Analytic Hierarchy Process Algorithm Applied to Battery Energy Storage System Selection for Grid Applications

Oening, Ana Paula; Marcilio, Débora Cíntia; Andrade, Juliano de; Impinnisi, Patricio Rodolfo

doi:10.1590/1678-4324-75years-2021210148

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Article - 75 years - Special Edition • Braz. arch. biol. technol. 64 (spe) • 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4324-75years-2021210148 copy

Analytic Hierarchy Process Algorithm Applied to Battery Energy Storage System Selection for Grid Applications

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

HIGHLIGHTS

The Brazilian electricity regulatory agency calls for energy storage projects

Electric utilities evaluate battery energy storage for power quality control

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) algorithm for battery technology: a strategic choice

Environmental, Technological, Regulatory and Financial AHP criteria

Abstract

The Brazilian Power Sector is preparing the introduction of battery energy storage in its distribution lines for energy quality control. The technical and financial viability of this new technology depends on several factors: battery technologies, geographical locations, environmental restrictions and the local regulation. One of the objectives of the present project was to create a methodology for helping technicians to choose the best battery technology for each particular application. The Analytic Hierarchy Process - AHP algorithm was selected to take into account all the above-mentioned factors. This methodology was applied to a case study considering four different commercially available battery energy storage systems (BESS) and the methodology was able to recommend the best choice by taking into account all the criteria and subcriteria considered. The second objective of the present project is to evaluate a real hybrid BESS operation composed of two different battery technologies. Up to the moment when this paper was submitted the BESS has not been installed yet. The installation place has already been selected, a feeder-line with 1,360 kW peak power, and monitored for energy quality. The BESS has been sized, a 250 kW/1 MWh flow battery together with a 250 kW/500 kWh lithium-ion battery and the purchase process has been initiated. Both battery technologies will work in separate and joint operations for power quality in on-grid and island cases.

Keywords:
Battery Energy Storage; Brazilian Power Grids; Peak Shaving; Voltage-Sags Smoothing; Multicriteria decision-making Algorithm; Analytic Hierarchy Process; Battery Technology Selection

Battery technology	Nº of projects	Accumulated Power (kW)	Average power (kW by project)	Accumulated Energy (kWh)
Lithium ion	467	1,335,336.0	2,890.34	1,404,586.4
Sodium Sulphur	32	188,900.0	5,903.13	1,260,680.0
Lead acid	69	60,424.0	875.71	68,634.9
Supercaps	69	46,810.0	678.41	147,922.0
Nickel Cadmium	25	30,903.0	1,236.12
Na-NiCl₂ (ZEBRA)	2	30,000.0	15,000.00	9,150.0
Electrochemical¹	27	14,481.0	579.24	52,127.3
Lead acid+Supercaps	20	13,054.0	652.70	15,943.4
Lead Carbon	12	6,732.0	561.00
Sodium ion	3	1,016.0	338.67	798.0
Nickel Iron	11	971.0	88.27	3,181.8

Criteria		Sub-criteria
Environmental	24.64%	Safety	37.39%
		Demobilization	20.20%
		Visual impact	5.3%
		Contaminant potential	37.09%
Technological	29.64%	Technological maturity	19.04%	Number of systems installed	12.92%
				Installed energy	33.28%
				Availability of suppliers	37.07%
				Time of commercial use	16.72%
		Density	36.90%	Gravimetric energy density	54.65%
		Density	36.90%	Volumetric energy density	45.35%
		Efficiency	44.04%
Regulatory	21.07%	Applicable environmental law	51.67%
Regulatory	21.07%	Compliance with regulations and certificates	48.33%
Financial	24.64%	Average cost	61.45%
Financial	24.64%	Manufacturing/Imports	38.55%

Sub-criteria	Alternative 1	Alternative 2	Alternative 3	Alternative 4
Safety	Corrosion, exposure to toxic agents	Corrosion, exposure to toxic agents	Corrosion, exposure to toxic agents	Explosions, exposure to toxic agents
Demobilization	Fully recyclable	Fully recyclable	Fully recyclable	Disposable
Visual impact	Equivalent to container up to 33 m³	Equivalent to container up to 33 m³	Equivalent to container up to 33 m³	Equivalent to container up to 33 m³
Contaminant potential	Little damage	Serious damage	Average damage	Little damage
Efficiency (%)	85	92	85	98
Number of systems installed	45	3	69	112
Installed energy (MW)	61.4	1.0	61.4	174.6
Availability of suppliers	More than 40	Between 5 and 20	More than 40	More than 40
Time of commercial use	Over 60 years	Up to 10 years	Over 60 years	Over 40 years
Volumetric energy density (kWh/m³)	37.60	62.72	55.50	115.04
Gravimetric energy density (kWh/kg)	0.01875	0.02353	0.03542	0.08780
Applicable environmental law	Law enacted and applicable to technology	Law can be adapted	Law enacted and applicable to technology	Law can be adapted
Compliance with regulations and issuing of certificates	Standard only	No standard	Standard only	Standard only
Manufacturing/Imports	Factory in Brazil	Factory abroad	Factory in Brazil	Factory abroad
Average cost	Between U$ 500 and U$ 1000	Between U$ 500 and U$ 1000	Between U$ 100 and U$ 500	Higher than U$ 1000

Technology	Priority
Alternative 1	26.13%
Alternative 2	19.73%
Alternative 3	27.92%
Alternative 4	26.22%

Technology/Criteria	Environmental	Technological	Regulatory	Financial
Alternative 1	0.2371	0.1700	0.3415	0.3267
Alternative 2	0.2371	0.1819	0.1186	0.2433
Alternative 3	0.2527	0.2176	0.3415	0.3267
Alternative 4	0.2730	0.4305	0.1985	0.1033

Instituto de Tecnologia do Paraná - Tecpar Rua Prof. Algacyr Munhoz Mader, 3775 - CIC, 81350-010 Curitiba PR Brazil, Tel.: +55 41 3316-3052/3054, Fax: +55 41 3346-2872 - Curitiba - PR - Brazil
E-mail: babt@tecpar.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Correspondence: rodolfo@lactec.org.br; Tel.: +55-41-33616266 (P.R.I.)