{"title":"Robustness of district heating versus electricity-driven energy system at district level: A multi-objective optimization study","authors":"Jaume Fitó, Mathieu Vallée, Alain Ruby, Etienne Cuisinier","doi":"10.1016/j.segy.2022.100073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article compares the robustness of the optimal choice of technologies for two Smart Energy Systems architectures at district level, illustrated by a case study representative of a newly built district in Grenoble, France. The electricity-driven architecture relies on the national electric grid, decentralized photovoltaic panels and decentralized heat pumps for heat production building by building. The alternative architecture consists of a district heating network with multiple sources and equipment for centralized production of heat. Those are a gas boiler plant, a biomass-driven cogeneration plant, a solar thermal collector field, and a geothermal heat pumping plant (grid-driven or photovoltaics-driven). Electric and heat storages are considered in both architectures. The sizing and operation of both architectures are optimized via linear programming, through a multi-objective approach (total project cost versus carbon dioxide emissions). Both architectures are compared at nominal scenario and at sensitivity scenarios. It is concluded that the electricity-driven architecture is less robust, especially to uncertainties in space heating demands (+150%/−30% impact on costs) and in heat pump performance (+35%/−15% in costs). Meanwhile, the multi-source architecture is less sensitive to space heating demands (+110%/−30%) and has negligible sensitivity to the rest of parameters except photovoltaic panels efficiency (+14%/−7%).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34738,"journal":{"name":"Smart Energy","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100073"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666955222000119/pdfft?md5=54d6aabbce23004aa08e6d6b668f6b2d&pid=1-s2.0-S2666955222000119-main.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Smart Energy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666955222000119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
This article compares the robustness of the optimal choice of technologies for two Smart Energy Systems architectures at district level, illustrated by a case study representative of a newly built district in Grenoble, France. The electricity-driven architecture relies on the national electric grid, decentralized photovoltaic panels and decentralized heat pumps for heat production building by building. The alternative architecture consists of a district heating network with multiple sources and equipment for centralized production of heat. Those are a gas boiler plant, a biomass-driven cogeneration plant, a solar thermal collector field, and a geothermal heat pumping plant (grid-driven or photovoltaics-driven). Electric and heat storages are considered in both architectures. The sizing and operation of both architectures are optimized via linear programming, through a multi-objective approach (total project cost versus carbon dioxide emissions). Both architectures are compared at nominal scenario and at sensitivity scenarios. It is concluded that the electricity-driven architecture is less robust, especially to uncertainties in space heating demands (+150%/−30% impact on costs) and in heat pump performance (+35%/−15% in costs). Meanwhile, the multi-source architecture is less sensitive to space heating demands (+110%/−30%) and has negligible sensitivity to the rest of parameters except photovoltaic panels efficiency (+14%/−7%).