Optimal Location and Sizing of Solar Farm on Japan
East Power System Using Multiobjective Bees
Algorithm
Prakornchai Phonrattanasak
Department of Electrical Engineering
North Eastern University
Khonkaen, Thailand
tumneu@live.com
Abstract— Nowadays some nuclear power plant in Japan is shut
down due to problem of security in earthquake disaster.
Consequently, Japan will encounter a lack of electrical energy in
the future if new electrical generation is not constructed. Solar
energy is one of appropriate renewable energy for Japan. Solar
panel produces electrical energy by using the natural solar
radiation from sun. PV Solar farm consists of multiple
components, including the photovoltaic modules, mechanical
and electrical connections. PV solar farm with grid-connected
can directly connect to the existing electricity grid by using
inverter circuit toward transformer. In this paper, PV solar
farm is utilized as a power generation which injects active power
into a Japan east power system. An optimal location and sizing
of solar farm by using multiobjective Bees optimization (MBO)
is proposed to minimize fuel and emission costs of overall system
with considering solar radiation energy in each area. The results
show that the proposed method found the optimal position of
solar farm with minimum cost of fuel and environmental
pollution.
Index Terms—Power system, Optimization, Bees algorithm, PV
solar and Japan power system.
I. INTRODUCTION
PV solar farm is a system which uses many solar modules
to convert sunlight into electricity. It consists of multiple
components, including the photovoltaic modules, mechanical
and electrical connections. Solar power has become popular
renewable energy due to reducing of in-vestment cost. The
advantages of solar power are very low environmental impact
as well as very low operation and variable cost. One of the
main advantages of a solar power system is the lack of
pollution given off by solar panels when generating electricity.
Another advantage of solar power in economic is very low
variable cost. When solar farm is built to generate electricity,
it can produce more electricity power into power system
during daytime. Moreover; solar energy system operations do
not generate air or water emissions pollutant and do not
Masafumi Miyatake
Orie Sakamoto
Department of Electrical Engineering
Sophia University
Tokyo, Japan
miyatake@sophia.ac.jp, orie-sakamoto@sophia.ac.jp
produce hazardous waste like coal, oil, or gas [1] and have
very low risk from earthquake such as nuclear power plant.
Japan east power system comprise of three electric
companies as Tokyo Electric Power Company, Tohoku
Electric Power Company and Hokkaido Electric Power
Company. The frequency of electric current is 50 Hertz.
Integration of solar energy in power system is studied to
find utilization of an existing solar farm [2]. But the result of
solar farm in economic and environment benefit with
considering solar radiation is not still developed.
The goal of this paper is to find best location and sizing of
solar farm in power system with minimum fuel cost and
emission in Japan east power system with many real
constraints and considering solar radiation of each area. The
multiobjective bees algorithm is developed to find minimum
fuel cost and emission when the solar farm varies in its
location and sizing on Japan east power sys-tem. The result
show that the best location and sizing of solar farm with
minimum fuel cost and emission in system.
II. PROBLE FORMULATION
The objective of environmental/economic power dispatch
with varying location and sizing of Solar farm is to minimize
the economic and environmental cost function of Japan east
power system while satisfying various equality and inequality
constrains with considering solar radiation.
A. Objective
Objective1: Minimization of generator cost
The total Yen/h fuel cost can be expressed as
NS
N
¦a  b P  c P  ¦ di PSi (1)
2
f ( PGi , PSi ) i i Gi i Gi
i 1 i 1
where ai , bi , ci and d i are the cost coefficients of the i th
generator units and Solar farm, and PGi and PSi are the real QGimin d QGi d QGimax , i  N (9)
th
power output of the i generator units and Solar farm at bus PSmin d PSi d PSmax , i  N (10)
S . N and N S is the number of generators and solar farm
where VGi and QGi is voltage magnitude and reactive power at
respectively.
Objective2: Minimization of environmental emission bus i of generator
The total ton/h emission of atmospheric pollutants such as (2) Security constraints:
sulfur oxides SOX and nitrogen oxides NOX caused by fossil- Theses incorporate the constraints of voltage magnitudes of
fueled units can be expressed as load buses as well as transmission line loadings as follows:
N NS VLimin d VLi d VLimax , i  NB (11)
e( PGi , PS ) ¦D i PGi  E ¦ PSi
i 1 i 1
(2)
Si d Simax , i  NL (12)
where D i and E are coefficients of the i th emission where Sl and N L are transmission line loading and the
characteristics of generation units and Solar farm. number of transmission lines.
The system equality constraints g ( x, u ) include: Power B. Multiobjective optimization principle
flow equations are: Multiobjective optimization is the process of
simultaneously optimizing two or more conflicting objectives
¦ > @
NB
PGi  P i PSi  PDi Vi V j Gij cos(G i  G j )  Bij sin(G i  G j ) subject to certain constraints. For a multiobjective, any two
j 1 solutions x1 and x2 can have one of two possibilities: One
(3) dominates the other or none dominates the other. In a
NB
minimization problem, without loss of generality, a solution
j 1
¦
QGi  QDi  QSi Vi V j ª¬Gij sin(G i  G j )  Bij cos(G i  G j ) º¼ x dominates x if the following two conditions are satisfied
1 2

(4) [6]:
where NB is the number of buses. PGi , QGi are real and
^ `
1. i  1,2,.....,Nobj : fi ( x1) d fi ( x2 ) (16)
reactive power generated at the i th bus. Vi and V j are
^ `
2. i  1,2,.....,Nobj : f j ( x1) d f j ( x2 ) (17)
the voltage magnitudes at bus i and j . G i and G j are the
voltage angles at bus i and j . P i is Solar radiation If any of the above condition is violated, the solution
utilization factor of solar farm at bus i . x1 does not dominate the solution x2 . If x1 dominates the
solution x2 , x1 is called the nondominated solution. The
Power balance constraints: Power balance is an equality solutions that are nondominated within the entire search
constraint. The total power generation must cover the total space are denoted as Pareto-optimal and constitute Pareto-
demand PD. Hence, optimal set. This set is also known as Pareto-optimal front.
N NS

¦ PGi  ¦ Pi PSi  PD  PL
i 1 i 1
0 (5) C. Formulation of Multiobjective optimization
Aggregating the objectives and constraints, the problem can
be mathematically formulated as a nonlinear constraint
Then, power loss in transmission lines can be calculated as multiobjective optimization problem as follows [5].

NL
Minimize > @
f ( x, u), e( x, u) (13)
PL ¦g
k 1
k
ª¬Vi 2  V j2  2VV º
i j cos(G i  G j ) ¼ (6)
Subject to:
g ( x, u) 0 (14)
where Vi and V j are the voltage magnitudes at bus i and j h( x, u) d 0 (15)
where g ( x, u ) is the equality constraints , h( x, u ) is the
. G i and G j are the voltage angles at bus i and j .
system inequality constraints.
The system operating constraints h( x, u ) include:
III. MULTIOBJECTIVE BEES ALGORITHM
(1) Generation constraints:
For stable operation, generator voltages, real power outputs A. Bees algorithm
and reactive power outputs and reactive power outputs are Bees algorithm (BA) was developed by Pham D.T [3]
restricted by the lower and upper limits as follows: which was used for optimizing numerical problems in 2005.
VGimin d VGi d VGimax , i  N (7) The algorithm mimics the food foraging behavior of swarms
of honey bees. Honey bees use several mechanisms such as
PGimin d PGi d PGimax , i  N (8) waggle dance to optimally locate food sources and to search
new one. This makes them one of candidate for developing
Meta heuristic search algorithms. It is a simple, robust and
population based stochastic optimization algorithm.
The colony of artificial bees is divided to two groups
of bees namely scout and employed bees. The responsibility
of scout bees is to find a new food source. The responsibility
of employed bees is to determine a food source within the
neighborhood of the food source in their memory and share
their information with other bees within the hive.
In recent years, BA has been presented as an efficient
population-based heuristic technique which is flexible and
robust. However, changing conventional single objective BA
to a multiobjective BA requires some technique mathematic.
In MBA, there is no absolute one global best, but rather a set
of nondominated solutions. Hence there is a need to
compromise the quality of the outcome by a fuzzy technique
as it is proposed in this paper.
B. MBO and Computation Flow
The population has ns scout bees and each bee is an m-
Pareto set. If nondominated solution is over the
limit, then uses FCM.
Step 9: Check the stopping criterion. If satisfied, terminate
the search, else NC NC  1 .
Step10: Assign the n  m population to generate new
solutions and add it with last best solution. Go to
Step 2.
Upon the Pareto-optimal set of nondominated solution,
fuzzy-based mechanism is imposed to extract the best
compromised outcome.
C. Reducing Pareto set by FCM clustering
Fuzzy c-means (FCM) is a data clustering technique which
a data set is grouped into n clusters with every data point in
the dataset belonging to every cluster to a certain degree [4].
It is based on minimization of the following objective
function:
N C

¦¦ u
2
dimensional vector, where m is the number of optimized Jm m
ij xi  c j , 1 d m  f (21)
parameters. The computation flow of the proposed MBO i 1 j 1
technique is briefly stated and defined as follows:
Step 1: Generate randomly the initial populations of scout
bees as following equation. where m is any real number greater than 1, uij is the degree
Ps ji Pi low  rand (0,1) u ( Pi up  Pi low ),( j 1,.., ns) (18) of membership of xi in the cluster j , xi is the i th of d-
where Pi up and Pi low are upper and lower bound dimensional measured data, c j is the d-dimension center of
of the power unit i and solar farm. These initial the cluster, and is any norm expressing the similarity
populations must be feasible candidate solutions
that satisfy the constraints. Set NC 0 . between any measured data and the center. Fuzzy partitioning
Step 2: Evaluate the fuel cost and emission fitness value is carried out through an iterative optimization of the
of the initial populations. objective function shown above, with the update of
Step 3: Search for nondominated solutions from initial membership uij and the cluster centers c j by:
solution by using nondominated function in order
to get the Pareto set and find m best solutions for
neighborhood search by using fuzzy c-mean 1
uij 2
(22)
clustering (FCM).
Step 4: Separate the m best solutions to two groups, the C § xi  c j · m1
¨ ¸
first group have e best solutions Pei by using ¦ ¨ xi  ck ¸
k 1
© ¹
random selection and another group is other
selected m  e solutions Pmei . N
Step 5: Determine the size of neighborhood search of each ¦u m
ij .xi
best solutions ( ngh ). cj i 1
(23)
N
Step 6: Generate neighborhood solution around the
selected solutions within neighborhood size as ¦u
i 1
m
ij

following equations.
Pne ji Pei  rand (0,1) u ngh u ( Pi up  Pi low )
For best solutions and
(19)
This iteration will stop when max ij ^u
( k 1)
ij `
 uij( k )  H , H is
Pnme ji Pmei  rand (0,1) u ngh u ( Pi up  Pi low ) (20) a termination criterion between 0 and 1, whereas k is the
For other selected solutions. iteration step. This procedure converges to a local minimum
Step 7: Evaluate the fuel cost and emission fitness value of or a saddle point of J m . By iteratively updating the cluster
the generated solution. centers and the membership grades for each data point, FCM
Step 8: Search for nondominated solutions from all solution LWHUDWLYHO\ PRYHV WKH FOXVWHU FHQWHUV WR WKH ³ULJKW´ ORFDWLRQ
by using nondominated function in order to get the within a data set. Once the cluster centers have been obtained,
the nearest solution to each center is selected, and the other
solutions are eliminated. Reducing Pareto set by the FCM Table I
method is shown as Fig 1. Generating unit fuel cost and emission coefficients.
coefficient
PGmin PGmax QGmin QGmax
Unit
(MW) (MW) (MVar) (MVar) a b c ࢻ
clustering centers yen/ yen/ 㻌 ton/
㻌 yen
MWh㻌 MWh2㻌 MWh
solutions of pareto front
1 2600 3750 0 1,020 0 7210 0.01 0.3

Selected solution from using 2 2080 3000 0 1,234 0 7210 0.01 0.3
FCM.
3 3120 4500 0 1,803 0 7210 0.01 0.3

4 520 750 0 332 0 7210 0.01 0.3

5 520 750 0 332 0 7210 0.01 0.3

6 1040 1500 0 626 0 7210 0.01 0.3

7 4680 6750 0 2,202 0 7210 0.01 0.3

Fig. 1: the FCM method for reducing Pareto set 8 3848 5550 0 1,766 0 7210 0.01 0.3

C. Best Compromise Solution 9 2496 3600 0 1,756 0 7210 0.01 0.3

After obtaining the Pareto-optimal solution, the decision
10 3848 5550 0 1,930 0 7210 0.01 0.3
maker may need to choose one best compromised solution
according to the specific preference for different applications. 11 5200 7500 0 2,450 0 7210 0.01 0.3

However, due to the inaccurate nature of human judgment, it 12 3536 5100 0 2,020 0 7210 0.01 0.3
is not possible to explicitly define what is really needed.
13 2496 3600 0 1,442 0 7210 0.01 0.3
Thus, fuzzy set is introduced here to handle this problem.
D. Implementation 14 2527.2 3645 0 1,715 0 7210 0.01 0.3

The MBO technique has been developed in order to apply 15 2995.2 4320 0 1,603 0 7210 0.01 0.3
for solving nonlinear constraints optimization problem. A
16 1092 1575 0 516 0 0 0 0
computation process will check the feasibility of the
candidate solution in all stage of the search process. This 17 1040 1500 0 504 0 0 0 0

ensures the feasibility of the nondominated solution. 18 936 1350 0 501 0 0 0 0

The MBO technique was implemented on Japan east
19 702 1012.5 0 327 0 0 0 0
power system without existing of nuclear power plant. The
detailed data are given in http://www2.iee.or.jp/~pes/ 20 1248 1800 0 596 0 0 0 0

model/english/kikan/East30/east30.html. 21 1664 2400 0 867 0 0 0 0

The values of fuel cost and emission coefficients are
22 2233.9 3222 0 1,039 0 0 0 0
given in Table I. The MBO is computed by The Dell
3UHFLVLRQŒ7,QWHO-bit multicore Xeon processors with 23 2600 3750 0 1,261 0 0 0 0

up to 1600MHz, 12.8 GB ram under Matlab program. IEEJ 24 5200 7500 0 2,291 0 7210 0.01 0.3
east 30 machine system model [5] is found as follows.
25 2080 3000 0 1,176 0 7210 0.01 0.3
(1) This large scale system model has the 500 kV loops
Table II
and the 275 kV loops. (30 machines, 107 nodes, 191
Solar radiation utilization factor at bus.
branches) Solar Bus Number Utilization
(2) Daytime: all the generators are operated at rated Radiation
output power load = 72,600 MW Factor
The parameter of MBO can be set as follow. The (MJ/m2/day)
population of bees is set to be 40. The number of selected 11 2,14,15,16,25,39,40,41,44,45,47,72,74,76,80,95, 0.7333
105
sites and elite site is 20 and 1 respectively. Patch size is 0.05. 12 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,17,18,19,20,21,22,2 0.8
Number of bees around elite site and Number of bees around 4,26,27,31,36,37,38,42,43,46,48,49,55,61,63,64,
other selected sites is 20 and 15respectively. Maximum 65,66,67,68,69,70,71,73,75,77,78,79,82,83,84,8
8,89,90,91,96,97,98,100,101,102,103,104,107
iteration = 200. The maximum size of the Pareto-optimal set
was selected as 50 solutions. The MBO is tested to 30 runs to 13 23,28,29,30,32,50,51,52,53,54,60,62,81,85,86,8 0.8667
obtain best solution. 7,93,94,99,106
14 35,59 0.9333
15 33,34,56,57,58,92 1.0

E. SOLAR FARM
Solar farm consists of a large number of solar panel
connected to bus of power system through power transformer
[6]. Solar farm uses inverter for converting dc power to 3 PG8(Thermal) 4,563.9㻌
phase ac power into power system. PG9(Thermal) 2,981.8㻌
PG10(Thermal) 4,638.5㻌
Solar panel is modeled as a voltage sourced which is PG11(Thermal) 5,405.1㻌
fed to the DC bus in order to inject only real power to the PG12(Thermal) 3,790.7㻌
inverter during daytime operation while reactive power is not PG13(Thermal) 3,517.7㻌
produced by solar farm. The amount of real power from solar PG14(Thermal) 2,785.1㻌
farm to the grid depends upon the number of power module PG15(Thermal) 3,757.7㻌
PG16(Hydro) 1,570.5㻌
and solar radiation. Inverter is composed of six IGBTs with
PG17(Hydro) 1,485.0㻌
its snubber circuits. For instance, solar farm is shown in Fig.2 PG18(Hydro) 1,321.1㻌
PG19(Hydro) 980.3㻌
PG20(Hydro) 1,754.5㻌
PG21(Hydro) 2,392.9㻌
PG22(Hydro) 3,216.6㻌
PG23(Hydro) 3,742.4㻌
PG24(Thermal) 7,331.6㻌
PG25(Thermal) 2,899.0㻌
Total of units (MW) 3,073.6㻌
Fuel Cost(Yen/hr) 417,701,702
Emission(ton/hr) 17,112

Case 2: best fuel cost and emission of power system with

Solar farm penetration
Best solution of cost and emission with solar farm
penetration can be shown in Table 4.and Fig 3.
Table IV
Results of best solution of the proposed approach with solar
farm penetration Japan east power system
Unit (MW) Best solution
PG1(Thermal) 3,509 㻌 2,935 㻌 3,473 㻌 3,315.1㻌
PG2(Thermal) 2,649 㻌 2,388 㻌 2,782 㻌 2,405.1㻌
PG3(Thermal) 3,671 㻌 3,816 㻌 3,797 㻌 3,996.2㻌
PG4(Thermal) 667 㻌 677 㻌 622 㻌 617.9㻌
PG5(Thermal) 727 㻌 525 㻌 620 㻌 736.2㻌
PG6(Thermal) 1,390 㻌 1,323 㻌 1,083 㻌 1,426.7㻌
Fig.2 solar farm with inverter connect to bus of power system through power PG7(Thermal) 6,026 㻌 6,239 㻌 5,141 㻌 4,723.3㻌
transformer PG8(Thermal) 4,550 㻌 4,329 㻌 4,446 㻌 5,172.7㻌
In this paper, operation cost and emission PG9(Thermal) 2,668 㻌 3,472 㻌 3,001 㻌 3,415.6㻌
coefficients of solar farm are zero. One solar farm can PG10(Thermal) 3,855 㻌 3,872 㻌 4,761 㻌 4,021.7㻌
PG11(Thermal) 5,298 㻌 5,387 㻌 6,267 㻌 5,228.7㻌
produce electric power up to 200 MW. The solar farm is PG12(Thermal) 3,923 㻌 4,095 㻌 3,806 㻌 4,217.2㻌
operated during daytime of Japan east power system and it is PG13(Thermal) 2,572 㻌 2,626 㻌 3,468 㻌 2,619.4㻌
PG14(Thermal) 3,539 㻌 3,564 㻌 2,812 㻌 3,171.9㻌
installed at nearest area of bus which loss in low voltage line PG15(Thermal) 3,693 㻌 3,962 㻌 4,281 㻌 3,909.8㻌
close to zero. PG16(Hydro) 1,574 㻌 1,574 㻌 1,561 㻌 1,550.8㻌
PG17(Hydro) 1,492 㻌 1,499 㻌 1,492 㻌 1,498.5㻌
IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION PG18(Hydro) 1,350 㻌 1,350 㻌 981 㻌 1,338.5㻌
PG19(Hydro) 963 㻌 1,002 㻌 999 㻌 907.4㻌
Case 1: best fuel cost and emission of power system without PG20(Hydro) 1,796 㻌 1,795 㻌 1,686 㻌 1,763.5㻌
solar farm PG21(Hydro) 2,400 㻌 2,393 㻌 1,888 㻌 2,380.6㻌
Fuel cost and emission objective are optimized to find the PG22(Hydro) 3,217 㻌 3,215 㻌 2,692 㻌 3,221.0㻌
PG23(Hydro) 3,750 㻌 3,748 㻌 3,717 㻌 3,723.9㻌
best solution by using MBO Algorithm when solar farm is PG24(Thermal) 7,435 㻌 7,458 㻌 6,667 㻌 6,616.8㻌
not penetrated into Japan east power system. Its result is PG25(Thermal) 2,518 㻌 2,316 㻌 2,159 㻌 2,791.9㻌
shown in Table III. Total of units
75,230 㻌 75,559 74,202 㻌 74,774.4㻌
(MW)
Fuel
415,090,000 413,530,000 413,450,000 414,469,171
Table III Cost(Yen/hr)
Results of best solution of MBO without solar farm Emission
17,034 17,010 17,003 17,023
(ton/hr)
Number of
Unit (MW) Best solution 1 2 3 4
Solar farm
PG1(Thermal) 3,073.6㻌 Location (Bus) 17 [5,23] [14,22,23] [11,13,26,29]
PG2(Thermal) 2,316.4㻌 [198,127, [68,109,1193
Size (MW) 200 [136,97]
PG3(Thermal) 3,921.8㻌 176] ,102]
PG4(Thermal) 646.3㻌
PG5(Thermal) 575.3㻌 Table IV shows the power generation and solar farm position
PG6(Thermal) 1,458.4㻌 optimized by the MBO technique. The result in this case has
PG7(Thermal) 5,371.8㻌
cost and emission lower than previous case. One Solar farm
 which is penetrated into Japan east power system can reduce The best solution in tradeoff surface is selected by
fuel cost and emission of pollution as 1,130,000Yen/h and 80 fuzzy compromise method in Fig 3.
ton/hr respectively. Moreover, four solar farms can reduce
V. CONCLUSION
fuel cost and emission of pollution as 3,440,000Yen/hr and
140 ton/hr respectively. In this paper, MBO algorithm has been developed to find
8
best location and sizing of solar farm on power system with
x 10 minimum economic and emission of generations with
4.158
considering solar light radiation. Solar farm is formulated in
form of real power source to inject electric power into power
4.156 system. The simulation result demonstrates that solar farm in
optimum sizing and location can reduce fuel cost and
emission pollutant of all unit generation. In addition, the
4.154 result indicated that MBO have effectiveness to search
Best Compromise optimum point of Solar farm on Japan east power system.
Fuel cost(Yen/hr)

REFERENCES
4.152
[1] http://www.seriouslysolar.com/advantages.php
[2] Williams J.R. 1984, Advances in Solar Energy: K. W. Boer and J. Duffie
(Editors), American Solar Energy Society, Inc., Solar Energy, Volume
4.15 33, Issue 2, Page
[3] Pham D.T., Eldukhri E.E., Soroka A.J. 2005 The bees algorithm -- A
novel tool for complex optimization problems, Intelligent Production
Machines and Systems Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd. 454-459.
4.148 [4] Mendoza F., Bernal J.L., Agustin, J.A. Dominguez N. 2006, NSGA and
SPEA applied to multiobjective design of power distribution systems,
IEEE Trans. on Power Systems 21 ,1938-1945.
4.146 [5] http://www2.iee.or.jp/~pes/model/english/kikan/East30/east30.html
[6] 7KRPDV.-HII6´(QDEOLQJ,QWUHJDWLRQRI'LVWULEWHG5HQHZDEOHV´
presented at Taiwan Power Company, Taipei, Taiwan, July 21-22.

4.144
1.7034 1.7035 1.7036 1.7037 1.7038 1.7039 1.7
Environment cost(ton/hr) 4
x 10

Fig.3 Best solution on tradeoff surface with one solar farm in power system