 Open Access
 Total Downloads : 33
 Authors : Vipandeep Kour, Lakhwinder Singh
 Paper ID : IJERTCONV5IS05029
 Volume & Issue : ESDST – 2017 (Volume 5 – Issue 05)
 Published (First Online): 24042018
 ISSN (Online) : 22780181
 Publisher Name : IJERT
 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Comparitive Analysis of Lambda Iteration Method and Particle Swarm Optimization for Economic Emission Dispatch Problem
Vipandeep Kour
Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Department,
IET Bhaddal, Ropar, India
Lakhwinder Singh
Professor,
Electrical Engineering Department, BBSBEC, Fatehgarh Sahib, India
Abstract – With the increase in energy demands, it becomes necessary to operate the thermal power plants most economically, which gives rise to Economic Load Dispatch (ELD) problem. The problem of ELD in power system is to plan the power output for each committed generating unit in such a way that operating cost is minimized while meeting load demand, power operating limits. In present scenario, expansion in power generation has resulted to increase in emissions in the environment which is the prime concern for power system planners. In order to get clean energy, emission control has become an important operational objective in addition to minimization of operating cost. The combination of both the objectives i.e. economic dispatch and emission dispatch have resulted in multidimensional power system optimization problem called Economic Emission Dispatch (EED) problem. In this paper, EED problem has been solved using Lambda Iteration Method and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique. Both the solution methodologies have been validated on three generator system and five generator system. Comparative analysis of the results obtained by both the methods has been performed.
Keywords Economic Load Dispatch, Economic Emission Dispatch, Lambda Iteration Method, Particle Swarm Optimization.

INTRODUCTION
The modern power system is a vast interconnected system in which the main task is to allocate the load demand among participating generators at minimum possible cost. Planning the output of each generator in a power system while minimizing the fuel cost and satisfying various system constrains is termed as economic dispatch. The system constraints include matching the power generation with the load, operating the generators within permissible limits and maintaining system stability. When fossil fuels are burnt, toxic gases are released, such as oxides of carbon, oxides of sulphur and oxides of nitrogen [1]. These gases cause pollution in atmosphere and hence disturb the ecological balance leading to global warming. With the increasing energy production to meet the increasing demands, the emission of pollutants has also increased, thus making the environment unfit for the survival of living beings. To meet clean energy requirement, there is need to minimize the emissions along with the fuel cost which is termed as emission dispatch. While minimizing the emissions, there is need to satisfy the system constraints. When economic dispatch and emission dispatch problems are combined together becomes as Economic Emission Dispatch (EED) problem [2].
Different techniques have been reported in the literature pertaining to solution of economic emission dispatch problem. Senthil et al. gave an improved Tabu search algorithm of three generator system, six generator system with emission constraints and thirteen generator system with valve point effect loading [3]. Abido presented a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm for environmental/economic power dispatch problem as nonlinear constrained multiobjective optimization problem and used Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm (SPEA) to solve the formed multiobjective problem [4]. In another attempt, Abido also presented a MultiObjective Particle Swarm Optimization (MOPSO) for environmental/economic dispatch problem [5].
Thakur et al. used PSO algorithm to solve the problem of Combined Economic and Emission Dispatch (CEED) with use of penalty factors. The authors focused on reducing NO2 and SO2 emissions [6]. Valle et al. provided a detailed literature on PSO, its concepts, variants and application in the field of power systems. The authors have performed a vast study on this optimization technique [7]. Arunachalam et al. presented a new approach to solve CEED problem using a Hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization (HPSO) and Firefly algorithm where a multiobjective optimization problem with the valve point effect using a price based penalty factor was solved [8]. Das et al. used PSO and Teaching Learning Based Optimization (TLBO) for solution of ELD problem used to find the optimum solution with lowest fuel cost for four different network consisting of three, six, fifteen, and twenty generating units respectively for different load demand. Results obtained using PSO and TLBO are compared with the results obtained using lambda iteration method [9].
Particle swarm optimization is a population based stochastic optimization technique developed by Eberhart and Kennedy in 1995 to optimize nonlinear functions [10]. It is inspired by the social behavior of bird flocking or fish schooling while searching for food. PSO optimizes problem by having a population of particles, moving these particles around in the search space according to simple mathematical formula over the particle's position and velocity. Each particle's movement is influenced by its local best known position and is also guided toward the best known positions in the search space, which are updated as better positions are found by other particles. This moves the swarm toward the best solutions.
Each particle keeps track of its coordinates in the solution space, which are associated with the best solution (fitness) that has been achieved so far by that particle. This value is called personal best, Pbest. Another best value that is tracked by the PSO is the best value obtained so far by any other particle in the neighborhood of that particle. This value is called Gbest. The basic concept of PSO lies in accelerating each particle toward
The objective function (FT) is equal to the total cost for supplying the indicated load (PLOAD). The problem is to minimize function (FT) subject to the constraint that the sum of the power generated must equal the load. When transmission losses are neglected, the total fuel cost (FT), is stated as
= 1 + 2 + + (1)
Pbest and the Gbest locations, with a random weighted
= ( )
(2)
acceleration at each time. Each particle tries to modify its
=1
position using the following information: current positions, current velocities, distance between the current position and Pbest, and distance between the current position and the Gbest.
=1
PSO has a flexible and well balanced method to adapt the global exploration abilities with faster convergence rates [10]. The efficiency of PSO is due to the fact that each particle uses the information of the best particle and improves itself accordingly. PSO has been successfully implemented to solve power system problems including EED and many other multi objective functions [1114]. The key objectives of PSO over
The operating cost of plant can be represented as shown in fig. 2. This cost is usually approximated by one or more quadratic segments. So, the fuel cost curve is a quadratic curve in active power generation. The fuel cost function without valvepoint loading of the generating unit is given by
() = 2 + + Rs/hr (3)
The economic load dispatch problem can be described as an optimization (minimization) process with the following objective function
other optimization techniques can be listed as [15]:

Unlike other algorithms, it is derivative free algorithm.

It does not depends on the ature of objective function, i.e. continuity and convexity.

The solution is not trapped in the local minima.

It does not require an initial solution to start the algorithm.
In PSO, the individuals of the swarm are not created or destroyed, that is, the population remains stable and the particles follow the path of cooperation over competition. The particles while moving within the search space retains a memory of its best point ever attained. This best position is communicated to all other particles.
The intent of the paper is to implement PSO to optimize
(4)
EED problem and to compare traditional lambda iteration method with PSO in order to prove the better computational efficiency of later over the former.


PROBLEM FORMULATION

Economic Dispatch
Consider a system of N thermalgenerating units connected to a single busbar serving the electrical load is shown in fig. 1. The input to each unit is Fi. The output of each unit is Pgi. The total cost of this system is the sum of the costs of each of the individual units. The essential constraint on the operation of this system is that the sum of the output powers must equal the load demand [16].
Fig. 2. Operating cost characteristics of fossil fuel fired generator

Emission Dispatch
Fossil fuels constitute a significant repository of carbon. Burning such fuels, result in the conversion of carbon to carbon dioxide, which is then released into the atmosphere causing an increase in the earth's levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which enhances the greenhouse effect and contributes to global warming. Other emissions produced from a generating station are oxides of sulphur and oxides of nitrogen. Sulphur and nitrogen oxides cause smog and acid rain [1718]. Very tall fluegas stacks can be built on plants, so that pollutants would get diluted when they are put in the atmosphere. While this helps in reducing local contamination, it does not help in solving the global issues. Total emissions of the system shown in fig. 1 are given by ET, such that
= 1 + 2 + + (5)
= ( )
(6)
=1
Fig. 1. N thermal units committed to serve a load PLOAD
The emission of the thermal power plant can be formulated as a second order polynomial function as
() = 2 + + Kg/hr (7)
The emission dispatch problem can be described as an optimization (minimization) process with the following objective function
B. Particle Swarm Optimization
In the PSO algorithm, a random population of particles is created and the optimization is achieved by the movement of
=1
(8)
particles towards the global best position. The particles update their position and velocity according to their selfexperience as


SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS
Optimization of a given function is done when certain constraints are being satisfied. The constraints that are considered during the optimization of cost function and emission function formulated in eq. 4 and eq. 8 are:

Equality Constraints
id
1 1
best id
id
2 2
best d
id
The equality constraints are represented by the power
well as the social interaction between other particles. Economic emission dispatch problem is solved by implementing PSO.
The modified velocity and position of each particle can be derived using the present velocity and the distance from Pbest id to Gbest d by the velocity and position equations as given in the following equations:
balance constraint, that is, the power balance equation, where
Vid(t+1) = w.v t + c r (P
x t) + c r (G x t) (11)
the total power generation must cover the total power demand and the power loss.
xid(t+1) = xidt +v1d
(t+1) (12)
=1
= +
(9)
Where, x represents the position of particle, v represents velocity of the particle, and the ith particle is denoted as xi =

Inequality Constraints
The inequality constraints are power generation limits of thermal power generators. Upper and lower bounds on the generation of each generator are to be fulfilled and can be expressed as
(xi1, xi2,…, xid) in the dth dimensional search space. The previous best position of the ith particle is stored in memory and represented by Pbest i = Pbest i1, Pbest i2 ,.., Pbest id. Also, for a particle, the description of rate of velocity is denoted as vi = vi1, vi2, …, vid. The best position among the Pbest is represented as Gbest d. Fig. 4 shows the flow chart of PSO algorithm.
Pmin P Pmax
(i = 1, 2,, n) (10)
gi gi gi


SOLUTION METHODOLOGY
The purpose is to solve economic emission dispatch problem using the conventional optimization technique, lambda iteration method, and compare the results obtained by solving the same using PSO algorithm.
A. Lambda Iteration Method
Lambda iteration method is an iterative type of computational technique shown in fig. 3. The optimum operating point of any generator set, within a specified limits, is found using this method.
Fig. 1. Lambda iteration method
Fig. 2. Basic PSO algorithm

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Economic emission dispatch problem has been solved using lambda iteration method and particle swarm optimization technique. The validity of the proposed techniques has been verified on two generator sets: 3 generator set for a demand of 350, 400 and 450 MW and 5 generator set for a demand of 400, 500 and 600 MW [3][19].
Equations (4) and (8) were solved using the proposed optimization techniques to get desired results for the two generator sets. All the PSO based optimization was done in MATLAB R2015a on 32 bit Intel Core i3 Computer with 2GB RAM with Windows 7 operating system.

Results for 3 Generator Set
Table 1 shows the values of powers generated and fuel cost in three generator set calculated from Lambda iteration method for economic dispatch. Table II shows the power output and total emissions for emission dispatch calculated from lambda iteration method.
TABLE I
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 3 GENERATOR SET FOR ECONOMIC DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM LAMBDA ITERATION METHOD
Demand
(MW)
P1
P2
P3
Fuel cost
(Rs/hr)
350
200.52
94.00
56.32
1487.34
400
200
119.32
81.00
1716.09
450
200
144
106
1957.34
TABLE III
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 3 GENERATOR SET FOR EMISSION DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM LAMBDA ITERATION METHOD
Demand (MW)
P1
P2
P3
Total
Emissions (kg/hr)
350
109.52
96.51
144.4
694.93
400
123.41
109.23
167.32
655.83
450
142.89
127.07
180
753.98
Table III shows the values of powers generated by each of the generator in three generator set calculated from PSO for economic dispatch. Table IV shows the power output of each unit for emission dispatch calculated from PSO.
TABLE IIIII
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 3 GENERATOR SET FOR ECONOMIC DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM PSO
Demand
(MW)
P1
P2
p>P3 Fuel cost
(Rs/hr)
350
182.185
107.258
60.082
1406.273
400
192.716
122.60
84.148
1715.771
450
195.891
142.719
110.775
1956.557
TABLE IVV
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 3 GENERATOR SET FOR EMISSION DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM PSO
Demand (MW)
P1
P2
P3
Total Emissions
(kg/hr)
350
185.636
82.935
81.427
682.891
400
124.3
114
160.751
654.3982
450
143
126.651
179.518
752.412

Results for 5 Generator Set
Table V shows the values of powers generated and fuel cost in five generator set calculated from Lambda iteration method for economic dispatch. Table VI shows the power
output and total emissions for emission dispatch calculated from lambda iteration method.
TABLE V
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 5 GENERATOR SET FOR ECONOMIC DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM LAMBDA ITERATION METHOD
Demand
(MW)
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
Fuel cost
(Rs/hr)
400
105.45
69.98
85
30
110.0
1169.19
500
153.99
82.98
85
30
149.23
1418.58
600
187.06
93.48
108.73
30.22
180.6
1632.54
TABLE VI
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 5 GENERATOR SET FOR EMISSION DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM LAMBDA ITERATION METHOD
Demand (MW)
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
Total Emissions
(kg/hr)
400
68.78
55.02
116.95
52.93
106.31
318.99
500
88.40
70.72
139.38
66.01
135.75
451.89
600
118.67
40
173.95
86.17
181.12
670.01
Table VII shows the values of powers generated by each of the generator in five generator set calculated from PSO for economic dispatch. Table VIII shows the power output of each unit for emission dispatch calculated from PSO.
TABLE VII
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 5 GENERATOR SET FOR ECONOMIC DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM PSO
Demand (MW)
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
Fuel cost (Rs/hr)
400
123.30
61.20
87.23
32.32
91.74
1168.33
500
189.33
70.47
84.78
75.33
80.00
1430.66
600
185.38
93.15
99.69
44.68
175.28
1631.85
TABLE VIII
POWER OUTPUT & FUEL COST FOR A 5 GENERATOR SET FOR EMISSION DISPATCH CALCULATED FROM PSO
Dema nd (MW)
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
Total Emissi
ons (kg/hr)
400
70.35
53.52
115.34
54.45
105.53
317.32
500
89.58
135.64
135.42
68.53
69.76
450.28
600
116.45
55.64
170.53
88.53
170.45
652.91

Comparison of Results obtained from Lambda Iteration Method and PSO technique
The results from both the techniques were compared and the comparison results are presented in Table IX for three generator set and in Table X for five generator set.
TABLE IX
COMPARISON BETWEEN LAMBDA ITERATION METHOD & PSO FOR 3 GENERATOR SET
Demand (MW)
Fuel Cost (Rs/hr)
Total Emissions
(Kg/hr)
Lambda Iteration
Method
PSO
Lambda Iteration
Method
PSO
200
858.43
858.38
446.08
443.33
250
1060.27
1058.22
472.26
471.70
300
1273.27
1273.21
515.74
510.07
TABLE X
COMPARISON BETWEEN LAMBDA ITERATION METHOD & PSO FOR 5 GENERATOR SET
Demand (MW)
Fuel Cost (Rs/hr)
Total Emissions
(Kg/hr)
Lambda Iteration
Method
PSO
Lambda Iteration
Method
PSO
400
1169.19
1168.34
318.99
317.33
500
1418.58
1403.66
451.89
450.28
600
1632.54
1631.85
670.02
652.91


CONCLUSION
In this paper, two optimization techniques (lambda iteration and PSO) have been implemented to solve economic emission dispatch problem and the obtained results have been compared. Lambda iteration method is a conventional method but PSO is a new optimization technique which is a population based search algorithm. PSO shows better results along with fast convergence characteristics hence the optimized results of PSO are better than lambda iteration method. As far as fuel cost is concerned, it is small for three generators set but it is reasonably good for five generators set.
APPENDIX
The Particle Swarm Optimization parameters used are: Population size 100
No. of iterations 80
Cognitive coefficient, C1 2
Social coefficient, C2 2
Inertia weight, w : 1 for 3 gen. set, 1.5 for 5 gen. set
REFERENCES

D.P. Kothari and J.S. Dhillon, Power system optimization, Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi, 2011.

L. Singh and J. S. Dhillon, Interactive fuzzy approach for economic environmental electric power load dispatch, IEEE International Conference on Power Systems Technology (POWERCON 2016), University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia, September 28 to October 1, 2016, pp. 16.

K. Senthil and K. Manikandan Economic thermal power dispatch with emission constraint and valve point effect loading using improved tabu search algorithm, International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 3, no. 9, 2010.

M. A. Abido, Environmental/Economic ower dispatch using multi objective evolutionary algorithms, IEEE Trans. on Power Syst., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 15291537, November 2003.

M. A. Abido,Multi objective particle swarm optimization for environmental/economic dispatch problem, Elsevier Electr. Power Res., vol. 79, pp. 11051113, 2009.

T. Thakur, K. Sem, S. Saini and S. Sharma, A particle swarm pptmization solution to NO2 and SO2 emissions for environmentally constrained economic dispatch problem, in Proc. of IEEE/PES Transmission & Distribution Conference and Exposition: Latin America, pp. 15, 2006

Y. Valle, G. Venayagamoorthy, S. Mohagheghi, J. C. Hernandez, and
R.G. Harley, Particle swarm optimization: basic concepts, variants and applications in power systems, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 171195, April, 2008.

S. Arunachalam, T. AgnesBhomila and M. Ramesh Babu, "Hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm and firefly algorithm based combined economic and emission dispatch including valve point effect," Springer Link – Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8947, pp. 647 660, 2015.

B. Das and T. K. Sengupta, Economic load dispatch using PSO and TLBO in Micheal Faraday IET Int. Summit, pp. 212219, 2015.

J. Kennedy and R. C. Eberhart, Particle swarm optimization, in Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Neural Networks, vol. IV, pp. 19421948. IEEE service centre, Piscataway, NJ, 1995.

M. A. Abido, Multiobjective particle swarm optimization for environmental/economic dispatch problem, Electrical Power System Research, vol. 79, no. 7, pp. 11051113.

M. R. AlRashidi and M. ElHawary, Hybrid particle swarm optimization approach for solving the discrete opf problem considering the valve loading effects, IEEE Trans. on Power System, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 20302038, 2007.

J. B. Park, K. S. Lee, J. R. Shin and K. Y. Lee, A particle swarm optimization for economic dispatch with non smooth cost functions, IEEE Trans. Power system, vol. 20, no.1, pp .3442, 2005.

A. Sakthidasan, Firefly algorithm for economic emission dispatch with normalized objective function, Int. Journal of Development Research, vol. 4, no.3, pp. 560564, 2014.

M. R. AlRashidi and M. ElHawary, A survey of particle swarm optimization applications in electric power systems, IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 13, no.4, pp. 913918, 2009.

A. J. Wood and B. F. Wollenberg, "Characteristics of power generation units," in Power Generation Operation & Control, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 811, 1996.

D. P. Kothari, S. K. Maheshwari and K. G. Sharma, Minimization of air pollution due to thermal power plants, Journal Institution of Engineering (India), vol.EN57(2), pp.6568, Feb 1977.

L. Singh and J. S. Dhillon, Surrogate worth trade off method for economic emission dispatch, IEEE Power System Conf., pp.230235, 2006.

L. Devi, and O. V. Krishna, Combined economic and emission dispatch using evolutionary algorithmsa case study, ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, vol. 3, no. 6, pp.2835, 2008.