Power management strategies for a stand-alone

power system using renewable energy sources and

hydrogen storage
Dimitris Ipsakis
a,1
, Spyros Voutetakis
a,
*, Panos Seferlis
a,2
,
Fotis Stergiopoulos
a
, Costas Elmasides
b
a
Chemical Process Engineering Research Institute (C.P.E.R.I.), CEntre for Research and Technology Hellas (CE.R.T.H.),
P.O. Box 60361, 57001 Thermi-Thessaloniki, Greece
b
Systems Sunlight SA, 67200, Neo Olvio, Xanthi, Greece
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 22 November 2007
Received in revised form
28 May 2008
Accepted 4 June 2008
Available online 4 September 2008
Keywords:
Renewable energy sources
Stand-alone power system
PEM Electrolyzer
PEM fuel cell
Lead-acid accumulator
Hydrogen production
Power management strategy
a b s t r a c t
A stand-alone power system based on a photovoltaic array and wind generators that stores
the excessive energy from renewable energy sources (RES) in the form of hydrogen via
water electrolysis for future use in a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell is
currently in operation at Neo Olvio of Xanthi, Greece. Efcient power management strate-
gies (PMSs) for the system have been developed. The PMSs have been assessed on their
capacity to meet the power load requirements through effective utilization of the electro-
lyzer and fuel cell under variable energy generation from RES (solar and wind). The evalu-
ation of the PMS has been performed through simulated experiments with anticipated
conditions over a typical four-month time period for the region of installation. The key
decision factors for the PMSs are the level of the power provided by the RES and the state
of charge (SOC) of the accumulator. Therefore, the operating policies for the hydrogen
production via water electrolysis and the hydrogen consumption at the fuel cell depend
on the excess or shortage of power from the RES and the level of SOC. A parametric sensi-
tivity analysis investigates the inuence of major operating variables for the PMSs such as
the minimum SOC level and the operating characteristics of the electrolyzer and the fuel
cell in the performance of the integrated system.
2008 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved.
1. Introduction
Power systems based on RES offer off-grid energy supply for
various applications, such us electrication of rural and
remote areas with problematic grid connection, powering of
telecommunication stations, energy intensive desalination
of water and water pumping for irrigation or drinking
purposes. These systems are usually a combination of photo-
voltaic systems (PV-systems), wind generators and diesel
generators [14]. Sometimes they are accompanied by micro-
hydro generators that utilize water potential energy to
produce electricity [57].
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 30 2310 498 317; fax: 30 2310 498 380.
E-mail address: paris@cperi.certh.gr (S. Voutetakis).
1
Department of Chemical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, P.O. Box 1517, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, P.O. Box 484, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Avai l abl e at www. sci encedi r ect . com
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ he
0360-3199/$ see front matter 2008 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.06.051
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5
Global warming is considered as one of the most critical
environmental problems that people will face in the next
50 years [8]. The use of RES for the production of electrical
energy can contribute signicantly to the reduction of green-
house emissions such as carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides
and protect the environment from further degradation. More-
over, solar and wind energy is abundant, free, clean and inex-
haustible. Other advantages of PV-systems and wind
generators include the long lifetime and low maintenance
requirements for both systems [9]. The time variations of the
weather conditions, however, require the design of a robust
system in order to compensate for the uctuations of the
available energy from RES. Traditionally, deep-cycle lead-
acid accumulators have been used as the means of short-
term energy storage. Accumulators though, have a relatively
small lifespan (around 36 years) and due to their heavy utili-
zation affect the operation and maintenance costs of the
system. Therefore, utilization of surplus energy from RES in
a water electrolyzer for hydrogen production and subsequent
use in a fuel cell in cases of shortage of energy provides
a viable, efcient and promising alternative storage of energy
[916]. Such integrated stand-alone systems have been
recently developed and implemented in various locations
around the world [15,17,18].
The design, analysis and optimization of such systems
require the development of mathematical models for all indi-
vidual components [1921]. Accurate models predict the daily
proles of produced energy from PV-systems and wind gener-
ators based on meteorological data [22,23]. Dynamic PEM
electrolyzer and hydrogen storage analysis calculate the
necessary power for hydrogen production and storage pres-
sure in pressurized tanks [24]. Several models predict fuel
cell characteristics with empirical equations [22,2527] and
rigorous mathematical dynamic models [28]. The proper
sizing of the various subsystems is a major challenge that
depends on weather conditions at the place of installation,
the selected operating policy and of course economic data
(e.g., cost of purchase, maintenance, operation and so forth).
Numerous studies have been published on this subject that
deal with different congurations of stand-alone power
systems [9,16,2932]. Optimization strategies based on cost
minimization of the integrated system utilizing a short-term
Nomenclature
A
elec
electrode area, m
2
A
w
wind generator swept area, m
2
c
p
performance coefcient of the wind generator
F Faradays constant, Cb/mol
I
bat
charging/discharging current, A
I
D
diode current for the PV-system, A
I
elec
operation current for the PEM electrolyzer, A
I
L
light current for the PV-system, A
I
o
diode reverse saturation current for the
PV-system, A
I
pv
operation current for the PV-system, A
I
sh
shunt current for the PV-system, A
i current density for the PEM fuel cell, A/m
2
i
o
Tafel parameter for the PEM fuel cell, A/m
2
l parameter for the overvoltage due to mass
transportation limitations for the PEM fuel cell,
m
2
/A
m parameter for the overvoltage due to mass
transportation limitations for the PEM fuel cell, V
n number of mol of hydrogen, mol
n
c
number of cells for the PEMelectrolyzer or the PEM
fuel cell
n
e
number of electrons
n
F
Faradays efciency
n
H2
hydrogen ow rate, mol/s
P shortage or surplus power, J/s
P
Acc
power from/to the accumulator, J/s
P
c1
hydrogen pressure before the compression, bar
P
c2
hydrogen pressure after the compression, bar
P
cr
critical pressure of hydrogen, bar
P
load
power demand of the load, J/s
P
w
output power from the wind generator, J/s
P
pv
output power from the PV-system, J/s
P
RES
produced power from the RES, J/s
P
T
pressure in the storage tanks, bar
PMSs/PMS power management strategies/strategy
R universal gas constant, bar m
3
/mol K
R
s
series resistance for the PV-system, U
R
sh
shunt resistance for the PV-system, U
SOC State of Charge of the accumulator
r resistance for the PEM fuel cell, Um
2
r
i
parameters for the ohmic resistance of the
electrolyte of the PEM electrolyzer, i =1,2
s
i
parameters for the overvoltage at the electrodes of
the PEM electrolyzer, i =1,.3
T temperature,

C
T
c1
temperature of the hydrogen before the
compression, K
T
c2
temperature of the hydrogen after the
compression, K
T
cr
critical temperature of hydrogen, K
t
i
parameters for the overvoltage at the electrodes of
the PEM electrolyzer, i =1,.3
V
c1
volume of the hydrogen before the
compression, m
3
V
c2
volume of the hydrogen after the compression, m
3
V
elec
operation cell voltage for the PEM electrolyzer, V
V
fc
operation cell voltage for the PEM fuel cell, V
V
o
open circuit voltage for the PEM fuel cell, V
V
pv
operation voltage for the PV-system, V
V
rev,elec
reversible voltage for the PEM electrolyzer, V
V
rev,fc
theoretical reversible voltage for the PEM fuel
cell, V
V
T
tank volume, m
3
Greek symbols
a curve tting parameter for the PV-system, V
a
T
Tafel slope for the PEM fuel cell, V
b blade pitch angle for the wind generator, degree
l tip speed ratio
v
wind
wind speed, m/s
r air density, kg/m
3
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7082
and a long-term storage system can be proved quite efcient
[29,3335]. Several power management algorithms that use
models to predict the behavior of stand-alone power systems
have been developed and evaluated based on the achieved
performance [32,36,37]. The experience gained from the oper-
ation of different stand-alone power systems across the world
is a valuable resource for the selection of a proper operating
policy in a similar system [3845]. The main conclusion is
that PMSs strongly affect the lifetime of the various subsys-
tems and in particular the lifetime of the accumulator, the
electrolyzer and the fuel cell. The key decisions in a PMS are
based on the SOC levels of the accumulator [22,35,37,46]. The
minimum SOC limit, SOC
min
, designates the operation of the
fuel cell and the maximum limit, SOC
max
, regulates the oper-
ation of the electrolyzer. The operation of the electrolyzer can
be supported either solely by the RES or by the RES and the
accumulator. In some cases, as described in Refs. [22,35,37],
a hysteresis band was used around those limits that would
ensure a smoother operation for the units.
Nevertheless, little is reported about the inuence that key
variables like the operation limits of SOC of the accumulator
and the output power of the fuel cell have on the operation
time and operation variables (e.g. hydrogen inventory) of the
stand-alone power system, but caution was mainly given to
the operation of the accumulator as a sensitive subsystem.
For example, low SOC
min
limits (increased depth of discharge,
DOD) might lead to increased hydrogen inventory, but at the
expense of more intense usage of the accumulator [46]. The
identication of such key variables could be used in optimiza-
tion studies that would take into account the operation costs
along with the key variables and guide the designer to suitable
decisions on enhancing the performance of the system for an
economical and reliable operation. In the present work, three
PMSs are proposed that ultimately aim to ensure the reliable
satisfaction of the system load requirement and safeguard
the units from undesirable operating conditions. The perfor-
mance of the entire power system under each PMS is then
estimated and assessed under variable conditions. Hence,
the interactions among the various components of the power
systemare being fully explored and analyzed. The assessment
criteria include the satisfaction of the specications of the
subsystems (electrolyzer, fuel cell, and accumulator) and the
maximization of the efcient power utilization. The key deci-
sion parameters in the PMS are the level of the power provided
by the RES and the SOC levels of the accumulator. Therefore,
the operating policies of the hydrogen production via water
electrolysis and the hydrogen consumption in the fuel cell
mainly depend on the excess or shortage of energy from the
RES and the level of SOC for the accumulator. Constraints
associated with the operation of the electrolyzer and the
fuel cell are also taken into consideration. The proposed
logical block diagrams are given in such a way that the imple-
mentation in various simulation programs is quite easy to
handle.
The structure of the paper is as follows: in Section 2 the
mathematical models employed for each subsystem are
briey described. The major equations are provided and the
key model parameters are dened. Section 3 presents the
proposed PMSs for the integrated systemthroughlogical block
diagrams and provides the implementation details. Section
4 reports the simulated results and evaluates the performance
of each PMSs towards certain criteria. A sensitivity analysis of
the system performance with respect to key decision parame-
ters attempts to identify the optimal operating factors for the
PMSs in Section 5.
2. Stand-alone power system: system
description and unit modeling
An application utilizing solar and wind energy with hydrogen
production through water electrolysis, storage and utilization
in fuel cell is currently in operation installed at Neo Olvio of
Xanthi, Greece. Fig. 1 shows a layout of the stand-alone power
system. The RES production subsystem comprises a PV-array
with a nominal capacity of 5 kW
p
and three wind generators
rated at 3 kW
p
in total. The system is attached to a 1 kW
load. Surplus energy from RES can potentially be used to oper-
ate a PEM electrolyzer, rated at 4.2 kW
p
. The produced
hydrogen is stored in cylinders under medium pressure with
total volume 6 m
3
(equivalent energy is around 190 kWh,
giving about 8 days of autonomy). In case that RES fail to
meet the load specication, a PEM fuel cell rated at 4 kW
p
that utilizes the stored hydrogen can be used as an alternative
energy source. The produced water from the fuel cell is
recycled in a closed loop back to the water storage tank for
use in the electrolyzer. Furthermore, in order to account for
short-term produced energy uctuations and ensure
smoother operation of the system, a lead-acid accumulator
with a total capacity of 3000 Ah at 48 V has been installed.
Optionally, a back up unit (diesel generator or grid) can be
used in order to cover the electrical needs during periods of
low RES energy and hydrogen inventory. Furthermore, power
electronic converters are employed for power conditioning
and integration of the various subsystems through a 48 V DC
bus. Thus, in order to assess the performance of the integrated
system, detailed and accurate mathematical models are
employed for the simulation of each subsystem in the inte-
grated system.
Fig. 1 Block diagram of the proposed stand-alone power
system.
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7083
2.1. Photovoltaic system
Commonly available PV-systems usually use crystalline or
polycrystalline cells [22,47]. A photovoltaic cell has the ability
to convert photon energy into electrical energy in the form of
direct current (DC). This is possible due to two basic properties
of PV cells:
v Electrons are freed in a semiconductor when photons with
sufcient energy are absorbed within them.
v When dissimilar semiconductors are joined at a common
boundary, a xed electric eld is usually induced across
that boundary.
The model that is widely used is the one-diode model andis
referredinsubsystems witha specic number of cells inseries.
The relationship between current and voltage is given by [22]:
I
pv
= I
L
I
D
I
sh
= I
L
I
o

exp

V
pv
I
pv
R
s
a

V
pv
I
pv
R
s
R
sh
(1)
The output power from the PV-array is given by:
P
pv
= V
pv
I
pv
h
conv
(2)
where h
conv
is the efciency of a DC/DC converter (typically
w9095%). Variables I
L
, I
o
, R
s
and a, are obtained by non-linear
algebraic equations that are described and presented else-
where [22,47,48]. Eq. (1) requires the PV manufacturer data
regarding the values of current and voltage at the maximum
power point, the value of current at short circuit current
conditions, the value of voltage at open voltage conditions,
the values of the temperature coefcient at short circuit and
open voltage conditions and nally the number of solar cells.
2.2. Wind generators
A wind turbine converts the kinetic energy of wind into
mechanical energy. Wind generators can be separated accord-
ing to the type of the axis about which the turbine rotates.
Turbines that rotate around a horizontal axis are more
commonly used than those that rotate around a vertical axis.
Themodel isbasedonthecharacteristicsof thepower of turbine
at steady state. The produced power is proportional to the cube
of the wind speed and is given by the following equation [49]:
P
w
= c
p
(l; b)
rA
w
2
v
3
wind
h
inv
(3)
where h
inv
is the efciency of anAC/DC inverter (typically w90
95%). The calculation of c
p
is based on the characteristics of the
turbine [49].
2.3. Lead-acid accumulator
A lead-acid accumulator is an electrochemical device that
converts electrical energy into chemical energy during the
charging process and vice versa during the discharging
process [22,50]. As in any electrochemical device, an anodic
and a cathodic electrode are present. The reactions that take
place are the following:
Anode: Pb HSO

4
/PbSO
4
H

2e

(4)
Cathode: PbO
2
HSO

4
3H

2e

/PbSO
4
2H
2
O (5)
Overall reaction (discharge)
Pb PbO
2
2H
2
SO
4
/2PbSO
4
2H
2
O (6)
The employed KiBaMmodel [50] requires as input information
the experimental data describing the discharging current as
a function of the discharging time. The mathematical model
calculates the charging and discharging current, voltage and
the SOC of the accumulator. The SOC of the accumulator is
the fraction of the current capacity of the accumulator at
each time instant, divided by its nominal capacity:
SOC(t) = SOC(t 1)(1 s) I
bat
h
bat
(Dt) (7)
where s is the self-discharge rate (w2.5%), h
bat
is the efciency
factor (w95%) and t is the time in h. The depth of discharge
(DOD), is dened as the difference between the maximum
and the minimum allowed operation limit of the SOC of the
accumulator.
2.4. Polymer electrolyte membrane electrolyzer
A PEM electrolyzer decomposes water into hydrogen and
oxygen by passing an electrical current (DC) betweentwo elec-
trodes separated by an aqueous electrolyte with good ionic
conductivity. The reactions that take place at the anode and
the cathode of a PEM electrolyzer are as follows:
Anode: H
2
O/
1
2
O
2
2H

2e

(8)
Cathode: 2H

2e

/H
2
(9)
In order to properly model the voltagecurrent characteristics
of the PEM electrolyzer, the overvoltages that occur at the
electrodes and the ohmic resistance must be taken into
consideration. The voltagecurrent relationship is based on
the following equation [22]:
V
elec
= V
rev;elec

r
1
r
2
T
A
elec
I
elec

s
1
s
2
T
s
3
T
2

log

t
1
t
2
=T t
3
=T
2
A
elec
I
elec
1

(10)
The reversible voltage is simply the maximum voltage that
can be applied across the electrodes of an electrolyzer. The
above semi-empirical model has been applied for alkaline
electrolyzers, but can be also used for a PEM electrolyzer if
sufcient experimental data exist for the model validation.
The production rate of hydrogen in an electrolyzer is given
by the Faradays Law [51]:
n
H
2
= n
F
n
c
I
elec
n
e
F
(11)
The Faradays efciency, n
F
, is the ratio between the actual
and the theoretical amount of hydrogen produced and is
usually around 80100%.
The PEM electrolyzer of the stand-alone power system can
operate under variable power mode that must be between
a minimum and a maximum power level.
2.5. Polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell
The opposite reactions that occur in an electrolyzer take place
in a fuel cell. Hydrogen in the anode is ionized releasing
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7084
electrons and protons. Electrons ow to the cathode through
a circuit producing electric current. Protons diffuse through
a polymer electrolyte membrane and react in the cathode
with oxygen and electrons to form water. The reactions that
take place are:
Anode: H
2
/2H

2e

(12)
Cathode:
1
2
O
2
2H

2e

/H
2
O (13)
The following equationdescribes the voltagecurrent relation-
ship that takes into consideration the activation overvoltage
(Tafel equation), the ohmic overvoltage from the resistances
in the cell as well the mass transport limitations [22,51]:
V
fc
= V
o
a
T
log(i) ir m exp(il) (14)
V
o
= V
rev;FC
a
T
log(i
o
) (15)
Similar to the electrolyzer operation, the ow rates of
hydrogen and oxygen are given from Eq. (11). The fuel cell of
the proposed stand-alone power system is rated at 4 kW
p
,
but can be used at various levels of output power depending
on the hydrogen inlet ow rate. The factors that mainly affect
the fuel cell performance are the operating temperature and
the gas pressure in the anode and cathode [22,26,27,47]. In
general, higher temperature and gas pressure generally lead
to better fuel cell performance but at the expense of higher
thermal requirements for the cooling system and increased
energy for the compression of the gases.
2.6. Medium pressure hydrogen storage
Hydrogen can either be stored as a liquid or as a gas. Liquid
hydrogencanbe storedincryogenic tanks andgaseous hydrogen
can be stored in either medium or high pressure cylinders or
near atmospheric pressure in metal hydrides. Storage under
pressure requires the use of an energy demanding gas
compressor. In the case of metal hydrides the use of
a compressor is not required but energy should be supplied
to help the chemical desorption of the hydrogen from the
metal. Metal hydride technology for hydrogen storage is
a fairly new technology with signicant recent developments
[5258]. However, the industrial use of metal hydride tech-
nology is still at an early stage.
The system under investigation stores hydrogen in pres-
surized tanks. Specically, hydrogen is temporarily stored in
lowpressure buffer tanks until the pressure inside these tanks
reaches the limit of 7 bar. Hydrogen is then compressed to the
medium pressure level (approx. 20 bar) of the nal storage
tank. The buffer storage serves as a regulatory unit for
hydrogen ow and pressure. The basic equations (Van der
Waals law) that describes the pressure inside the storage
tanks are as follows [22]:
P
T
=
nRT
V
T
nb
s
a
s
n
2
V
2
T
(16)
a
s
=
27R
2
T
2
cr
64P
cr
(17)
b
s
=
RT
cr
8P
cr
(18)
where a
s
and b
s
are specic parameters for hydrogen.
The relationship between conditions before the compres-
sion (state 1) and after the compression (state 2) for polytropic
compression is given by the following relation:
P
c2
P
c1
=

V
c1
V
c2

k
=

T
c2
T
c1

k=(k1)
(19)
where k is the polytropic coefcient.
Similarly, the polytropic work (DW
pol
) for the compression
of hydrogen is related to the pressure difference as:
DW
pol
=
k
k 1
n
H
2
RT
c1
"

P
c2
P
c1

(k1)=k
1
#
(20)
It is noted that the actual work from the compressor as well
as the electrical energy demand for the operation of the
compressor motor is calculated by Eq. (20) after dividing it
by the respective efciency coefcients for total compressor
power and for total electrical consumption. The compressor
is not considered as an integrated part of the stand-alone
power system where it would be powered by the various
subsystems (e.g. the RES or the accumulator) but rather
as an auxiliary unit whose electrical needs are met by the
grid.
The values for all the parameters engaged in the mathe-
matical models are given in Appendix.
3. Power management strategies
The main objective for the applied PMSs in the integrated
system is the satisfaction of the load requirements. RES
produce power that is basically used to meet the 1 kW
constant load. Any surplus of power can be potentially stored
in the form of hydrogen through water electrolysis and any
shortage of power can be met by the fuel cell provided that
sufcient inventory of hydrogen is available. The operating
logic would have been quite simple if the RES power was
constant or varying slowly over time. However, the large vari-
ability of power generation, mainly due to the stochastic
behavior of the RES, increases the complexity of the manage-
ment of the system [46]. Furthermore, the operation of the
electrolyzer and the fuel cell should satisfy certain specica-
tions regarding the duration and power level of operation
every time the units are ignited. Frequent start-up and
shut-down actions for the electrolyzer and the fuel cell will
eventually degrade their performance and possibly reduce
their lifespan. Therefore, the lead-acid accumulator becomes
an important component of the systemthat aims at absorbing
the short-term variability of the RES power generation. On the
other hand, the operation cycles that an accumulator
undergoes affect its lifespan and subsequently inuence the
operating and maintenance costs of the entire system. In
a nutshell, the PMSs aim at providing operating policies under
variable weather conditions that would ensure the satisfac-
tion of the power requirements and maintain the operating
costs at a reasonable level.
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7085
Solar radiation intensity, air temperature and wind speed
proles averaged over hourly time intervals during a typical
four-month time period for Neo Olvio, Xanthi, are shown in
Table 1. The size of the time interval is suitable to represent
the variation in the wind and solar energy adequately. Table 2
provides the operational characteristics of the various compo-
nents in the integrated power system. Based on the input data
(weather proles) during the given four-month time period,
the net power for the system is calculated as the difference
between the output power from the RES, P
res
(i.e. the sum of
the output power from the PV-array and the wind generators)
and the constant power demand, P
load
.
P = P
RES
P
load
(21)
Table 3 summarizes the characteristics of the cumulative net
energy for the integrated system for each month. In 56.4% of
the total time period, an excess of energy is available (positive
values) and in 43.6% of the time a shortage of energy is
obtained (negative values).
3.1. Description of the power management strategies
As observed in the simulation results for the systemunder the
specic weather conditions (Table 3), the system operates in
energy decit for a large period of time. Hence, the lead-acid
accumulator or the fuel cell should be capable of providing
the necessary power to meet the load requirement. Therefore,
the operation of the integrated system involves a number of
decisions regarding the management and use of power. The
key indicator that governs the operation of the system is the
SOC of the accumulator. The dynamics of the accumulator
are much faster than those of the electrolyzer and that of
the fuel cell and, therefore, can efciently cover the energy
uctuations due to the stochastic nature of the RES. Addition-
ally, frequent changes in the operation of the electrolyzer and
the fuel cell (e.g., start-ups and shut-downs) are not recom-
mended because they reduce the lifespan of the units. Given
the importance of the accumulator in the smooth operation
of the overall system, it is essential to keep the accumulator
SOC at the highest allowable level, SOC
max
, while prevent
a SOC drop below a minimum level, SOC
min
[46].
In general, when the accumulator SOC reaches SOC
max
,
excess energy can be directed to the electrolyzer for hydrogen
production (the electrolyzer can also operate in various power
levels between the minimumand maximumrated power) and
when the accumulator system reaches SOC
min
, the fuel cell
may cover the energy shortage. However, operational
constraints of the individual components may impose certain
restrictions on the underlined power management scheme.
The effect of these constraints on the operational
characteristics of the overall system will be explored through
the implementation of three PMSs.
For theintegratedsystemunder considerationthefollowing
values for the operating parameters are selected (unless stated
otherwise): SOC
min
, 84%; SOC
max
, 91%; load, 1 kW; fuel cell
output power, 1 kW (operating current, 30.19 A; operating
voltage, 33.18 V); initial accumulator capacity, 2700 Ah
(SOC=90%); minimum allowed power level (P
min,elec
) for the
electrolyzer, 1.05 kW; maximumallowed power level (P
max,elec
)
for the electrolyzer, 4.2 kW; initially hydrogen inventory level,
60.5 Nm
3
of hydrogen (55% of the maximum capacity of the
pressurized tanks which is equivalent to about 110 kWh).
3.2. Power management strategy 1 (PMS1)
The logical block diagram for PMS1 is shown in Fig. 2. If P _0,
based on hourly averaged power supply, then the necessary
power to satisfy the load is provided by the lead-acid accumu-
lator or the fuel cell. The source of additional power is deter-
mined based on the SOC of the accumulator. If
SOC_SOC
min
then the accumulator provides the necessary
power to the system. If SOC_SOC
min
, then the fuel cell
provides the necessary power to meet the total load demand.
In the case that the output power of the fuel cell is higher than
the power decit, the excess power is utilized by the accumu-
lator. If P >0 then the surplus power is either used in the elec-
trolyzer for the production of hydrogen or in the charging of
the accumulator. However, since the electrolyzer has
a minimumload level for efcient operation, the excess power
must be higher than P
min,elec
for the initiation of the electro-
lyzer in case that SOC_SOC
max
. If SOC_SOC
max
and
P _P
min,elec
then the available power is used to charge the
accumulator with some provision to avoid overcharging
(dump load). If P _P
max,elec
then the electrolyzer operates at
its maximum power and the rest of the power, P
Acc,charge
=
P P
max,elec
is used for charging the accumulator.
3.3. Power management strategy 2 (PMS2)
The logical block diagram for PMS2 is shown in Fig. 3. If P _0,
then PMS2 is exactly the same as PMS1. If P >0, then the
Table 1 Average values for solar radiation, temperature
and wind speed for each month.
Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4
G (W/m
2
) 207.8 275.5 285.7 254.1
T (K) 296.8 303.8 305.7 304.8
v
wind
(m/s) 1.54 1.44 1.95 1.75
Table 2 Component characteristics in the stand-alone
power system.
PV-
system
Wind
generators
Lead-acid
accumulator
PEM
electrolyzer
PEM
fuel
cell
Storage
unit
5 kW
p
3 kW
p
144 kWh 4.2 kW
p
4 kW
p
6 m
3
/
190 kWh
Table 3 Net energy cumulative over the four-monthtime
period.
Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Overall
Excess of
energy (kWh)
412.3 506.5 599.1 461.2 1979.1
Shortage of
energy (kWh)
421.8 349.1 357.3 380.4 1508.6
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7086
surplus power is driven to the electrolyzer for the production
of hydrogen or for charging the accumulator. If SOC_SOC
max
,
then the surplus power is utilized in the electrolyzer as long as
P
min,elec
_P _P
max,elec
. If P _P
min,elec
, then the accumulator
provides the power that is required for the electrolyzer to
operate at the lowest allowable level, P
min,elec
. The power
that the accumulator provides to the electrolyzer for its oper-
ation is calculated as follows:
P
Acc;discharge
= fP
max;elec
P (22)
where f is the ratio of the electrolyzer current operation to its
maximum operation level. For this study, parameter f is
selected equal to 0.25.
If P _P
max,elec
, then the electrolyzer operates at its
maximum power and the rest of the power is used to charge
the accumulator. It is evident that PMS2 utilizes the electro-
lyzer more than PMS1 at the expense of more intense usage
of the accumulator. As in PMS1, in order to avoid the accumu-
lator from overcharging, excess power is dumped if the SOC
level reaches that of 100%.
3.4. Power management strategy 3 (PMS3)
The logical block diagram for PMS3 is shown in Fig. 4. PMS3 is
a unique strategy that was presented among others in
Ref. [37], and differs from the simple logic of PMS1 and PMS2
that are mainly used in stand-alone power systems. In
PMS3, when the SOC reaches its upper limit the accumulator
is disconnected from the RES supply and solely provides the
necessary load demand. RES power is then directed to the
electrolyzer for hydrogen production. This policy aims to
protect the accumulator from overcharging. More specically,
when SOC_SOC
max
and P
min,elec
_P
RES
_P
max,elec
then the
RES provide the power to the electrolyzer and the accumulator
meets the load demand. If P
RES
_P
min,elec
then the excess
power is dumped and if P
RES
_P
max,elec
then the electrolyzer
uses the P
max,elec
power and the remaining power is also
dumped. If SOC
min
<SOC<SOC
max
then the accumulator is
charged or discharged with respect to the excess or shortage
of power, respectively. Whenever SOC_SOC
min
, the fuel cell
solely provides the load demand (its output power is always
Fig. 2 Logical block diagram for PMS1.
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7087
equal to the load demand) and the RES solely charge the
accumulator.
4. PMS performance
The performance of the stand-alone power system under the
three proposed PMSs over a typical four-month time period
has been evaluated. Table 4 shows the percentage of time
that the SOC was below SOC
min
, between SOC
min
and SOC
max
,
and above SOC
max
for the three PMSs, respectively. As
observed, in PMS1 the percentage of time that SOC was above
its upper limit was the highest as compared to the other two
PMSs and moreover, the time that SOC was below the lower
limit was the lowest among all PMSs. On the other side,
PMS3, where the accumulator was disconnected and used
for the load whenever SOC>SOC
max
, exhibited the highest
percentage of time with the accumulator SOC below its lower
limit. This is characteristic of a heavier utilization of the
accumulator for the power requirements of the integrated
system. For all PMSs, the largest power shortages were
observed during month 1 (large percentage of time that SOC
was below the lower limit) that resulted in intensive use of
the fuel cell. On the contrary, month 3 exhibited the highest
power surplus, exceeding P
min,elec
for long periods of time,
and therefore the electrolyzer was used extensively for
hydrogen production. Regarding the accumulator, the extent
of violation for the limits was not very signicant in any of
the PMSs. Therefore, the risk for overcharging or exhausting
the accumulator was totally avoided.
Figs. 57 showthe total hydrogen production in the electro-
lyzer, consumption in the fuel cell and the hydrogeninventory
in the system, respectively, during the simulated time period
for the three PMSs. As expected, the intermittent energy
supply to the electrolyzer due to the wide uctuations of the
weather conditions caused the non-continuous operation of
the electrolyzer. Despite the fact that PMS1 exhibited the
longest period that SOC>SOC
max
, it was PMS3 that resulted
Fig. 3 Logical block diagram for PMS2.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7088
in the highest production of hydrogen. However, in PMS1 the
SOC of the accumulator didnt reach the lower limit as
frequent as in PMS2 and PMS3 and hydrogen consumption
in the fuel cell was less than the other two strategies.
PMS3 resulted in the highest hydrogen production because
the entire RES power was directed to the electrolyzer when-
ever the maximum SOC limit was reached. However, the
largest variability in the SOC for the accumulator caused the
fuel cell to operate more intensively. Therefore, hydrogen
inventory was depleted during the four-month time period
leading to signicant decit in hydrogen. Such a situation
requires additional power from an outside source (e.g., diesel
generator or electrical grid connection). Overall, PMS1 and
PMS2 adequately managed to operate the stand-alone power
system without depleting the initial hydrogen inventory.
Tables 5 and 6 present the mean values and the standard devi-
ation of the population of the values of the hydrogen inven-
tory for each month and for each PMSs.
5. Parametric sensitivity studies
5.1. Effect of the minimum state-of-charge, SOC
min
Lead-acid accumulator manufacturers recommend that a very
lowvalue for SOC
min
should be avoided in order to prolong the
life of the accumulator. Furthermore, the use of the fuel cell at
high output power would cause the fuel cell to work less time
in order to cover the required power of the system and would
therefore increase its lifetime at the expense of higher
hydrogen consumption. Fig. 8ac depict the effect of three
different levels for SOC
min
to the hydrogen inventory during
the simulated period for the three PMSs, respectively (output
power of fuel cell is xed at 1 kW). The reduction in the
minimum SOC limit resulted in higher hydrogen inventory
during the simulation time for all PMSs. Especially, in PMS3
the reduction of the SOC
min
at 80% and 76% eliminated the
Fig. 4 Logical block diagram for PMS3.
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7089
risk of hydrogen inventory depletion at the end of the four-
month time period.
5.2. Effect of the fuel cell output power, P
FC
Inthesimulatedexamples sofar, thefuel cell output power was
xed at 1 kW independent of the RES power level. The effect of
operating the fuel cell at a variable level was investigated. Vari-
able power mode implies that the fuel cell only provides the
power decit for the load without charging the accumulator.
Since PMS3 is only applicable for constant output power of the
fuel cell to solely meet the load demand, only PMS1 and PMS2
are discussed here. Fig. 9a,b shows the effect of three levels of
output power operation for the fuel cell on hydrogen inventory
for PMS1 and PMS2, respectively (SOC
min
=84%). Results
suggest that the operation of the fuel cell at a higher output
power level (2 kW xed output power) increased hydrogen
consumption and subsequently reduced the hydrogen inven-
toryduring the four-monthtimeperiod. Inparticular, hydrogen
inventory in PMS2 became negative at some time instances
implying the needfor auxiliary power source (e.g., diesel gener-
ator or connection to electrical grid). On the contrary, fuel cell
operation with variable power mode resulted in higher
hydrogen inventory at the end of the four-month time period.
5.3. Discussion on parametric sensitivity studies
Tables 7 and 8 summarize the results from all the simulated
studies. An operation cycle for the accumulator is dened as
the process where a discharging (or charging) mode is
followed by a charging (or discharging) mode. The efciency
of the accumulator is dened as the ratio between the dis-
charging energy and the charging energy [37]. Table 7 presents
the percentage of time that each subsystem in the integrated
system was in operation during the four-month time period
for all PMSs. It is clear that the decrease in the SOC
min
caused
the accumulator to charge for shorter times and discharge for
longer periods, while the electrolyzer and the fuel cell oper-
ated for shorter overall time. Moreover, the reduction in the
SOC
min
had an increasing effect on the number of the total
accumulator cycles. Due to the fact that the required power
for electrolysis and the generated power from the fuel cell
reduced, higher hydrogen inventory levels were present
during the simulated period. Regarding the suitable selection
of the minimum level for the SOC, the key decision relates
to the operation pattern of the accumulator, electrolyzer and
fuel cell. A value of SOC
min
that would combine reduced
percentage of cycles for the accumulator and a smooth oper-
ation pattern with less number of start-ups and shut-downs
for the electrolyzer and fuel cell would be the most benecial.
Such a behavior could be accomplished with the introduction
of a hysteresis band for the operation of the electrolyzer and
the fuel cell at the critical SOC levels [35,59]. Special care,
however, should be given at the hydrogen inventory were
depletion should be avoided.
A comparison among the three PMSs reveals that in PMS3
the accumulator operated for longer periods while the fuel
cell was utilized more than the other two strategies. Moreover,
the electrolyzer in PMS2 operated for a longer time period than
in PMS1 but, hydrogen inventory was higher in PMS1 due to
Table 4 SOC levels during a typical four-month time period.
Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Overall
SOC
min
>SOC PMS1 16% 3.9% 2.9% 8.4% 7.8%
PMS2 18.5% 7.9% 5.1% 12.1% 10.9%
PMS3 19.5% 10.1% 9.4% 15.1% 13.5%
SOC
min
<SOC<SOC
max
PMS1 72.6% 73.2% 69.1% 73.5% 72.1%
PMS2 72.7% 76.4% 73.7% 76.2% 74.7%
PMS3 75.3% 80.3% 78.9% 78.2% 78.2%
SOC>SOC
max
PMS1 11.4% 22.9% 28% 18.1% 20.1%
PMS2 8.8% 15.7% 21.2% 11.7% 14.4%
PMS3 5.2% 9.6% 11.7% 6.7% 8.3%
Fig. 5 Cumulative hydrogen production during a typical
four-month time period.
Fig. 6 Cumulative hydrogen consumption during a typical
four-month time period.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7090
higher hydrogen consumption by the fuel cell in PMS2.
Furthermore, the amount of hydrogen consumed was much
higher in PMS3 than in the other two PMS and this resulted
in the lower hydrogen inventory at the end of the simulated
time period.
As far as the output power of the fuel cell is of concern, it is
noted that anincreased output power fromthe fuel cell results
in more power for the charging of the accumulator. An
increase in the peak output power from the fuel cell (from
1 kW to 2 kW) caused the accumulator to operate for slightly
shorter period (sum of charge and discharge time). Further-
more, the electrolyzer was forced to operate for slightly longer
period while the fuel cell operated for a shorter period.
Hydrogen inventory at the end of the four-month time period
was reduced as the fuel cell operating power level increased
the hydrogen consumption. In some cases (P
FC
at 2 kW for
the PMS2), hydrogen inventory was totally depleted. The vari-
able power mode operation of the fuel cell resulted in lower
operation time for both the accumulator and the electrolyzer.
However, the fuel cell operated for longer periods of time than
in the cases of xed output power level but hydrogen inven-
tory was signicantly higher throughout the simulated period.
In conclusion, output power level for the fuel cell exceeding
that of the load should be avoided and the operation of the
fuel cell at power level equal that of the load demand would
be the most benecial for the performance of the overall
system as far as hydrogen inventory is of primary concern.
A comparison among PMS1 and PMS2 reveals that the
accumulator in PMS1 operated for shorter period than in
PMS2, while the electrolyzer and the fuel cell also operated
for shorter period. Furthermore, hydrogen production and
consumption was higher in PMS2 than in PMS1, but the
hydrogen inventory was less for all the cases of the fuel cell
output power. An interesting observation is that the increase
in the fuel cell output power operating level from 1 kW to
Fig. 7 Hydrogen inventory during a typical four-month
time period.
Table 5 Mean values of the hydrogen inventory (Nm
3
)
for each PMS.
Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4
PMS1 43.05 27.16 48.16 64.31
PMS2 39.89 16.68 31.28 40.43
PMS3 37.65 9.71 14.28 13.12
Table 6 Standard deviation values of the hydrogen
inventory for each PMS.
Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4
PMS1 15.64 5.11 9.61 5.35
PMS2 17.27 3.16 8.2 7.5
PMS3 18.13 2.61 4.37 8.76
Fig. 8 Effect of theSOC
min
onthehydrogeninventoryduring
a typical four-monthtime period (a. PMS1; b. PMS2; c. PMS3).
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7091
2 kW resulted in increased percentage of cycles for the accu-
mulator but when the fuel cell operated in variable power
resulted in decreased cycles. Such a variable mode operation
behavior may prolong the life of the accumulator but in the
expense of a more frequent use of the fuel cell and a possible
early replacement. Energy requirements for hydrogen
compression are also reported in Tables 7 and 8. As expected,
compression energy is correlated to electrolyzer operation. An
increase in the electrolyzer operation time increases the total
compression operation time and the total energy demand.
Special care should be given to the fact that the compression
of hydrogen provokes the inevitable temperature increase
(Eq. (19)) and thus cooling utilities need to be present to cool
hydrogen before it is stored.
6. Conclusions
Three different PMSs for an integrated power system that
comprises energy generation from RES and hydrogen produc-
tion as an alternative to energy storage have been developed.
The evaluation of the PMSs performance required the devel-
opment of mathematical models for the calculation of the
response of the individual components of the system using
real weather data for the region of installation. The PMSs
used as decision variables the net power from the RES after
satisfying the load and the accumulator SOC. The accumu-
lator maximum and minimum SOC levels determined the
operation of the electrolyzer and the fuel cell, respectively.
Several modes of operation for the electrolyzer and the fuel
cell were investigated (e.g., minimum capacity level, xed or
variable power level etc.). The simulated results over a typical
four-month time period based on hourly averaged data
revealed the characteristics of the operating performance for
the three proposed strategies. PMS3 performance was consid-
ered unsatisfactory for the system under investigation since
the cycles and time for the accumulator were too high, while
the average hydrogen inventory was quite low. PMS1 resulted
in less operation time for all the subsystems and in higher
average hydrogeninventory than inPMS2. However, the usage
of the accumulator for the electrolyzer operation in cases of
low RES energy surplus in PMS2 is considered an advantage
Fig. 9 Effect of the fuel cell output power on the hydrogen
inventory during a typical four-month time period (a.
PMS1; b. PMS2).
Table 7 Subsystem operational data for the four-month time period.
% T
charge
% T
discharge
% T
elec
% T
FC
% T
comp
Cycles, %
SOC
min
=84% PMS1 40.92 52.07 7.08 5.96 3.01 3.70
PMS2 40.07 53.59 10.40 8.43 3.52 4.08
PMS3 45.16 54.84 7.66 10.84 3.86 6.48
SOC
min
=80% PMS1 39.36 54.88 5.76 3.15 2.47 4.32
PMS2 38.04 57.38 7.35 3.42 2.51 4.32
PMS3 40.65 59.35 4.91 3.59 2.47 5.90
SOC
min
=76% PMS1 38.79 55.79 5.42 2.24 2.41 4.92
PMS2 37.50 58.20 6.88 2.41 2.30 5.11
PMS3 39.97 60.03 4.47 2.47 2.24 6.84
P
FC
=1 kW PMS1 40.92 52.07 7.08 5.96 3.01 3.70
PMS2 40.07 53.59 10.40 8.43 3.52 4.08
PMS3 45.16 54.84 7.66 10.84 3.86 6.48
P
FC
=2 kW PMS1 38.01 54.81 7.25 3.22 3.12 5.44
PMS2 35.84 57.25 11.21 5.01 3.90 6.22
PMS3
P
FC
=variable PMS1 35.2 51.12 6.84 6.91 2.95 2.43
PMS2 32.25 51.69 9.76 9.96 3.42 2.43
PMS3
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7092
as the hydrogen production will increase. Moreover, the inter-
mittent energy supply from the RES would not always guar-
antee the smooth operation of the electrolyzer in PMS1 and
frequent start-ups and shut-downs might occur. PMS1 would
be efcient in places where enough energy from the RES is
available for long periods of time. In contrast, in places such
as the Neo Olvio in Xanthi, such periods are not very frequent
and PMS2 is also considered a viable option. The suitable
selection of the PMS decision variable values (e.g. SOC
min
,
SOC
max
, operating power for the fuel cell and minimum oper-
ating level of the electrolyzer, hydrogen compression pattern
and so forth) requires the consideration of the operating and
maintenance costs for the various subsystems over a specied
period of time under a detailed optimization strategy.
Acknowledgements
The nancial support of the European Fund of Regional
Growth and the Region of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace
with nal beneciary the General Secretariat of research and
technology under project contract (PEP/AMQ 9) in the oper-
ating project Eastern Macedonia and Thrace is gratefully
acknowledged.
Appendix
All parameter values of the system components are given
below (see literature references as well):
PV-system: I
mp
, 4.25 A; V
mp
, 16.5 V; I
sc
, 4.7 A; V
oc
, 21.4 V; N
s
,
36; m
I,sc
, 2.06 10
3
A/K; m
V,oc
, 0.077 V/K.
Wind generator: D, 2.7 m.
Accumulator: c, 0.151; k, 1.56; q
max
, 866.48 Ah; E
oc
, 1.9 V/cell;
E
od
, 2.097 V/cell; E
min
, 1.94 V/cell; E
max
, 2.35 V/cell; R
o
, from
0.5 10
3
to 1.32 10
3
U; s
ac
, 2.5%; n
ac
, 95%.
Electrolyzer: r
1
, 2.3 10
3
U/m
2
; r
2
, 1.107 10
7
U/

Cm
2
; s
1
,
1.286 10
1
V; s
2
, 2.378 10
3
V/

C; s
3
, 2.606 10
5
V/

C
2
; t
1
,
3.559 10
1
m
2
/A; t
2
, 1.302 m
2
C/A; t
3
, 2.513 10
3
m
2
C
2
/A.
Fuel cell: V
o
, 0.86 V; a
T
, 0.0121 V; r, 0.0130 Ucm
2
; m, 0; l, 0.
Storage system: V
T
, 6 m
3
; n
H2
, 0.0125 mol/s.
r e f e r e n c e s
[1] Isherwood W, Ray Smith J, Aceves SM, Berry G, Clark W,
Johnson R, et al. Remote power systems with advanced
storage technologies for Alaskan villages. Energy 2000;25:
100520.
[2] Bhatti TS, Al-Ademi AAF, Bansal NK. Loadfrequency control
of isolated wind-diesel microhydro hybrid power systems
(WDMHPS). Energy 1997;22:46170.
[3] Kane M, Larrain D, Favrat D, Allani Y. Small hybrid solar
power system. Energy 2003;28:142743.
[4] Nfah EM, Ngundam JM, Tchinda R. Modelling of solar/diesel/
battery hybrid power systems for far-north Cameroon.
Renewable Energy 2007;32:83244.
[5] Zvonko B. Short-term optimization of the new Avc e
pumping plant and three existing hydro power plants on the
Soc a river in Slovenia. Electric Power Systems Research
2007;77:14107.
[6] Forouzbakhsh F, Hosseini SMH, Vakilian M. An approach to
the investment analysis of small and medium hydro-power
plants. Energy Policy 2007;35:101324.
[7] Bueno C, Carta JA. Wind powered pumped hydro storage
systems, a means of increasing the penetration of renewable
energy in the Canary Islands. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 2006;10:31240.
[8] Mathews J. Seven steps to curb global warming. Energy Policy
2007;35:424759.
[9] Nelson DB, Nehrir MH, Wang C. Unit sizing and cost analysis
of stand-alone hybrid wind/PV/fuel cell power generation
systems. Renewable Energy 2006;31:164156.
[10] Ghosh PC, Emonts B, Stolten D. Comparison of hydrogen
storage with diesel-generator system in a PVWEC hybrid
system. Solar Energy 2003;75:18798.
Table 8 Hydrogen production and consumption and power data for the operation of the subsystems for the four-month
time period.
E
Charge
,
kWh
E
Discharge
,
kWh
Efciency,
%
E
Elec
,
kWh
E
FC
,
kWh
H
2
prod.,
m
3
H
2
cons., m
3
Net
H
2
, m
3
H
2
decit,
m
3
E
Loss
,
kWh
E
comp,
kWh
SOC
min
=84% PMS1 1560.5 1370.9 87.85 456.94 176 92.06 102.08 50.45 0 0 57.41
PMS2 1571 1381.3 87.92 529.82 249 106.74 144.42 22.80 0 0 68.05
PMS3 1691.2 1494.1 88.35 585.56 320 117.97 185.60 7.16 10.44 7.75 74.57
SOC
min
=80% PMS1 1620.9 1430.8 88.27 373.39 93 75.22 53.94 81.76 0 0 47.65
PMS2 1664.2 1469.2 88.29 376.7 101 75.89 58.58 77.79 0 0 48.40
PMS3 1770 1566.9 88.53 370.21 106 74.58 61.48 73.58 0 3.15 48.5
SOC
min
=76% PMS1 1634.4 1450.5 88.75 352.55 66 71.03 38.28 93.22 0 0 45.86
PMS2 1675.2 1487.2 88.78 353.46 71 71.21 41.18 90.50 0 0 45.40
PMS3 1775.6 1578.9 88.92 344.1 73 69.32 42.34 87.46 0 2.62 43.03
P
FC
=1 kW PMS1 1560.5 1370.9 87.85 456.94 176 92.06 102.08 50.45 0 0 57.41
PMS2 1571 1381.3 87.92 529.82 249 106.74 144.42 22.80 0 0 68.05
PMS3 1691.2 1494.1 88.35 585.56 320 117.97 185.60 7.16 10.44 7.75 74.57
P
FC
=2 kW PMS1 1625.9 1431.6 88.05 466.16 190 93.91 114.80 39.59 0 0 59.40
PMS2 1659.3 1464.1 88.24 571.31 296 115.10 178.84 3.27 4.83 0 75.70
PMS3
P
FC
=variable PMS1 1536.3 1349.5 87.84 442.74 159 89.19 90.91 58.76 0 0 56.13
PMS2 1536.9 1351.5 87.94 501.42 216.43 101.02 123.75 37.74 0 0 67.20
PMS3
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7093
[11] Contreras A, Carpio J, Molero M, VezirogluTN. Solar-hydrogen
an energy system for sustainable development in Spain.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1999;24:104152.
[12] Abdallah M, Asfour SS, Veziroglu TN. Solar-hydrogen energy
system for Egypt. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
1999;24:50517.
[13] Almogren S, Veziroglu TN. Solar-hydrogen energy system for
Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2004;
29:118190.
[14] Steinfeld A, Kuhn P, Reller A, Palumbo R, Murray J,
Tamaura Y. Solar-processed metals as clean energy carriers
and water-splitters. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy 1998;23:76774.
[15] Little M, Thomson M, Ineld D. Electrical integration of
renewable energy into stand-alone power supplies
incorporating hydrogen storage. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:15828.
[16] Barra L, Coiante D. Hydrogen-photovoltaic stand-alone
power stations: a sizing method. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 1993;18:33744.
[17] Thomson M, Ineld D. Laboratory demonstration of
a photovoltaic-powered seawater reverse-osmosis system
without batteries. Desalination 2005;183:10511.
[18] Thomson M, Ineld D. A photovoltaic-powered seawater
reverse-osmosis system without batteries. Desalination
2003;153:18.
[19] Carpetis C. A study of water electrolysis with photovoltaic
solar energy conversion. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy 1982;7:287310.
[20] Seigel A, Schott T. Optimization of photovoltaic hydrogen
production. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1988;
19:65975.
[21] Bilgen E. Solar hydrogen from photovoltaic-electrolyzer
systems. Energy Conversion Management 2001;42:104757.
[22] Ulleberg . Stand-alone power systems for the future:
optimal design, operation & control of solar-hydrogen energy
systems. PhD thesis. Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, Trondheim; 1998.
[23] Kolhe M, AgbossouK, HamelinJ, Bose TK. Analytical model for
predicting the performance of photovoltaic array coupled
witha windturbine ina stand-alone renewable energysystem
based on hydrogen. Renewable Energy 2003;28:72742.
[24] Go rgu n H. Dynamic modelling of a proton exchange
membrane (PEM) electrolyzer. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 2006;31:2938.
[25] Busquet S, Hubert CE, Labbe J, Mayer D, Metkeemeijer R. A
new approach to empirical electrical modelling of a fuel cell,
an electrolyser or a regenerative fuel cell. Journal of Power
Sources 2004;134:418.
[26] Amphlett JC, Baumert RM, Mann RF, Peppley BA, Roberge PR.
Performance modeling of the ballard mark IV solid polymer
electrolyte fuel cell I. Mechanistic model development.
Journal of Electrochemical Society 1995;142:18.
[27] Amphlett JC, Baumert RM, Mann RF, Peppley BA, Roberge PR.
Performance modeling of the ballard mark IV solid polymer
electrolyte fuel cell II. Empirical model development. Journal
of Electrochemical Society 1995;142:915.
[28] Khan MJ, Iqbal MT. Dynamic modeling and simulation of
a small wind-fuel cell hybrid energy system. Renewable
Energy 2005;30:42139.
[29] Vosen SR, Keller JO. Hybrid energy storage systems for stand-
alone electric power systems: optimization of system
performance and cost through control strategies.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1999;24:113956.
[30] Richards BS, Conibeerb GJ. A comparison of hydrogen storage
technologies for solar-powered stand-alone power supplies:
a photovoltaic system sizing approach. International Journal
of Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:27128.
[31] Yang H, Lu L, Zhou W. A novel optimization sizing model for
hybrid solarwind power generation system. Solar Energy
2007;81:7684.
[32] Zhou K, Ferreira JA, de Haan SWH. Optimal energy
management strategy and system sizing method for stand-
alone photovoltaic-hydrogen systems. International Journal
of Hydrogen Energy 2008;32:47789.
[33] Santrelli M, Cali M, Macagno S. Design and analysis of stand-
alone hydrogen energy systems with different renewable
sources. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2004;29:
157186.
[34] Ke louwani S, Agbossou K, Chahine R. Model for energy
conversion in renewable energy system with hydrogen
storage. Journal of Power Sources 2005;140:3929.
[35] Ulleberg . The importance of control strategies in PV-
hydrogen systems. Solar Energy 2004;76:3239.
[36] Dufo-Lo pez R, Bernal-Agustn JL, Contreras J. Optimization of
control strategies for stand-alone renewable energy systems
with hydrogen storage. Renewable Energy 2007;32:110226.
[37] Ghosh PC. Cost optimization of a self-sufcient hydrogen
based energy supply system PhD thesis, Forschungszentrum
Julich in der Helmhotltz-Gemeinschaft, Institut fur
Werkstoffe und Verfahren der Energietechnik Institut 3:
Energieverfahrenstechnik (Diss. Aachen, RTWH, 2003).
[38] Meurer C, Barthels H, Brocke WA, Emonts B, Groehn HG.
Phobeusdan autonomous supply system with renewable
energy: six years of operational experience and advanced
concepts. Solar Energy 1999;67:1318.
[39] Gazey R, Salman SK, Aklil-DAhalluin DD. A eld application
experience of integrating hydrogen technology with wind
power in a remote island location. Journal of Power Sources
2006;157:8417.
[40] Chaparro AM, Soler J, Escudero MJ, de Ceballos MJ,
Wittstadt U, Daza L. Data results and operational experience
with a solar hydrogen system. Journal of Power Sources 2005;
144:1659.
[41] Lehman PA, Chamberlin CE, Pauletto G, Rocheleau MA.
Operating experience with photovoltaic-hydrogen energy
system. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1997;22:
46570.
[42] Hollmuller P, Joubert JM, Lachal B, Yvon K. Evaluation of
a 5 kWp photovoltaic hydrogen production and storage
installation for a residential home in Switzerland.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2000;25:97109.
[43] Galli S, Stefanoni M. Development of a solar-hydrogen cycle
in Italy. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1997;22:
4538.
[44] Vanhanen JP, Kauranen PS, Lund PD. Operation experiences
of a phosphoric acid fuel cell in a solar hydrogen energy
system. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1997;22:
70713.
[45] Lehman PA, Chamberlin CE. Design of a photovoltaic-
hydrogen-fuel cell energy system. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 1991;22:34952.
[46] Ipsakis D, Stergiopoulos F, Voutetakis S, Elmasides C,
Seferlis P, Papadopoulou S. Study of an autonomous power
system based on solar and wind energy with hydrogen as the
intermittent energy source for future use. Conference
proceedings of the 4th Dubrovnik Conference on Sustainable
Development of Energy Water and Environmental Systems,
Dubrovnik, Croatia; June 48 2007.
[47] Deshmukh SS, Boehm RF. Review of modeling details related
to renewably powered hydrogen systems. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2007; doi:10.1016/j.rser.2007.06.
008.
[48] Band structure and carrier concentration. See also: http://
www.ioffe.rssi.ru/SVA/NSM/Semicond/SiGe/bandstr.html
(accessed January 2008).
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7094
[49] Siegfried H. Grid integration of wind energy conversion
systems. John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 1998.
[50] Manwell JF, McGowan JG. Lead acid battery storage model for
hybrid energy systems. Solar Energy 1993;50:399405.
[51] Larminie J, Dicks A. Fuel cell systems explained. 2nd ed. John
Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2003.
[52] Kikkinides ES, Georgiadis MC, Stubos AK. Dynamic modelling
and optimization of hydrogen storage in metal hydride beds.
Energy 2006;31:242846.
[53] Li Q, Lu XG, Chou KC, Xu KD, Zhang JU, Chen SL. Feasibility
study on the controlled hydriding combustion synthesis of
MgLaNi ternary hydrogen storage composite. International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:187584.
[54] Elam CC, Catherine E, Padro G, Sandrock G, Luzzi A,
Lindblad P, et al. Realizing the hydrogen future: the
International Energy Agencys efforts to advance hydrogen
energy technologies. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy 2003;28:6017.
[55] Vanhanen JP, Lund PD, Tolonen JS. Electrolyser-metal
hydride-fuel cell system for seasonal energy storage.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1998;23:26771.
[56] Bossi C, Del Corno A, Scagliotti M, Valli C. Characterisation of
a 3 kW PEFC power system coupled with a metal hydride H
2
storage. Journal of Power Sources 2007;171:1229.
[57] Botzung M, Chaudourne S, Gillia O, Perret C, Latroche M,
Percheron-Guegan A, et al. Simulation and experimental
validation of a hydrogen storage tank with metal hydrides.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:98104.
[58] Sakintuna B, Lamari-Darkrim F, Hirscher M. Metal hydride
materials for solid hydrogen storage: a review. International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:112140.
[59] Ipsakis D, Voutetakis S, Seferlis P, Stergiopoulos F,
Papadopoulou S, Elmasides C. The effect of the hysteresis
band on power management strategies in a stand-alone
power system, Energy, in press, doi:10.1016/j.energy.2008.07.
012.
i nt e r na t i o na l j o ur na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r gy 3 4 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 7 0 8 1 7 0 9 5 7095