augmented e-constraint Thermal and electrical shiftable load Multi-objective PDF
[50] Operation expenses and environmental pollution minimization MOWDO and MOGA Responsive and non-responsive Multi-objective PDF
[27] Purchase cost and user’s dissatisfaction minimization MOGA Domestic load Multi-objective –
Operating cost and environmental governance cost minimiza- Adaptive simulated annealing particle
[33] Residential, commercial, and industrial Multi-objective PDF
tion swarm optimization algorithm
[34] Economic and environmental cost minimization MINLP Residential Multi-objective –
Operation costs, emission pollution, loss of energy supply prob-
[51] e-constraint Thermal and electrical load Multi-objective –
ability
Loss of power supply probability and energy cost minimization,
[35] MOPSO Village load Multi-objective –
and maximizing renewable generation availability
[36] Peak shaving and cost curtailment MINLP Electrical and thermal load Single-objective –
[37] Operating cost and voltage deviation minimization e-constraint IEEE 34-bus test system Multi-objective Roulette wheel
[52] Emission, cost, LOLE, and deviation e-constraint Thermal and electrical load Multi-objective –
Single/Multi-
[45] Least cost and least environmental footprint GA and MOGA Residential –
objective
Retailers energy cost minimization and clean energy utilization
[46] Stochastic algorithm Electricity retailers Multi-objective –
maximization
Log normal distribution
[53] Operation costs, emission pollution and customer satisfaction Shuffled frog leaping algorithm Thermal and electrical load Multi-objective
function
[48] Economical and environmental situation optimization MOPSO Domestic, industrial, and commercial Multi-objective PDF
[54] Operation cost and pollution emission MOGA and MOPSO Domestic, industrial, and commercial Multi-objective PDF
[55] Environment and economic, and load curtailment cost e-constraint Thermal and electrical load Multi-objective –
Operational cost, clean energy utilization, pollution emission,
This work MOWDO and MOPSO Domestic, industrial, and commercial Multi-objective MCS and PDF
uncertainty handling of generation and load
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 5 of 21

2. Proposed System Model

Due to the growing need for energy, the world is evolving from traditional energy
sources to RESs and combined RESs, forming distributed generation (DG). The SPG accom-
modates DG and facilitates bidirectional communication between the energy source and
the load for energy optimization. This two-way/bidirectional communication is possible
with the advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) of the SPG that stores and processes
data from consumers and sources through smart meters and sends it back to the service
provider. This real-time information exchange allows users to balance power generation
and load consumption via DR incentives. A microgrid can either work in solitary mode
or be mixed with renewable energy in harmony to provide energy. The developed system
model is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The developed multi-objective model for optimizing energy usage in the SPG.

2.1. Consumers
The developed model considers three types of consumers:
• Domestic;
• Industrial;
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 6 of 21

• Commercial.
where (RC):RP(r, t) = RC(r, t), ( IC ):IP(i, t) = IC (i, t), and CP(c, t) = CC(c, t) are for the
above consumers, respectively. There are different load categories for consumers, shiftable
and non-shiftable loads. Non-shiftable loads are used around the clock and cannot be
turned off or shifted. These types of loads include fans, bulbs, refrigerators, etc. A domestic
consumer can change home appliances, such as washing machines, iron, and air conditioner,
to avoid high prices. The utility service provider provides cost incentives for consumers to
shift load from on-peak hours (bearing high cost) to off-peak hours where the tariff rate is
relatively lower. This helps in peak shaving and reduces power demand over peak hours.

2.2. RES Uncertainty Modelling

This study considers two types of RESs, namely solar and wind, that exhibit uncer-
tainty, stochasticity, and intermittency due to their dependence on environmental factors.
To smooth-out RES fluctuations, batteries are used with RES [56,57]. In contrast, to model
the uncertainty of RESs, probabilistic models are developed because wind speed and solar
irradiance are stochastic variables that use meteorological data to estimate their genera-
tion potential. A detailed discussion on wind and solar energy uncertainty modelling is
as follows.

2.2.1. Wind Energy Modelling

The wind is a renewable source used to run wind turbines (WTs) to convert wind
speed into electrical energy [58–60]. The energy generated from WTs depends upon the
turbine’s size and shape, wind availability, and wind speed quotient [61]. The bigger the
turbine blades, the more energy is produced from the turbine [62]. Likewise, WTs in higher
wind speeds generates more energy. Due to the stochastic nature of wind speed, we propose
a probabilistic model for estimating the amount of energy it can produce. To model the
behaviour of wind speed, the PDF is presented in [63], where αω , β w , etc. are scale/shape
parameter, which assumed to be 2. Wind speed is modelled using PDF, depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2. PDF for wind speed uncertainty modelling.

Let vm be the mean wind speed, then the scale parameter of a particular site is given
below [54].
 !
vwind 2

Fv (vwind ) = 1 − exp − (1)
αω
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 7 of 21

 !
vwind 2

2
f v (vwind ) = 2 vwind exp − (2)
αω αw

Substituting aw as an average wind speed in PDF, the Rayleigh distribution function

for wind energy of the above equations is obtained as follows [54].
   
π vwind π vwind
Fv (vwind ) = exp − (3)
2 v m2 4 v m2
 π  v 2 !
wind
f v (vwind ) = 1 − exp − (4)
4 vm

The output characteristic of wind energy can be obtained using Equation (5) adopted
from [54,64] and modelled below.


 0 vwind < vci
 P = (vwind −vci ) v ≤ v


R (vr −vci ) ci wind < vr
pw (vwind ) = (5)
 PR

 vr ≤ vwind < vco

0 vwind ≥ vco


where vr , vci and vwind are the rated, cut in, and factual wind speed, respectively. The PR is
the rated power of WTs. The parameters used for WTs used in this proposed model have
vci = 3.5 ms ; vco = 18 ms ; vr = 17.5 ms . Figure 3 shows wind speed profile used in wind energy
generation.

Figure 3. The wind speed measured in meter per second pattern.

2.2.2. Solar Photovoltaic Modelling

Solar is a form of renewable energy that produces energy from solar radiation and
temperature via the PV effect [65]. The solar-generated energy depends on the intensity of
the sunlight: solar radiation and temperature [66,67]. The solar irradiance uncertainty is
modelled via PDF functions in Equation (6) as [54].
(
r ( α + β ) α −1
r ( α )r ( β )
si (1 − si ) β−1 0 ≤ si ≤ 1, α ≥ 0
f B (si ) = (6)
0 otherwise
Z si
r ( α + β ) α −1
FB = si (1 − si ) β−1 dsiβ ≥ (7)
0 r ( α )r ( β )
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 8 of 21

where si denotes solar radiations. The α/β are parameters, where the average solar irradi-
ance and standard deviation from the PDF are calculated and used below [54].
   
µ (1 + µ ) µ (1 + µ )
α=µ − 1 β = ( 1 − µ ) − 1 (8)
σ2 σ2
Solar output power is obtained using Equation (9) [68–70].

ph (si ) = Ac × η × si (9)
where ph (si ) denotes the PV output power obtained from the solar irradiance si, η repre-
sents PV module efficiency, and Ac PV module is surface area. The uncertainty of the PV
output power with PDF is modelled in Equation (10).

α −1
 r (α+ β)

 r(α)r( β) ( ph (si )) (1 − ph (si )) β−1
f Ppv Ppv = i f Ppv ∈ [0, ph (si )] (10)

0 otherwise


The solar PV output power is depicted in Figure 4. The bids and emissions coefficient
of PV are listed in Table 2.

Figure 4. Solar irradiance profile.

Table 2. Bids and emissions coefficient of the sources considered in the developed model.

Source Bid Start/Shut Cost CO2 SO2 NOx Pmin Pmx

WT 1.073 0 0 0 0 0 15
PV 2.584 0 0 0 0 0 25
Bat 0.38 0 10 0.0002 0.001 −30 −30
MT 0.457 0.96 720 0.0036 0.1 6 30
Grid - 0 950 0.5 2.1 −30 30

2.3. Objective Functions

The developed model balances demand and generation to optimize pollution emission
and operational cost as objectives considering DGs and demands like residential, industrial,
and commercial. Objectives are defined as follows.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 9 of 21

2.3.1. Operational Cost

The first objective function is operational cost optimization. For all the sources partici-
pating in energy production, the cost function is subdivided into energy reserve cost and
exchange with the utility grid as well as the cost of starting up and shutting down energy
production units. Our energy production unit, which includes diesel generators, fuel cells,
microturbines, wind, and solar energy systems, operates in coordination to supply energy
consistently and meet energy demands. The cost function is modelled as follows [71].

T
minf 1( x ) = ∑ STDG (t) + costDG (t) + costGd (t) + costs (t) (11)
t =1

Ng
STDG (t) = ∑ SDGi |Ui (t) − Ui (t − 1)| (12)
i =1

cos tGd (t) = UBy (t) PGd−By (t) BGd−By (t)

(13)
−Usell (t) PGd−sell (t) BGd−sell (t)
Ng
Cos t DG(t) = ∑ Ui (t) PDGi (t) BDGi (t) (14)
i =1

Ns
u j (t) × Psj (t) × Bsj (t)+

cos ts (t) = ∑ Ssj (t) × u j (t) − u j (t − 1)
(15)
j =1

SDGi (t) and Ssj (t) denote the startup or shutdown costs for the turbine and storage units,
respectively, PGd-By (t) indicates the real power purchased from the utility, and PGd-sell (t)
refers to the real power sold to the utility. The bids trade (purchase and sell) with the power
company are BGd-By (t) and BGd-sell (t), respectively, are listed in Table 2. PDGi (t) and Psj (t)
are the actual output power of the generators and battery storage, respectively. Likewise,
Bsj (t) and BDGi (t) are the bids of the storage devices and DGs, respectively.

2.3.2. Pollution Emissions

Pollution emissions comprise the quantity of pollution emitted from DGs, generators,
and utility grids, mathematically modelled in the pollution function below [71].
(
Ng
∑i=1 [Ui (t) PDGi (t) EDGi (t)] + . . .
min f 2( x ) = (16)
∑ Ns

j=1 U j ( t ) Psj ( t ) Esj ( t ) + PGd ( t ) EGd ( t )

where Esi (t), EDGi (t), and EGd (t) are pollution emissions measured in kgMWh−1 for the
generator units, DGs, and utility, respectively.

2.4. Constraints
The developed model ensures optimal energy optimization of the SPG by considering
the following constraints.

2.4.1. Energy Balancing Constraints

The power generation (DGs, generator, power grid, etc.) must equal the net load
demand to ensure energy balance. Energy balancing constraints are defined as follows [71].
Ng Ns
∑ PDGi (t) + ∑ Psj (t) + UBy (t) PBy (t) PGd−By (t)
i =1 j =1
(17)
NL
= ∑ PDemand (t) + Usell (t) PGd−sell (t)
L =1
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 10 of 21

where NL is demand levels number and PDemand (t) represents power demand to be met by
the SPG.

2.4.2. Power Threshold Constraint

The power originating from each source is limited by the source’s minimum and
maximum power capacity thresholds, mathematically modelled as follows [71].

PDGi,min (t) ≤ PDGi (t) ≤ PDGi,max (t)

Psj,min (t) ≤ Psj (t) ≤ Psj,max (t) (18)
pGd, min ( t ) ≤ PGd (t) ≤ PGd,max (t)

where PDGi,max (t), Psj,max (t), and PGd,max (t) is the maximum real power-generating units of
ith DGs, jth storage system and the utility, respectively. Furthermore, PDGi,min (t), Psj,min (t),
and PGd,min (t) are minimum power from the aforementioned sources, respectively.

2.4.3. Battery Constraints

Batteries charging and discharging are limited by their minimum and maximum
charging and discharging capacity limits, modelled below.

Bess (t) = Bess (t − 1) + ηchg (t) Pchg (t)∆t × Ichg

1
− ∆t × Idischg + Ichg (t)
ηdischg (t) (19)
Bess,min 6 Bess (t) 6 Bess,max Pchg (t)
6 Pchg,max ; Pdischg (t) 6 Pdischg,max

Bess represents stored energy in battery. Likewise, Pchg and Pdischg show the charge and
discharge power for duration δt, respectively, while ηchg and ηdischg denote the battery
charging/discharging efficiency, respectively. Bess,min and Bess,max show the lower and
upper limits for energy storage in the battery, respectively, and Pchg,max and Pdischg,max
denote maximum charge/discharge battery power for a period of δt, respectively.
The bids and emissions coefficient of sources, such as WTs, PVs, batteries, generators,
and power grids, are listed in Table 2.

3. Developed Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms

The developed model adopted the MOWDO algorithm due to its capability of handling
conflicting constraints, equality/inequality constraints, and multi-conflict functions to
achieve the desired objectives. The air parcels in the MOWDO algorithm have positions
and velocities with five benchmark functions: Kita, Schaffer, Kursawe, ZDT1, and ZDT4,
for solving optimization problems, as illustrated in Algorithm 1.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 11 of 21

Algorithm 1: MOWDO algorithm for multi-objective energy optimization.

Desired results:
Minimized cost of operation and pollution emissions;
Parameters initialization:
Pop. size, Max iteration, upper/lower Bounds, Pressure function, parcels
position;
MOWDO Max velocity (vold ) = ±[0.5] Pressure function evaluation:
In population at each iteration for each member evaluate pressure function;
In population, assign Pareto-front to all members according to sorting using,
j −1
Uv = (1 − k ) × Ub − gXb + j RT ( Xmx − Xb )
e.g., defined below. 1
× j k × uk otherd
Archived population members with Pareto fronts are considered rank 1.
Non-dominated Pareto-fronts are global best solutions.
Velocity update
Adjust upper/lower bounds with stopping criterion;
while iter < Max. iter do
for j=1 do
find pareto-fronts;
if Iter=200? then
Check archived population and select pareto-fronts rank 1 members,
which is the final solution otherwise, go back to step 3 depicted in
flowchart 5
end
if Iter 6= 200? then
Return back to step 1 depicted in flowchart 5;
end
if fit value > desired value then
Go back to step 1 depicted in flowchart 5;
end
end
for k = 1 do
for j = 1 do
Determine coefficient of fitness function ;
find pareto fronts;
Determine global optimal, i.e., final best solution
end
end
end

MOWDO uses Pareto-front ranks to determine the global best solution [16].

3.1. Schaffer Benchmark Function

This function’s lower/upper bounds for variables are [−103 , 103 ], and the optimal
solution is bounded as [0, 2]. The Schaffer function is modelled as follows.

f 1 ( k ) = k2 , f 2 ( k ) = ( k − 2)2 (20)
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 12 of 21

3.2. Kita Function

This function’s variable is bounded as [0, 7], and the multi-objective functions are
defined as follows.
f 1 (k1 , k2 ) = −k1 2 + k2 (21)
and
k1
f 2 (k1 , k2 ) = + k2 + 1 (22)
2
subject to:
k1 13 k 15
+ k2 ≤ , 1 + , 5k1 + k2 ≤ 30 (23)
6 2 2 2
The function is designed to mitigate the impact of pressure.

3.3. Kursawe Function

This function’s bounded variables are [−5, 5], and their multi-objective function is
defined below:
N −1 q
f 1 (k ) = ∑ (−10 exp(−0.2 k2 i + k2 j+1 )) (24)
j =1

N
f 2 (k) = ∑ |k j |0.8 + 5 sin(k3 j )) (25)
j =1

3.4. ZDT1 Function

ZDT1 variables are bounded as [0, 1], and its multi-objective function is defined below.

f 1 (k) = k1
and q
k1
f 2 ( k ) = g ( k [1 − g(k)
]) (26)
N
∑ ki
j =2
where g ( k ) = 1 + 9 ( ( N −1) )

3.5. ZDT4 Function

This function’s variables are bounded as k j = [−5, 5], j = 2, 3, .., n and k1 = [0, 1], and
its multi-objective function is defined below.

f 1 (k) = k1
and r
 
k1
f 2 ( x ) = g(k) 1 − g(k)
(27)
and,
g(k ) = 1 + 10( N − 1)
N
+ ∑ (k2 j − 10 cos(4πk j ))
i =2

Step-wise detail of the MOWDO algorithm is illustrated in the flowchart in Figure 5.

Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 13 of 21

Figure 5. MOWDO algorithm implementation flow chart.

4. Simulation Results and Discussion

The developed model was tested via experiments for multi-objective energy optimiza-
tion considering power generation sources, such as DGs, power grid, generators, etc., and
load, such as domestic, industrial, and commercial, as depicted in Figure 6. The price signal
of the energy market used by the developed model is displayed in Figure 7.

Figure 6. Demand load of domestic, commercial, and industrial consumers.

Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 14 of 21

Figure 7. Real-time price of energy market.

We have power-generating sources, such as solar, WT, diesel generators, hydroelectric

power, electric vehicles, and fuel cells on the generation side. The developed model under
these sources optimizes the operational costs and pollution emissions. On the consumer
side, we have different kinds of industrial, residential, and commercial loads. The electricity
demand for the loads mentioned above is 50, 33 and 10%, respectively. To address the
multi-objective optimization problems, the MOWDO technique was utilized. The defined
objectives were fed into the benchmark functions of the MOWDO algorithm. The objective
function took x as a variable function, as this problem was set for 24 h since the number of
variables was set to 24. RESs, such as solar and wind, are subject to high levels of uncertainty.
To model this uncertainty of renewable energy, the PDF was used. The predicted behaviour
of solar and wind is shown in Figures 8 and 9, respectively. The results are presented in
Table 3. The energy from these sources is subjected to three types of consumers: domestic,
commercial, and industrial.

Figure 8. Predicted power of PVs using PDF.

Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 15 of 21

Figure 9. Predicted power of wind using PDF.

Table 3. WT and solar PV prediction analysis.

Hours W T (kW) PV (kW) Hours W T (kW) PV (kW)

1 1.7850 0 13 3.9150 23.90
2 1.7850 0 14 2.3700 21.05
3 1.7850 0 15 1.7850 7.875
4 1.7850 0 16 1.3050 4.225
5 1.7850 0 17 1.7850 0.550
6 0.9150 0 18 1.7850 0
7 1.7850 0 19 1.3020 0
8 1.3050 0.200 20 1.7850 0
9 1.7850 3.750 21 1.3005 0
10 3.0900 7.525 22 1.3005 0
11 8.7750 10.45 23 0.9150 0
12 10.410 11.95 24 0.6150 0

Domestic are loads used in daily households, e.g., fans, light bulbs, TV, room cooler,
etc. In comparison, commercial loads include loads used by shops, restaurants, malls, etc.,
meant for commercial use. In the same way, industrial loads are heavy machinery, and
motors used all day. Simulation results were conducted to solve the optimization problem
of pollution emissions and operational costs. These objectives are conflicting and tradeoff
exists between them. The MOWDO is employed to achieve both objectives simultaneously.
Hence, we take minimal and optimal points at Pareto-fronts to draw our results.
The wind power data presented in Table 3 is taken from [72]. The solar energy system
is comprises 25 kW SOLAREX MSX type, including a solar array of 10 × 2.5 kW with
s = 10 m2 and h = 18.6%. For storage purposes, batteries are used with a minimum
and maximum capacity of 10% and 100%, respectively, adopted from [73]. The daily load
demand curve for the commercial, residential, and industrial consumer is illustrated in
Figure 6, taken from [74] as the daily average load demand curve. Energy used for the span
of 24 h is shown to be 1695 kWh [75]. However, these sources have uncertainty and rigid
operation constraints due to dependence on environment [76,77]. It is seen that all sources
participate actively to meet the demand in compliance with the smooth functioning of the
SPG. The detailed evaluation and discussion are presented in the subsequent section.
The MOWDO algorithm minimizes the pollution emissions and operational costs. All
the generation units participated in supplying energy to the load. The grid is shown to
provide excess energy during the daytime when demand is high. Still, as it is subjected to
more carbon constraints, RESs, such as wind and solar systems, actively produce energy
that reduces pollution emissions and increases power production. Furthermore, wind and
solar systems have low operational costs, thus contributing to achieving both objectives
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 16 of 21

simultaneously. From simulation results, it can be deduced that the optimal values of the
developed MOWDO for pollution emission and operational cost are 316, 400 Kg/kWh
and 339.4 USD, respectively, as shown in Figure 10. In contrast, the existing MOPSO
algorithm optimal values of pollution emission and operational cost are 336, 400 kg/KWh
and 382.4 USD, respectively, as illustrated in Figure 11. The proposed MOWDO and
existing MOPSO numerical findings are presented in Table 4. The above findings show
that the proposed MOWDO algorithm best suits this problem and reduces the cost and
emissions by 11.91% and 6.12%, respectively, compared to the existing MOPSO algorithm.

Figure 10. Optimization of the operational costs and pollution emissions using the proposed
MOWDO algorithm.

Figure 11. Optimization of the operational costs and pollution emissions using the existing MOPSO algo-
rithm.

Table 4. Numerical outcomes of the operational and emission optimization obtained through the
developed MOWDO and existing MOPSO algorithm.

Techniques Operational Cost Pollution Emissions

MOWDO 339.4 316.5
MOPSO 382.4 336.5

5. Conclusions
This study developed an optimization model considering both the generation side
(DGs, diesel generators, batteries, and utility) and the demand side (residential, commercial,
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 17 of 21

and industrial) for two objectives: pollution emission and operational cost optimization
using multi-objective techniques. The consumers in the developed model are engaged in
DR programs as coverage for the uncertainties associated with load demand, and PDF is
used to handle the uncertainty associated with solar and wind generation. The developed
optimization model using the MOWDO was implemented in MATLAB to solve the multi-
objective problem via a fuzzy mechanism for both objectives. For validation, the developed
model utilizing the MOWDO approach was compared to the MOPSO. The findings reveal
that the MOWDO algorithm reduced pollution emissions and the operational cost by
6.12% and 11.91%, respectively, compared to the MOPSO algorithm. Hence, in resolving
the multi-objective optimization problem concerning operational expense and pollution
emissions, the MOWDO algorithm performs better than the MOPSO algorithm.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, investigation, data cura-

tion, A.A., S.M., G.H. and S.A.; software, validation, writing—original draft preparation, resources,
A.A. and G.H.; writing—review and editing, supervision, visualization, G.H.; project administration,
resources funding acquisition, A.A. and G.H., software, validation, writing—review and editing,
resources, funding acquisition, M.I.K., K.R. and A.M.A. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Najran University
under the Distinguished Research funding Program grant code (NU/DRP/SERC/12/1).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to the Deanship of Scientific Research, Najran Univer-
sity, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for funding this work under the Distinguished Research funding
program grant code number NU/DRP/SERC/12/1.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

SPG Smart power grid

PDF Probability density function
PSO Particle swarm optimization
MOPSO Multi-objective particle swarm optimization
MOWDO Multi-objective wind-driven optimization
DR Demand response
RES Renewable energy sources
CDF Cumulative distribution function
MCS Monte Carlo simulations
ToU Time of use
RTP Real-time pricing
OLM Optimum load management
DST Decision support tool
CPP Critical peak pricing
EVs Electric vehicles
MILP Mixed integer linear programming
MINLP Mixed integer non-linear programming
GA Genetic algorithm
DSM Demand-side management
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 18 of 21

MOGA Multi-objective genetic algorithm

DGs Distributed generations
AMI Advanced metering infrastructure
WT Wind turbines
PV Photovoltaic
ασ Wind speed prediction scale parameters
ασ Wind speed prediction shape parameters
vm Mean value of wind speed
Pw (Vwind ) WTs’ net generated power
PR WTs’ rated power
vr Rated speed
vc_i Cut-in speed
vwind Wind speed
vc_o Cut-off speed
ph si PV output power
η Panel efficiency
Ac PV panel surface area
si Solar irradiance
SDGi (t) Startup or shutdown cost of DGs
Ssj (t) Startup or shutdown cost of storage units
PGd-By (t) Real power purchased from the utility
PGd-sell (t) Real power sold to the utility
BGd-By (t) Bids trade (purchase) with power company
BGd-sell (t) Bids trade (sell) with power company
Bsj (t) Bids of storage devices
BDGi (t) Bids of DGs
Esi (t) Pollution emissions measured in kgMWh−1 for generator units
EDGi (t) Pollution emissions measured in kgMWh−1 for DGs
EGd (t) Pollution emissions measured in kgMWh−1 for utility
NL Total number of demand levels
PD emand(t) Power demand to be met by SPG
PDGi,max (t) Maximum real power generation of DGs
Psj,max (t) Maximum real power generation of storage
PGd,max (t) Maximum real power generation of utility
PDGi,min (t) Minimum real power generation of DGs
Psj,min (t) Minimum real power generation of storage
PGd, min (t) Minimum real power generation of utility
Bess (t) Energy stored in battery at time t
Bess (t − 1) Energy stored in battery at time t-1
Pchg Charge power for duration δt
Pdischg Charge power for duration δt
ηchg Battery charging efficiency
ηdischg Battery discharging efficiency
Bess,min Lower limits for energy storage in the battery
Bess,max Upper limits for energy storage in the battery
Pchg,max Maximum charge power of battery for a period of δt
Pdischg,max Maximum discharge power of battery for a period of δt

References
1. Abdul, R.; Alam, M.M.; Ozturk, I.; Alvarado, R.; Murshed, M.; Işık, C.; Ma, H. Globalization and renewable energy use: How are
they contributing to upsurge the CO2 emissions? A global perspective. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 9699–9712.
2. Haiying, L.; Zafar, M.W.; Sinha, A.; Khan, I. The path to sustainable environment: Do environmental taxes and governance
matter? Sustain. Dev. 2023. [CrossRef]
3. Mohamed, L.; Monteiro, C.; Shafie-Khah, M.; Catalão, J.P.S. Evolution of demand response: A historical analysis of legislation
and research trends. In Proceedings of the 2018 Twentieth International Middle East Power Systems Conference (MEPCON),
Cairo, Egypt, 18–20 December 2018; pp. 968–973.
4. Cai, T.; Dong, M.; Chen, K.; Gong, T. Methods of participating power spot market bidding and settlement for renewable energy
systems. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 7764–7772. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 19 of 21

5. Mark, D.; Taylor, R. Transitioning the Energy System. In The Path to a Sustainable Civilisation: Technological, Socioeconomic and
Political Change; Springer: Singapore, 2023; pp. 53–88.
6. Yu, D.; Duan, C.; Gu, B. Design and evaluation of a novel plan for thermochemical cycles and PEM fuel cells to produce hydrogen
and power: Application of environmental perspective. Chemosphere 2023, 334, 138935. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Alzahrani, A.; Sajjad, K.; Hafeez, G.; Murawwat, S.; Khan, S.; Khan, F.A. Real-time energy optimization and scheduling of
buildings integrated with renewable microgrid. Appl. Energy 2023, 335, 120640. [CrossRef]
8. Asghar, R.; Sulaiman, M.H.; Saeed, S.; Wadood, H.; Mehmand, T.K.; Ullah, Z. Application of linear and nonlinear control schemes
for the stability of Smart Grid. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Emerging Technologies in Electronics,
Computing and Communication (ICETECC), Jamshoro, Sindh, Pakistan, 7–9 December 2022; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
9. Xiao, S.; Cao, Y.; Wu, G.; Guo, Y.; Gao, G.; Chen, S.; Sykulski, J.K. Influence of the distributed grounding layout for intercity trains on
the ‘train-rail’ circumflux. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs 2022, 70, 22725997. [CrossRef]
10. Mohammad, S.; Yamin, H.; Li, Z. Market Operations in eLectric Power Systems: Forecasting, Scheduling, and Risk Management; John
Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003.
11. Noam, L. Energy resources and use: The present situation and possible paths to the future. Energy 2008, 33, 842–857.
12. Wu, H.; Jin, S.; Yue, W. Pricing Policy for a Dynamic Spectrum Allocation Scheme with Batch Requests and Impatient Packets in
Cognitive Radio Networks. J. Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng. 2022, 31, 133–149. [CrossRef]
13. Gao, J.; Sun, H.; Han, J.; Sun, Q.; Zhong, T. Research on Recognition Method of Electrical Components Based on FEYOLOv4-tiny.
J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 2022, 17, 3541–3551. [CrossRef]
14. Song, J.; Mingotti, A.; Zhang, J.; Peretto, L.; Wen, H. Fast iterative-interpolated DFT phasor estimator considering out-of-band
interference. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2022, 71, 22067292. [CrossRef]
15. Gu, Q.; Tian, J.; Yang, B.; Liu, M.; Gu, B.; Yin, Z.; Zheng, W. A Novel Architecture of a Six Degrees of Freedom Parallel Platform.
Electronics 2023, 12, 1774. [CrossRef]
16. Ali, S.; Ullah, K.; Hafeez, G.; Khan, I.; Albogamy, F.R.; Haider, S.I. Solving day-ahead scheduling problem with multi-objective
energy optimization for demand side management in smart grid. Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 2022, 36, 101135. [CrossRef]
17. Dhople, V.S.; Domínguez-García, A.D. A framework to determine the probability density function for the output power of wind
farms. In Proceedings of the 2012 North American Power Symposium (NAPS), Champaign, IL, USA, 9–11 September 2012;
pp. 1–6.
18. Khorramdel, B.; Zare, A.; Chung, C.Y.; Gavriliadis, P.N. A Generic Convex Model for a Chance-Constrained Look-Ahead
Economic Dispatch Problem Incorporating an Efficient Wind Power Distribution Modeling. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2019, 35,
873–886. [CrossRef]
19. Chen, J.; Sun, B.; Li, Y.; Jing, R.; Zeng, Y.; Li, M. Credible capacity calculation method of distributed generation based on equal
power supply reliability criterion. Renew. Energy 2022, 201, 534–547. [CrossRef]
20. Zhao, P.; Ma, K.; Yang, J.; Yang, B.; Guerrero, J.M.; Dou, C.; Guan, X. Distributed Power Sharing Control Based on Adaptive
Virtual Impedance in Seaport Microgrids with Cold Ironing. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2022, 9, 2. [CrossRef]
21. Qin, Z.; Li, J. Demand response in electricity markets: A review. In Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Conference on the
European Energy Market, Florence, Italy, 10–12 May 2012; pp. 1–8.
22. Albogamy Fahad, R.; Paracha, M.Y.I.; Hafeez, G.; Khan, I.; Murawwat, S.; Rukh, G.; Khan, S.; Khan, M.U.A. Real-Time Scheduling
for Optimal Energy Optimization in Smart Grid Integrated with Renewable Energy Sources. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 35498–35520.
[CrossRef]
23. Ghasem, D.; Shayanfar, H.A.; Kazemi, A. The optimization of demand response programs in smart grids. Energy Policy 2016, 94,
295–306.
24. Hamed, Y.; Baneshi, M.; Yaghoubi, M. Techno-economic and environmental design of hybrid energy systems using multi-objective
optimization and multi-criteria decision making methods. Energy Convers. Manag. 2023, 282, 116873.
25. Xi, L.; Yang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhao, T. Classification of energy use patterns and multi-objective optimal scheduling of flexible loads in
rural households. Energy Build. 2023, 283, 112811.
26. Kunal, P.; Khosla, A. Home energy management systems in future smart grid networks: A systematic review. In Proceedings of
the 2015 1st International Conference on Next Generation Computing Technologies (NGCT), Dehradun, India, 4–5 September
2015; pp. 479–483.
27. Ana, S.; Antunes, C.H.; Oliveira, C.; Gomes, Á. A multi-objective genetic approach to domestic load scheduling in an energy
management system. Energy 2014, 77, 144–152.
28. Zhang, Z.; Altalbawy, F.M.A.; Al-Bahrani, M.; Riadi, Y. Regret-based multi-objective optimization of carbon capture facility in
CHP-based microgrid with carbon dioxide cycling. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 384, 135632. [CrossRef]
29. Cao, B.; Yan, Y.; Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Lin, J.C.W.; Sangaiah, A.K.; Lv, Z. A Multiobjective Intelligent Decision-Making Method for
Multistage Placement of PMU in Power Grid Enterprises. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2022, 19, 7636–7644. [CrossRef]
30. Refaat, S.S.; Abu-Rub, H. Implementation of smart residential energy management system for smart grid. In Proceedings of the
2015 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Montreal, QC, Canada, 20–24 September 2015; pp. 3436–3441.
31. Li, P.; Hu, J.; Qiu, L.; Zhao, Y.; Ghosh, B.K. A Distributed Economic Dispatch Strategy for Power-Water Networks. IEEE Trans.
Control Netw. Syst. 2022, 9, 356–366. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 20 of 21

32. Duan, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Hu, J. An initialization-free distributed algorithm for dynamic economic dispatch problems in microgrid: Modeling,
optimization and analysis. Sustain. Energy Grids Netw. 2023, 34, 101004. [CrossRef]
33. Yu, M.; Li, B.; Wang, H.; Wang, X.; Negnevitsky, M. Multi-objective optimal scheduling of microgrid with electric vehicles. Energy
Rep. 2022, 8, 4512–4524.
34. Alireza, Z.; Jadid, S.; Siano, P. Economic-environmental energy and reserve scheduling of smart distribution systems: A
multiobjective mathematical programming approach. Energy Convers. Manag. 2014, 78, 151–164.
35. Shimaa, B.; Ibrahim, H.; Elbaset, A.A. Multi-objective optimization of grid-connected PV-wind hybrid system considering
reliability, cost, and environmental aspects. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 60, 102178.
36. Elham, S.; Jadid, S. Cost reduction and peak shaving through domestic load shifting and DERs. Energy 2017, 124, 146–159.
37. Farhad, Z.S.; Guzman, C.P.; Pozos, A.T.; Quiros-Tortos, J.; Franco, J.F. Stochastic multi-objective optimal energy management of
grid-connected unbalanced microgrids with renewable energy generation and plug-in electric vehicles. Energy 2022, 241, 122884.
38. Taghieh, A.; Mohammadzadeh, A.; Zhang, C.; Kausar, N.; Castillo, O. A type-3 fuzzy control for current sharing and voltage
balancing in microgrids. Appl. Soft Comput. 2022, 129, 109636. [CrossRef]
39. Shao, B.; Xiao, Q.; Xiong, L.; Wang, L.; Yang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Guerrero, J.M. Power coupling analysis and improved decoupling
control for the VSC connected to a weak AC grid. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2023, 145, 108645. [CrossRef]
40. Xu, S.; Huang, W.; Huang, D.; Chen, H.; Chai, Y.; Ma, M.; Zheng, W.X. A Reduced-Order Observer-Based Method for Simultaneous
Diagnosis of Open-Switch and Current Sensor Faults of a Grid-Tied NPC Inverter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2023, 38, 9019
–9032. [CrossRef]
41. Yan, Z.; Wen, H. Electricity theft detection base on extreme gradient boosting in AMI. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2021, 70, 2504909
. [CrossRef]
42. Lin, L.; Shi, J.; Ma, C.; Zuo, S.; Zhang, J.; Chen, C.; Huang, N. Non-intrusive residential electricity load decomposition via
low-resource model transferring. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 73, 106799. [CrossRef]
43. Mahdiyeh, E.; Neshat, M.; Khalid, S.A. A novel hybrid sine cosine algorithm and pattern search for optimal coordination of
power system damping controllers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 541.
44. Mohammad, N.; Mohammadi, H.; Efatinasab, E.; Lashgari, A.; Eslami, M.; Khan, B. Golden search optimization algorithm. IEEE
Access 2022, 10, 37515–37532.
45. János, M.M.; Szilágyi, A.; Gróf, G. Environmental and economic multi-objective optimization of a household level hybrid
renewable energy system by genetic algorithm. Appl. Energy 2020, 269, 115058.
46. Shenbo, Y.; Tan, Z.; Liu, Z.; Lin, H.; Ju, L.; Zhou, F.; Li, J. A multi-objective stochastic optimization model for electricity retailers
with energy storage system considering uncertainty and demand response. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 277, 124017.
47. Zakaria, A.; Ismail, F.B.; Lipu, M.S.H.; Hannan, M.A. Uncertainty models for stochastic optimization in renewable energy
applications. Renew. Energy 2020, 145, 1543–1571. [CrossRef]
48. Aghajani, G.R.; Shayanfar, H.A.; Shayeghi, H. Demand side management in a smart micro-grid in the presence of renewable
generation and demand response. Energy 2017, 126, 622–637. [CrossRef]
49. Heydar, C.; Derakhshan, G.; Hakimi, S.M.; Bahramara, S. Tri-objective optimal scheduling of smart energy hub system with
schedulable loads. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 236, 117584.
50. Kalim, U.; Khan, T.A.; Hafeez, G.; Khan, I.; Murawwat, S.; Alamri, B.; Ali, F.; Ali, S.; Khan, S. Demand Side Management Strategy
for Multi-Objective Day-Ahead Scheduling Considering Wind Energy in Smart Grid. Energies 2022, 15, 6900.
51. Heydar, C.; Derakhshan, G.; Hakimi, S.M.; Bahramara, S. Multi-objectives optimal scheduling in smart energy hub system with
electrical and thermal responsive loads. Environ. Clim. Technol. 2020, 24, 209–232.
52. Heydar, C.; Derakhshan, G.; Hakimi, S.M.; Bahramara, S. Tri-objective scheduling of residential smart electrical distribution grids
with optimal joint of responsive loads with renewable energy sources. J. Energy Storage 2020, 27, 101112.
53. Heydar, C.; Derakhshan, G.; Bahramara, S. Multi-objective performance of smart hybrid energy system with Multi-optimal
participation of customers in day-ahead energy market. Energy Build. 2020, 216, 109964.
54. Kalim, U.; Ali, S.; Khan, T.A.; Khan, I.; Jan, S.; Shah, I.A.; Hafeez, G. An optimal energy optimization strategy for smart grid
integrated with renewable energy sources and demand response programs. Energies 2020, 13, 5718.
55. Heydar, C.; Bahramara, S.; Derakhshan, G. Day-ahead scheduling problem of smart micro-grid with high penetration of wind
energy and demand side management strategies. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2020, 40, 100747.
56. Zhang, X.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, X.; Shen, Y.; Lu, Z.; Wang, Z. Adaptive Dynamic Surface Control with Disturbance Observers for
Battery/Supercapacitor-based Hybrid Energy Sources in Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2022. [CrossRef]
57. Dang, W.; Liao, S.; Yang, B.; Yin, Z.; Liu, M.; Yin, L.; Zheng, W. An encoder-decoder fusion battery life prediction method based
on Gaussian process regression and improvement. J. Energy Storage 2023, 59, 106469. [CrossRef]
58. Saeed, S.; Asghar, R.; Mehmood, F.; Saleem, H.; Azeem, B.; Ullah, Z. Evaluating a Hybrid Circuit Topology for Fault-Ride through
in DFIG-Based Wind Turbines. Sensors 2022, 22, 9314. [CrossRef]
59. Azeem, B.; Rehman, F.; Mehmood, C.A.; Ali, S.M.; Khan, B.; Saeed, S. Exact Feedback Linearization (EFL) and De-Couple Control
of Doubly Fed Induction Generator Based Wind Turbine. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Frontiers of
Information Technology (FIT), Islamabad, Pakistan, 19–21 December 2016; pp. 330–335. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 9970 21 of 21

60. Asghar, R.; Anwar, M.J.; Wadood, H.; Saleem, H.; Rasul, N.; Ullah, Z. Promising Features of Wind Energy: A Glance Overview.
In Proceedings of the 2023 4th International Conference on Computing, Mathematics and Engineering Technologies (iCoMET)
Sukkur, Pakistan, 17–8 March 2023; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
61. Azeem, B.; Ullah, Z.; Rehman, F.; Ali, S.M.; Haider, A.; Saeed, S.; Khan, B. Levenberg–Marquardt SMC control of grid-tied Doubly
Fed Induction Generator (DFIG) using FRT schemes under symmetrical fault. In Proceedings of the 2018 1st International Conference
on Power, Energy and Smart Grid (ICPESG), Mirpur Azad Kashmir, Pakistan, 9–10 April 2018; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
62. Huang, N.; Chen, Q.; Cai, G.; Xu, D.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, W. Fault Diagnosis of Bearing in Wind Turbine Gearbox Under Actual
Operating Conditions Driven by Limited Data With Noise Labels. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2021, 70, 1–10. [CrossRef]
63. Eity, S.; Halder, P. Mehdi Seyedmahmoudian, Elmira Jamei, Ben Horan, Saad Mekhilef, and Alex Stojcevski. Progress on the
demand side management in smart grid and optimization approaches. Int. J. Energy Res. 2021, 45, 36–64.
64. Wind Speed Weather Data. Available online: http://wind.willyweather.com.au (accessed on 16 September 2022).
65. Ahmed, S.U.; Affan, M.; Raza, M.I.; Hashmi, M.H. Inspecting Mega Solar Plants through Computer Vision and Drone Technologies.
In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), Islamabad, Pakistan, 12–13
December 2022; pp. 18–23. [CrossRef]
66. Ge, L.; Du, T.; Li, C.; Li, Y.; Yan, J.; Rafiq, M.U. Virtual Collection for Distributed Photovoltaic Data: Challenges, Methodologies,
and Applications. Energies 2022, 15, 8783. [CrossRef]
67. Huang, N.; Zhao, X.; Guo, Y.; Cai, G.; Wang, R. Distribution network expansion planning considering a distributed hydrogen-
thermal storage system based on photovoltaic development of the Whole County of China. Energy 2023, 278, 127761. [CrossRef]
68. Duan, P.F.; Soleimani, H.; Ghazanfari, A.; Dehghani, M. Distributed energy management in smart grids based on cloud-fog layer
PHEVs. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2020. [CrossRef]
69. The Solar Power Group Company. Available online: http://thesolarpowergroup.com.au (accessed on 18 September 2022).
70. Reconstruction and Short-Term Forecast of the Solar Irradiance. Available online: http://lpc2e.cnrs-orleans.fr/~soteria/ (accessed on 18
September 2022).
71. Aghajani, G.R.; Shayanfar, H.A.; Shayeghi, H. Presenting a multi-objective generation scheduling model for pricing demand
response rate in micro-grid energy management. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 106, 308–321. [CrossRef]
72. Qing, L.; Zhang, Z.; Lü, S. Home energy management in smart households: Optimal appliance scheduling model with photovoltaic
energy storage system. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 2450–2462.
73. Arezoo, H.; Hakimi, S.M. Stochastic energy management of smart microgrid with intermittent renewable energy resources in
electricity market. Energy 2021, 219, 119668.
74. Rocha, H.R.; Honorato, I.H.; Fiorotti, R.; Celeste, W.C.; Silvestre, L.J.; Silva, J.A. An Artificial Intelligence based scheduling
algorithm for demand-side energy management in Smart Homes. Appl. Energy 2021, 282, 116145. [CrossRef]
75. Lu, C.; Xu, Q.; Yang, Y.; Song, J. Optimal energy management of smart building for peak shaving considering multi-energy
flexibility measures. Energy Build. 2021, 241, 110932.
76. Judge, M.A.; Manzoor, A.; Maple, C.; Rodrigues, J.J.; ul Islam, S. Price-based demand response for household load management
with interval uncertainty. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 8493–8504. [CrossRef]
77. Manzoor, A.; Judge, M.A.; Ahmed, F.; ul Islam, S.; Buyya, R. Towards simulating the constraint-based nature-inspired smart
scheduling in energy intelligent buildings. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2017, 118, 102550. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.