Paper accepted for publication in Renewable Energy (http://www.sciencedirect.

com/science/journal/09601481)
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2006.04.013

Optimization of Control Strategies for Stand-Alone Renewable
Energy Systems with Hydrogen Storage

Rodolfo Dufo-Lpez
1
, Jos L. Bernal-Agustn
1,*
, Javier Contreras
2

1
Electrical Engineering Department University of Zaragoza. Calle Mara de Luna, 3. E-50018 Zaragoza (Spain).
2
Applied Mechanics and Project Engineering Department University of Castilla La Mancha. Campus Universitario s/n. 13071 Ciudad Real (Spain).

Abstract
This paper presents a novel strategy, optimized by genetic algorithms, to control stand-alone hybrid renewable electrical
systems with hydrogen storage. The strategy optimizes the control of the hybrid system minimizing the total cost throughout
its lifetime. The optimized hybrid system can be composed of renewable sources (wind, PV and hydro), batteries, fuel cell,
AC generator, and electrolyzer. If the renewable sources produce more energy than the one required by the loads, the spare
energy can be used either to charge the batteries or to produce H
2
in the electrolyzer. The control strategy optimizes how the
spare energy is used. If the amount of energy demanded by the loads is higher than the one produced by the renewable
sources, the control strategy determines the most economical way to meet the energy deficit. The optimization of the various
system control parameters is done using Genetic Algorithms. This paper explains the strategy developed and shows its
application to a PV-Diesel-battery-hydrogen system.
Keywords: Hybrid Systems, Control Strategies, Genetic Algorithms.

1. Introduction
The electric generation hybrid systems are usually more reliable and lest costly than the systems than use a
single source of energy [1].
When designing a hybrid system both the sizing of the elements and the most adequate control strategy must be
obtained. Obtaining a good control strategy is essential, since the performance of a PV-hydrogen system can be
significantly affected by relatively small changes made in the control strategy [2]. However, to design a hybrid
system is a complicated task. The mathematical design problem (sizing and control) involves a significant
number of variables [3]. That is why classic design techniques are not able to obtain good results, being
necessary to apply other techniques which allow obtaining satisfactory results. In other design problems with a
high number of variables, heuristic techniques have been successfully applied [4]. One of the most commonly
used heuristic techniques is based on Genetic Algorithms [5]. Genetic Algorithms present the advantage of
having low computational requirements obtaining good solutions in reasonable time.
As mentioned before, a very important aspect when designing a hybrid system is the determination of the most
adequate control strategy. Numerous studies have developed control strategies applicable to hybrid systems. In
[6] several control strategies for PV-Diesel systems including batteries are described. Likewise, the HOMER
optimization model [7] uses relatively simple strategies based on the ones studied by Barley et al. [6] and it is
able to obtain an optimal design of a hybrid system by selecting the most appropriate strategy. The program

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 976 76 19 21; fax: +34 976 76 22 26.
E-mail: rdufo@unizar.es (R. Dufo-Lpez). jlbernal@unizar.es (J.L. Bernal-Agustn). Javier.Contreras@uclm.es (J. Contreras)


2
HYDROGEMS [8], compatible with TRNSYS [9], simulates hydrogen-based hybrid systems, although it is not
an optimization program. Another program applied to hydrogen-based hybrid systems, Hybrid2 [10, 11],
outperforms HOMER and generates many control strategies; nevertheless it is a simulation program, not an
optimization tool. These hybrid systems, which include renewable energy sources and hydrogen, have also been
studied by many researchers [12-17]. In [18] highly complex systems including renewable sources, AC
generators and fuel cells are analyzed. In another work [19] the optimization of stand alone renewable-based
hydrogen generation systems through control strategies is dealt with. Another author [2] describes control
strategies of PV-hydrogen based hybrid systems (photovoltaic generator, batteries, electrolyzer and fuel cell)
based on the on/off-switching of the electrolyzer and the fuel cell, depending on the value of the SOC (State of
Charge) of the batteries. In addition, [20] analyzes a renewable energy system, including hydrogen, as a long-
term energy storage source, with a battery bank as a short-term energy storage, where the energy management is
controlled through the SOC of the batteries.
In [21] the economic evaluation of a hybrid wind/photovoltaic/hydrogen generation systems is studied and
compared to a traditional hybrid energy system with battery storage, showing a clear economic advantage of the
traditional wind/PV/battery system over the wind/PV/hydrogen system. However, this situation may change in
the near future due to the decrease in the cost of fuel cells and electrolyzers.
In [22] a method to optimize the design and dispatch of wind-diesel systems with hydrogen storage is presented.
This paper originates from a previous work by the authors [23] in which the HOGA (Hybrid Optimization by
Genetic Algorithms) program is introduced. In this previous paper both the configuration of a PV-Diesel system
with AC loads and the control strategy are optimized using Genetic Algorithms. The control strategies in HOGA
are the same as the ones used in HOMER. In this new paper several improvements are introduced. First, the
electric energy demand can be either AC or DC, allowing for hydrogen demand as well. It is also possible to use
two different methods to estimate the lifetime of the batteries: either Average of full equivalent cycles (used by
the HOMER program) or Rainflow [24]. Moreover, it is possible to apply two different mathematical models
to the battery operation: KiBaM model [25] or Ah model [26]. In addition, the efficiency of the inverter
variable as a function of the output power is analyzed. Other features of the design tool include the possibility to
deal with different types of energy sources (hydro, wind, PV, fuel cells and Diesel generators) and different
types of energy storage (batteries and electrolyzers with hydrogen tanks). Finally, it is also remarkable the novel
control strategy developed and optimized by Genetic Algorithms.
In this paper we describe a new control strategy where the associated operating costs of every element are
specified, as well as the control variables used by the strategy. Additionally, we present an example in which a
control strategy for a PV-Diesel-battery-hydrogen system with AC, DC and hydrogen demands is optimized.

2. Control strategy of the hybrid system
The hybrid system that will be used to explain the control strategy described in this paper is shown in Fig. 1. It
can be observed that the hybrid system can include PV panels, wind turbines, batteries, charge regulator, hydro
turbine, AC generator (Diesel, but also any type of generator can be modeled), battery charger (AC/DC
converter), inverter (DC/AC converter), fuel cell, H
2
tank and electrolyzer. The fuel cell can be either fed by the
H
2
previously produced by the electrolyzer or by externally purchased H
2
. Both the wind turbines and the hydro
turbines can be connected to the AC or DC buses.

3
P
re_DC

Electrolyzer H
2
tank
AC Generator
HYDRO
WIND
P
re_AC
D.C.
Load
U
DC

U
AC

P
load_DC

Batteries
H
2
Load

Fuel Cell
P
load_AC

Battery
Charger
PV

Inverter
A.C.
Load
Charge
Regulator

Fig. 1. Control strategy of the hybrid system

Hourly intervals are considered for the design strategy calculations, where all the involved variables are assumed
to be constant throughout these intervals.
Two genetic algorithms, main and secondary, are used in the design process. The main one searches for possible
component configurations of the hybrid system (i.e. the power and features of each element), whereas the
secondary one searches for the best strategy for each of the configurations found by the main algorithm. Both
algorithms work jointly to find the optimal configuration of the components and the best control strategy. A
previous paper [23] describes both algorithms in detail. The difference between the previous paper and the one
presented here is due to the improvement in the mathematical models and the new control strategy developed.
Both algorithms are described in section 4.
The objective function to minimize in the optimization process is the total Net Present Cost (NPC) of the system.
The NPC represents the investment costs plus the discounted present values of all future costs during the lifetime
of the system. To calculate the NPC of the system we simulate it throughout its lifetime, obtaining the energy
produced and consumed by the components, their own lifetimes, the number of times in which the components
must be replaced, the operating and maintenance costs, the fuel costs, etc.
As a basic control rule, the energy produced by renewable sources must be preferentially used to feed the loads.
For every hour, if the renewable sources (PV, wind and hydro) produce more energy than is demanded, the
surplus power (P
charge
) can be used to charge the batteries or to produce H
2
in the electrolyzer. This process is
called CHARGE. P
charge
is the total converted spare power on the DC side (spare DC power plus spare AC
power, the latter one multiplied by the AC/DC converter efficiency), since both the batteries and the electrolyzer
are on the DC side. The decision whether the spare energy is used to charge the batteries or to produce H
2
in the
electrolyzer depends on the value of P
charge
, as shown in section 3.
If, on the contrary, the renewable sources are unable to provide for all the energy demand, the load that has not
been met, P
discharge
, should be produced either by the batteries or the AC generator or the fuel cell. This process is
called DISCHARGE. During the DISCHARGE process the costs of providing the required energy (using the

4
batteries, the AC generator and the fuel cell) must be evaluated. The system will produce the energy that is less
costly, as explained in section 3.
There are 12 control variables of the hybrid system and all of them are optimized by the secondary genetic
algorithm: P
min_gen
, P
min_FC
, SOC
min
, P
critical_gen
, SOC
stp_gen
, P
critical_FC
, SOC
stp_FC
, H
2
TANK
stp
, P
lim_charge
, P1
gen
, P1
FC
,
and P2. All these variables are simultaneously optimized by the secondary algorithm. The value determined by
this algorithm is denoted by the subindex
_opt
.
In the following subsections the first 8 control variables are described, and also how to determine the control
strategy from them. The last 4 variables are described in section 3.

2.1. Minimum AC generator power
The minimum power of an AC generator is generally set to the minimum value recommended by the
manufacturer, P
min_gen
, below which it cannot work. Besides, the specific consumption (/kWh) for low powers is
always much higher than for high powers. This means that it may be possible for an optimal minimum power to
exist with a higher value (as compared to the one recommended by the manufacturer) and below which the
generator should not work, due to its high specific consumption. Due to this, the design tool presented in this
paper searches for the optimal value of P
min_gen
, named P
min_gen_opt
, which is between P
min_gen
and the nominal
power of the generator.

2.2. Minimum fuel cell power
Fuel cells have a very low minimum power, P
min_FC
, and a very low consumption at zero power; some of them
have no consumption under no-load conditions. However, the program is also able to optimize the value of
P
min_FC
, named P
min_FC_opt
, which ranges between P
min_FC
and the nominal power of the fuel cell.

2.3. Minimum battery SOC
The batteries have a minimum State of Charge recommended by the manufacturer, SOC
min
(%), below which
they should not work. If we use the Rainflow battery life model, it is possible that the optimal SOC is higher
than the one recommended by the manufacturer, since the number of cycles depends on the depth of the
discharge, and, therefore, on the percentage of the discharge of the batteries. The program optimizes the value of
SOC
min
, named SOC
min _opt
, which is between SOC
min
and SOC
max
(100% of the SOC).


2.4. Critical power, SOC setpoint and H
2
tank setpoint
2.4.1 AC generator
Due to the aforementioned feature of an AC generator, its high specific consumption at low power, it may be
interesting for it to produce more than the demanded power when the power that must be supplied by the AC
generator has a low value (lower than the critical power limit, P
critical_gen
). That extra power could be used to
charge the batteries up to the SOC value, named SOC
stp_gen
(batteries SOC setpoint for the AC generator), or to
produce H
2
in the electrolyzer to fill the H
2
tank up to the value named H
2
TANK
stp
(setpoint for the amount of H
2

stored in the tank, measured in kg).


5
The program optimizes the value of P
critical_gen
, named P
critical_gen_opt
, which ranges between 0 and the maximum
value of the hourly power consumed by the demand, P
max_load
. The program also optimizes the value of
SOC
stp_gen
, named SOC
stp_gen_opt
, which ranges between SOC
min
and SOC
max
. Similarly, the value of H
2
TANK
stp
,
named H
2
TANK
stp_opt
, which ranges between 0 and the maximum capacity of the H
2
tank, H
2
TANK
max_size
(kg), is
optimized.
The control strategy related to these variables is as follows:
If the power that the generator must supply (P
demand
) is below P
critical_gen_opt
, then the generator works at nominal
power, P
N_gen
, meeting the demand P
demand
, where the spare power, P
spare
= P
N_gen
P
demand
, is used as follows:

If (P
spare
P
lim_charge
), then the P
spare
power is used to charge the batteries up to the SOC
stp_gen_opt
state, and, if
there is extra power, it is used to generate H
2
in the electrolyzer up to the H
2
TANK
stp_opt
tank level. P
lim_charge

is the power below which it is more economical to store energy in the batteries than in the H
2
tank. It is
defined in section 3.2.
If (P
spare
> P
lim_charge
), then the P
spare
power is used to generate H
2
in the electrolyzer up to the H
2
TANK
stp_opt

level, and, if there is extra power, it is used to charge the batteries up to the SOC
stp_gen_opt
level.
If, after using the spare energy to charge the batteries up to the SOC
stp_gen_opt
level and to generate H
2
in the
electrolyzer (whatever the order is), there still exists some extra energy, then the generator will not work at
nominal power, but at a power at which the energy is not wasted, considering its minimum value, P
min_gen_opt.
2.4.2 Fuel cell
Analogously to the generator case, the program optimizes the value of P
critical_FC
, named P
critical_FC_opt,
ranging
between 0 and P
max_load
. If the power that must be supplied by the fuel cell is lower than P
critical_FC_opt
, then the
fuel cell works at nominal power meeting the demand, and the spare energy is used to charge the batteries.
The program also optimizes the value of SOC
stp_FC
(batteries SOC setpoint for the fuel cell), named SOC
stp_FC_opt
,
ranging between SOC
min
and SOC
max
.
If, after trying to use the spare energy to charge the batteries, there is still extra energy, the fuel cell does not
work at nominal power, but at a power without spare energy, considering the P
min_FC_opt
value.

3. CHARGE and DISCHARGE processes
3.1. State definition: CHARGE or DISCHARGE
Fig. 2 shows whether the system is in CHARGE (the renewable sources produce more energy than what is
demanded) or in DISCHARGE (the renewable sources produce less energy than what is demanded) for each
hour, as well as the way to calculate the values of P
charge
or P
discharge
as a function of the AC load, the H
2
load, the
DC load and the energy produced by the renewable sources.
In each hour, the H
2
load (for external consumption) is initially met by the H
2
stored in the tank. If the H
2
stored
is not enough, the remaining H
2
, named H
2_rest
(kg), must be produced in the electrolyzer. This H
2_rest
(kg)
produced in the electrolyzer is comparable to the DC load, denoted by P
H2_rest_conv_DC
(W):

P
H2_rest_conv_DC
= H
2_rest
1000/
Elyz
(1)

where
Elyz
(kg H
2
/kWh
input
) is the amount of H
2
produced for each kWh of electrical energy consumed in the
electrolyzer. This P
H2_rest_ conv_DC
load behaves as a DC load.

6
Fig. 2. Flowchart of the CHARGE and DISCHARGE processes

We denote by P
re_DC
to the power produced by the renewable sources that are in the DC bus and P
re_AC
to the
power produced by the renewable sources that are in the AC bus. Likewise, we denote by P
load_DC
to the power
consumed by the loads in the DC bus (including P
H2_rest_ conv_DC
) and P
load_AC
to the power consumed by the loads
in the AC bus. We can enumerate these variables that appear in Fig. 2 as follows:

AC/DC
is the efficiency of the battery charger (AC/DC converter)
cos is the power factor of the AC loads
S is the apparent power at the inverter output (VA):

S = (P
load_AC
- P
re_AC
)/ cos

(2)



7

inv
(S) is the inverter efficiency
S
inv
is the nominal apparent power of the inverter (VA). Although the inverter can withstand relatively big
overloads, it cannot do so for long periods. Since we use hourly intervals, we assume that the efficiency of the
inverter can reach as much as S
inv
.

inv
(S
inv
) is the efficiency of the inverter at its apparent nominal power
P
inv_max
is the maximum active power that can be produced by the inverter:

P
inv_max
= S
inv
cos /
inv
(S
inv
)

(3)

3.2. CHARGE process
In the case of having spare energy for a 1 hour period (P
charge
> 0), this energy is used to charge the batteries
and/or to produce hydrogen in the electrolyzer (which is stored in the hydrogen tank).
Depending on which of the two devices has the lowest cost of cycling energy (i.e. the operating and maintenance
cost for 1 hour, including the depreciation and replacement costs), either the batteries are charged as much as
possible with the spare energy or the electrolyzer works at its highest possible power.
3.2.1 Cost of cycling energy through the batteries
The cost of cycling the energy corresponding to a certain power P (kW) through the batteries during 1 hour,
C
cycling_bat
(), including the energy lost, can be calculated as:





1000
global_bat cycles_eq DC bat_p N
bat
t cycling_ba
N U N C
C P
C =
(4)
where C
bat
() is the battery bank acquisition cost, C
N
(Ah) is the nominal capacity of the battery, N
bat_p
is the
number of batteries in parallel, U
DC
(V) is the DC bus voltage and N
cycles_eq
is the average of a battery lifetime in
equivalent full cycles. We have assumed that the batteries can cycle a certain amount of energy that, divided by
its nominal capacity, gives the average lifetime in equivalent full cycles. Finally,
global_bat
is the overall
efficiency of the batteries (roundtrip efficiency). In C
cycling_bat
we do not consider the O&M costs of the batteries;
we consider that they are fixed during the year, therefore, they do not depend on the performance of the batteries.
3.2.2 Cost of cycling energy through the electrolyzer
The cost of cycling the energy corresponding to a certain power P (kW) during 1 hour, where the energy is
stored as H
2
in the tank, later becoming fuel cell energy, is ():

Elyz FC
O&M_Elyz O&M_FC
Elyz FC
cycling_Elyz -FC
Elyz FC

+ + +
=
C C
C C
Life Life
C

(5)

where C
cycling_Elyz-FC
, unlike C
cycling_bat
, does not depend on the power (since the electrolyzer and the fuel cell
lifetimes, Life
Elyz
and Life
FC
(h), respectively, have been considered as not dependent on the power), as well as

8
C
O&M_Elyz
and C
O&M_FC
, the O&M costs of the electrolyzer and the fuel cell (/h), respectively. C
Elyz
and C
FC
()
are the electrolyzer and fuel cell acquisition costs, respectively.
We denote by
FC
(kWh
output
/kgH
2
) the amount of electrical energy output for each kg of H
2
consumed in the fuel
cell. We assume that
FC
= 1/(A
FC
+ B
FC
).
A
FC
and B
FC
are coefficients of the fuel cell consumption equation, Cons
FC
(kgH
2
/h); they can be modeled
similarly to the ones in a Diesel (or oil) generator consumption equation:


Cons
FC
= B
FC
P
N_FC
+ A
FC
P (6)


where P (kW) is the power supplied by the fuel cell at a certain time, P
N_FC
(kW) is the nominal power of the
fuel cell, and A
FC
and B
FC
(kgH
2
/kWh) are the coefficients of the consumption curve.
The value of the
FC
expression is only valid at the fuel cell nominal power. Nevertheless, since B
FC
is approx. 0
for fuel cells, the error is minimal.
We have not included the H
2
tank costs, since we have considered both the lifetime and the O&M costs as fixed,
therefore, they do not depend on the performance of the electrolyzer and the fuel cell.
3.2.3 Charge power limit
Fig. 3 depicts the cost of cycling energy () of the batteries and the electrolyzers as a function of the spare
energy P
charge
. It can be observed that, for low values of P
charge
, it is optimal to use the spare energy produced by
the renewable sources to charge the batteries as much as possible; if there is still more energy, then the spare
energy can also produce hydrogen in the electrolyzer.
This phenomenon takes place up to a certain power, P
lim_charge
, from which it is cheaper to cycle through the
electrolyzer and the fuel cell. This power is obtained from equating C
cycling_bat
to C
cycling_Elyz-FC
:

Elyz FC
O&M_Elyz O&M_FC
Elyz FC
lim_charge
bat Elyz FC
N bat_p DC cycles_eq global_bat
1000

+ + +
=
C C
C C
Life Life
P
C
C N U N

(7)



Batteries
Cost of
cycling
energy
()
P (kW) P
lim_Charge
Electrolyzer-Fuel Cell

Fig. 3. Cost of cycling energy

9
3.2.4 CHARGE strategy optimization
The strategy to optimize the CHARGE process is as follows:

1) If P
charge
P
lim_charge
then the batteries are charged as much as possible, and, if there is still spare energy,
it is used to produce H
2
in the electrolyzer.
2) If P
charge
> P
lim_charge
then the hydrogen is produced in the electrolyzer at full power, and, if there is still
spare energy, it is used to charge the batteries.

If the electrolyzer has a minimum power, P
min_Elyz
, then P
lim_charge
= max(P
lim_charge
, P
min_Elyz
).

In the calculation of P
lim_charge
it is necessary to take into account:

Although we have already included the proportional replacement cost of the elements in the C
cycling_bat
and
C
cycling_Elyz_FC
expressions, the lifetime of the system is not necessarily a multiple of the lifetime of the
components, therefore changing the real value of P
lim_charge
.
C
cycling_bat
depends on the number of equivalent cycles. If the batteries lifetime is modeled using the
Rainflow method, then the calculation is not going to be exact, since it is not possible to know beforehand
the cycled energy through the year.
The expression
FC
= 1/(A
FC
+ B
FC
) is only valid at the fuel cell nominal power.

These inaccuracies can cause the value of P
lim_charge
not to be optimal. The program searches for the optimal
value of P
lim_charge
, named P
lim_charge opt
, which ranges between 0 and 2P
lim_charge
.

3.3 DISCHARGE process
In the case of lack of energy during 1 hour (P
discharge
> 0), the energy is obtained either from the batteries or from
the AC generator, or from the fuel cell. The selection of the element supplying that energy depends on the
associated costs, described as follows.
3.3.1 Cost of supplying energy with the batteries
The average cost of supplying a certain P (kW) power with the batteries for 1 hour can be calculated, in ,
through the equation:

bat
N bat_p DC cycles_eq global_bat
P_bat
inv DC DC
1000


(1 )

=
+
P C
C N U N
C
Factor Factor

(8)
where Factor
DC
is the average annual value of the hourly ratio of the DC consumption vs. total consumption:

36524
load_DC
DC
1 load_DC load_AC
1

36524

=
=
+

i i
i
i
P
Factor
P P
(9)

Factor
DC
expresses the average value of the energy demanded by the DC loads weighted by the overall demand.
It is necessary to quantify this value because the batteries, when supplying DC power do not show external
losses, whereas, when supplying the AC power, it is necessary to consider the inverter losses.

10
Notice that, although the inverter efficiency is variable, it is necessary to use its average value to obtain the costs
of supplying the energy and the values of P1 and P2 (defined later). Hence,
inv
is the efficiency of the inverter
for the average AC load (apparent power), S
AC_average
, where:


36524
load_AC
AC_average
1
/ cos

36524
=

i
i
P
S (10)

3.3.2 Cost of supplying energy with the AC generator
The average cost of supplying a certain P (kW) power with the AC generator for 1 hour is, in :


gen fuel
P_gen O&M_gen N_gen fuel
gen AC/DC DC DC
fuel
fixed_gen
AC/DC DC DC
Pr

(1 )


(1 )
C A P
C C B P Pr
Life Factor Factor
A Pr P
C
Factor Factor

= + + + =
+
= +
+
(11)


where Pr
fuel
is the fuel price (/l), A and B and are the coefficients of the consumption curve (l/kWh) [27],
C
O&M_gen
is the O&M cost of the generator (/h), C
gen
is the acquisition cost of the AC generator (), Life
gen
is the
estimated lifetime of the AC generator (h) and C
fixed_gen
() is the operating fixed cost of the Diesel generator.
3.3.3 Cost of supplying energy with the fuel cell
The average cost of supplying power with a fuel cell depends on whether it is fed by the H
2
produced by the
electrolyzer, and stored in the tank, or it is fed by externally purchased H
2
.
If the fuel cell uses the H
2
previously produced by the electrolyzer, then the cost is fixed.

FC
P_FC O&M_FC fixed_FC
FC
= + =
C
C C C
Life
(12)
If the fuel cell uses externally purchased H
2
(in this case there is no electrolyzer in the hybrid system), then
the cost depends on the power:


FC H2
P_FC fixed_FC FC N_FC H2
inv DC DC


(1 )
= + +
+
A P Pr
C C B P Pr
Factor Factor
(13)


where Pr
H2
(/kg) is the cost of the externally purchased hydrogen.
3.3.4 DISCHARGE optimization
Fig. 4 shows the cost of supplying energy as a function of the power.
It is observed that, for powers between 0 and a certain value P1, the batteries are the optimal components needed
to supply the power, since they have zero cost at P = 0. It may also be possible that there exists a value of P1
from which it is more economical to supply the power with another component (the AC generator or the fuel
cell). This value of P1 is the minimum of the two values resulting from the intersection of the cost function of
supplying energy with batteries and the cost function of supplying energy with other components AC generator
and fuel cell (see Fig. 4).

11

Cost
()
Fuel Cell
Fuel Cell
Batteries
AC Generator
AC Generator
Batteries
Cost
()
P
discharge
P
discharge
B) FUEL CELL CONSUMING EXTERNAL H
2

P1= P1
gen
P2

P2

P1= P1
gen
P1FC
P1FC
A) FUEL CELL CONSUMING H
2
FROM ELECTROLYZER

Fig. 4. Cost of supplying energy in the DISCHARGE process

We denote by P1
gen
to the power at which C
P_bat
= C
P_gen
(intersection point of the cost of supplying energy with
the batteries and the cost of supplying energy with the AC generator), and by P1
FC
to the power at which C
P_bat
=
C
P_FC
(intersection point of the cost of supplying energy with the batteries and the cost of supplying energy with
the fuel cell).
If the value of P1
gen
is negative (intersection in the third quadrant), this implies that it is always cheaper to supply
energy with the batteries instead of with the generator. In this case, we make P1
gen
= , instead of choosing a
negative value, in order to select a coherent value of P1 when we make that P1 = min (P1
gen
, P1
FC
). In the case
of P1
FC
being negative, then we also make P1
FC
= .
It may be possible that both P1
gen
and P1
FC
have negative values, then P1
gen
= P1
FC
= , and the transfer of
energy from the batteries is always more economical.
The value of P1 is the minimum between P1
gen
and P1
FC
.
It may be also possible that a value P2 exists at which the energy produced by the component supplying power
starting from P1 is not the cheapest. This value of P2 is obtained by making C
P_FC
= C
P_gen
. Meaning that, if P1 =
P1
gen
, and P2 has a non-infinite positive value for which C
P_FC
= C
P_gen
, then, if P
discharge
is higher than P2, it is
cheaper to supply with the fuel cell instead of using the AC generator.
Consequently, the strategy that optimizes the DISCHARGE process is described as follows:

1) If P
discharge
< P1 then the energy is supplied by the batteries
2) If P1 P
discharge
P2 then the energy is supplied by the component with the lowest value of P1 (either
the AC generator or the fuel cell).
3) If P
discharge
> P2 then the energy is provided by the component with the highest value of P1 (either the
AC generator or the fuel cell).
4) Once the component to supply the required energy, P
discharge
, is selected, we have to consider whether it
is able to provide all the energy needed; if not, the remaining power, named P
rest
, is provided by the
component that can produce it at the lowest possible cost.
5) If the second component necessary to supply the energy is not available, then the third one is used to
supply the remaining energy.


12
Note that, when the components supply energy, they also take into account the values of P
min_gen
, P
min_FC
,
SOC
min
, P
critical_gen
, SOC
stp_gen
, P
critical_FC
, SOC
stp_FC
and H
2
TANK
stp
as defined in sections 2.1 to 2.4.
If P2 < P1, steps 2 and 3 become just one step: For powers where P1 P
discharge
, the energy is provided by the
component with the lowest value of P1 (either the AC generator or the fuel cell).
3.3.5 P1 calculation
P1
gen
is obtained by factoring out P from the C
P_bat
= C
P_gen
equation:

fixed_gen
gen
bat
N bat_p DC cycles_eq global_bat
fuel
inv DC DC AC/DC DC DC

1000

(1 ) (1 )
=
| |
|
|
\

+ +
C
P1
C
C N U N
A Pr
Factor Factor Factor Factor

(14)

P1
FC
is obtained by factoring out P from the C
P_bat
= C
P_FC
equation:

- If the fuel cell consumes H
2
previously produced by the electrolyzer:

[ ]
fixed_FC inv DC DC
FC
bat
N bat_p DC cycles_eq global_bat
(1 )

1000

+
=
C Factor Factor
P1
C
C N U N

(15)

- If the fuel cell consumes externally purchased H
2
(there is no electrolyzer in the system):

( ) [ ]
fixed_FC FC N_FC H2 inv DC DC
FC
bat
FC H2
N bat_p DC cycles_eq global_bat
(1 )

1000

+ +
=

C B P Pr Factor Factor
P1
C
A Pr
C N U N

(16)

P1 = min (P1
gen
, P1
FC
) (17)
3.3.6 P2 calculation
We obtain it from equating C
P_gen
= C
P_FC.
- If the fuel cell consumes H
2
previously produced by the electrolyzer:

fixed_FC fixed_gen AC/DC DC DC
fuel
( ) (1 )

+ (

=
C C Factor Factor
P2
A Pr

(18)

- If the fuel cell consumes externally purchased H
2
(there is no electrolyzer in the system):

fixed_FC FC N_FC H2 fixed_gen
fuel FC H2
AC/DC DC DC inv DC DC


(1 ) (1 )
+
=

+ +
C B P Pr C
P2
A Pr A Pr
Factor Factor Factor Factor
(19)

In the calculation of P1 and P2 it is necessary to take into account the same inaccuracies as in the calculation of
P
lim_charge
(see section 3.2.4); moreover, the inverter efficiency is variable, so we consider the average power,
inv
,
in this case.

13
These inaccuracies may cause the calculated values of P1
gen
, P1
FC
and P2 are not optimal. To take into account
these approximations and inaccuracies, the program searches for the optimal values of these variables, named
P1
gen_opt
, P1
FC_opt
and P2
opt
, which are between 0 and 2 times the calculated values.
3.3.7 DISCHARGE control strategy examples
Fig. 4 shows the cost functions of the different elements in two cases. In case A, a fuel cell consumes the
hydrogen previously produced by the electrolyzer and in case B the fuel cell consumes the hydrogen produced
externally (i.e. purchased, with no electrolyzer in the system). In both examples, if P
discharge
< P1, then it is better
to supply the energy with the batteries. If the batteries are not able to supply all the P
discharge
power, then the
remaining power, P
rest
= P
discharge
P
bat
, is provided by the AC generator if P
rest
< P2, and, if not, by the fuel cell.
If P1 P
discharge
P2, then it is better to supply the energy with the AC generator. If the generator is not able to
supply all the P
discharge
power, the remaining power, P
rest
= P
discharge
P
gen
, is provided by the batteries if P
rest
<
P1
FC
, and, if not, by the fuel cell.
If P
discharge
> P2 then, it is better to supply the energy with the fuel cell. If the fuel cell is not able to supply all the
P
discharge
power, then the remaining power, P
rest
= P
discharge
P
FC
, is supplied by the batteries if P
rest
< P1
gen
, and, if
not, by the AC generator.

4. Developed Genetic Algorithm
Genetic Algorithms simulate, through a computer program, the phenomena of reproduction, selection, crossing
and mutation that can be observed in nature, being able to solve optimization problems that are difficult to
approach with other techniques. Possible solutions to a particular problem are considered individuals of a
species. In the design problem presented in this paper the species are the configuration and control of a
hybrid system. An individual is a combination of the variables (genes) that we wish to optimize (in our case
the variables, or genes, are the components of the hybrid system and the variables of the control system
strategy).
An individual can be defined by a vector whose components represent the parameters of the system using an
integer code. The genetic algorithm searches for possible designs modifying the integer values of the vectors.
Individuals cross over to give birth to a new offspring in the next generation. The higher the fitness of the
individual, the higher the probability to cross over is. With the new generations, the algorithm finds better
individuals whose fitness functions are closer to the optimal values. Some individuals experiment mutations that
make them change some genes, which can expedite the convergence of the algorithm to the optimal value.
The size of the population (number of individuals), the number of generations (iterations), and the crossing and
mutation rates, are parameters of the Genetic Algorithm. The reader is referred to [5, 28], where the basic
principles of Genetic Algorithms can be found.
In a previous work [23] the characteristics of the developed Genetic Algorithm are described in detail. In this
section we will show, briefly, the changes and improvements that have been done.
The design program is made up of two Genetic Algorithms, the main one and the secondary one, described next.

4.1 Main algorithm
This Genetic Algorithm searches for configurations of PV panels, wind generators, hydro turbine, batteries, AC
generator, fuel cell, electrolyzer and inverter that minimize the cost of the system. This is the general case, if all

14
these elements are selected. However, the user can decide whether the system contains all these elements or only
some of them.
The codification of the variables used by the main algorithm is done through a vector made up of 11 integers:

| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k |
where,
a is the number of PV panels in parallel
b is the type of PV panel
c is the number of wind turbines
d is the type of wind turbine
e is the type of hydro turbine
f is the number of batteries in parallel
g is the type of battery
h is the type of AC generator
i is the type of fuel cell
j is the type of electrolyzer
k is the type of inverter

Regarding the inverter, it can be forced to supply the maximum power demanded by the AC load, which is an
option of the design tool. In this case, the inverter selected will be the one with the lowest power whose output is
higher than the AC load maximum. If this option is not used, the type of inverter will be a variable to be
optimized, being possible that an inverter whose output is bigger than the maximum AC consumption is not
needed; in this case, higher powers will be supplied by the AC generator.
The charge regulator, the battery charger and the H
2
tank do not take part in the combination of components
optimized by the main algorithm. This is so because, for each possible combination calculated by the main
algorithm, the optimal size of these components is determined once the secondary algorithm obtains the best
control strategy.
The main algorithm simultaneously uses a population of N
m
vectors, such as the one aforementioned. The
number of generations is N
gen_main_max
.
The main algorithm obtains the optimal configuration of the elements minimizing the NPC. The NPC must be
calculated for each combination, represented by one of the N
m
vectors which constitute the population.
The fitness function of the ith combination of the main algorithm is assigned according to its rank in the
population (rank #1 for the best individual, considering the objective function, and rank #N
m
for the worst
solution):

m
MAIN
m
( 1)
[( 1) ]
i
j
N i
fitness
N j
+
=
+

j = 1..N
m
(20)

4.2 Secondary algorithm
The Genetic Algorithm obtains, for each configuration provided by the main algorithm, the control strategy that
minimizes the NPC. The secondary algorithm is evaluated for each individual of the main algorithm, trying to
find its best control.

15

YES
Evaluation of the control strategy for
each of the Nm vectors of the main
algorithm. The secondary algorithm
is executed N
m
times.
i =1. Nm
Each of the Nm vectors of
the main algorithm has its
best control.
Sort by NPC the Nm
solutions obtained.
Random generation of Nm
vectors from the main algorithm
Ngen_main = 1
Ngen_main < Ngen_main_max?
NO
The best solution (rank 1) is
the lowest value of NPC.
END
Reproduction, crossing and
mutation of the main
algorithm vectors.
Ngen_main = Ngen_main+1
Evaluation of the NSEC vectors of the
secondary algorithm: Calculate NPC for
each one and sort by NPC.
Reproduction, crossing and mutation
of the secondary algorithm vectors.
Ngen_sec = Ngen_sec+1
Ngen_sec < Ngen_sec_max?
NO
The best control (rank 1) is that represented by the vector
of the secondary algorithm with lowest NPC.
i = i+1
i < Nm?
NO
YES
Random generation of NSEC vectors of the
secondary algorithm from the vector i of the
main algorithm.
Ngen_sec = 1
i = 1
MAIN ALGORTIHM
SECONDARY ALGORTIHM
YES

Fig. 5. Genetic algorithms flowcharts


The codification of the control variables is done through a vector that consists of 12 positions:

|P
min_gen
| P
min_FC
| SOC
min
| P
critical_gen
| SOC
stp_gen
| P
critical_FC
| SOC
stp_FC
| H
2
TANK
stp
| P
lim_charge
| P1
gen
| P1
FC
| P2|

The secondary algorithm simultaneously uses a population of N
sec
vectors such as the one described before. The
number of generations is N
gen_sec_max
.
The fitness function of the ith combination of the Secondary Algorithm is (rank #1 for the best individual,
considering the objective function, and rank #N
sec
for the worst solution):


sec
SEC
sec
( 1)
[( 1) ]
i
j
N i
fitness
N j
+
=
+

j = 1..N
sec
(21)

4.3 Implementation of the developed algorithm
Fig. 5 shows the flowchart of the developed algorithms.
MAIN ALGORITHM

16
5. Computational results
A system located in Zaragoza, Spain, has been optimized. As previously mentioned, the program optimizes both
the configuration of the physical components and their control strategy. Nevertheless, if there is a system with its
physical components fixed, for example, a real system that is already installed, the program can optimize the
control strategy. The latter case is the one presented here, since we are mainly interested in showing the strategy
optimization in this paper.
The system whose control will be optimized is a PV-Diesel-battery-hydrogen system with AC, DC and H
2

simultaneous load. We believe this is the first time that a control system with Diesel generator, batteries and fuel
cell is achieved. We have chosen this configuration because every control variable is considered. Although it is
not very common that a Diesel generator and a fuel cell co-exist, the acquisition costs, the O&M of the different
elements and the weather variables may make this configuration optimal in some cases.
The studied system is made up of the following elements:

6,600 W
p
PV generator:

15x4 PV panels of 110 W
p
at 12V, with a total acquisition cost of 48,720 , 25
years estimated lifetime, and an annual O&M cost of 40 /year.
48,000 Wh battery bank: 4x5 batteries of 200 Ah at 12V, with a total acquisition cost of 22,600 , KiBaM
model (Manwell and McGowan, 1993), estimated lifetime according to Rainflow, battery cycle life as
shown in Fig. 6, 40% minimum SOC, 80% roundtrip efficiency, and an annual O&M cost of 50 /year.
5 kVA inverter, an acquisition cost of 3,600 , 10 years expected lifetime, and a variable efficiency with
an apparent power as shown in Fig. 7.
7 kVA Diesel AC generator, acquisition cost of 3,640 , O&M cost of 0.2 /h, expected lifetime of 7,000
h, minimum power recommended by the manufacturer of 30% of the nominal power (2,100 W), gas-oil
cost of 0.8 /l, consumption parameters: A = 0.246 l/kWh, B = 0.08145 l/kWh [27].
1 kW fuel cell, acquisition cost of 4,000 , O&M cost of 0.2 /h, 30,000 h expected lifetime, consumption
parameters: A
FC
= 0.06 l/kWh, B
FC
= 0 (
FC
= 16.66 kWh/kgH
2
for the nominal power, corresponding to
50% of the H
2
Lower Heating Value), 6% minimum power (60W).


0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
DOD (%)
Cycles to Failure

Fig. 6. Battery cycle life (cycles to failure) vs. Depth of Discharge (DOD)

17

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Output Power (%)
Efficiency (%)

Fig. 7. Inverter efficiency

1 kW electrolyzer, acquisition cost of 3,200 , O&M cost of 0.2 /h, 30000 h expected lifetime,
Eyz
=
0.02157 kgH
2
/kWh (corresponding to 85% of the Higher Heating Value of H
2
).
0.1 kg H
2
tank, with an acquisition cost of 150 , O&M cost 10 /year, 25 years expected lifetime.
70A charge regulator, with a cost of 125 , 10 years lifetime.
Battery charger with a cost of 100 , 10 years lifetime and 90% efficiency.

The system has a 48V DC voltage and a 230V AC voltage. AC loads (40.9 kWh in one day), DC loads (a fixed
300 W value, providing a total of 7.2 kWh in one day), and H
2
loads (0.05 kg in one day) are present. Fig. 8
presents the hourly distribution of the AC and DC loads, and Fig. 9 shows the H
2
loads. Note that we consider
that every day has the same loads.
The total acquisition costs of the different elements of the system make a total of 86,435 , including assembly
costs of 300 . The electrolyzer and fuel cell costs are lower than the current ones in Spain, assuming that they
will go down in the near future.

0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour
AC+DC Load PV gen. Gen. AC Charge bat.
Disch. Bat. Fuel Cell Electrolyzer Pmin_gen_opt
Energy (Wh)

Fig. 8. Simulation of January 24
th


18
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour
H2 (kg)
H2 load H2 tank Electrolyzer
yzer.
Fuel Cell H2TANKstp_opt

Fig. 9. Simulation of the consumption and H
2
accumulation for January 24
th



The irradiation in the city of Zaragoza is shown in Table 1. The effective interest rate considered is 2%. The
maximum unmet load allowed is 0%.
The parameter values, without strategy optimization, recommended by the manufacturers and also calculated are
as follows: P
lim_charge
= 1,732 W; P1
gen
= 4,265 W; P1
FC
= 699 W; P2 = (i.e. the generator and fuel cell curves
do not intersect); P
min_gen
= 2100 W; SOC
min
= 40%; P
critical_gen
= 0 W, SOC
stp_gen
= 40%; P
min_FC
= 60 W;
P
critical_FC
= 0 W; SOC
stp_FC
= 40%, H
2
TANK
stp
= 0 kg.
The DISCHARGE parameters are represented in Fig. 10. For these parameter values calculated without strategy
optimization, the system NPC would be 285,575 . The fuel, O&M, and replacement costs are 199,140 .


Table 1
Average daily irradiation
Month Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Wh/m
2
2108 2688 4150 4931 6318 6941 6644 5593 4830 3456 2555 2138



Fuel cell
H2 from Electrolyzer.
Batteries
AC Generator
Cost ()
Pdischarge P1gen
P1FC

Fig. 10. DISCHARGE parameters before optimization

19
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour
SOC SOC max SOC min _opt SOC stp_gen_opt

SOC stp_FC_opt

Energy (Wh)

Fig. 11. Simulation of the battery SOC for January 24
th

Using the main algorithm makes no sense in this case, since the physical components are fixed. The calculation
of the optimal strategy has been done with the following parameters of the secondary algorithm: Number of
generations = 30, population = 300,000, crossover rate = 0.7, and mutation rate = 0.01.
When the strategy optimization is finished, the results obtained for the control parameters are:
P
lim_charge_opt
= 2,772 W; P1
gen_opt
= 1,279 W; P1
FC_opt
= 1,118 W; P2
opt
= 1,365; P
min_gen_opt
= 4550 W (65% of the
nominal power); SOC
min_opt
= 40%; P
critical_gen_opt
= 2730 W, SOC
stp_gen_opt
= 82%; P
min_FC_opt
= 1000 W;
P
critical_FC_opt
= 455 W; SOC
stp_FC_opt
= 94%, H
2
TANK
stp_opt
= 0.093 kg.
The system NPC for the optimized control strategy is 254,521 , this being the minimum value found by the
program. The operation, fuel and replacement costs are 168,086 .
It can be observed that the optimization of the control variables by Genetic Algorithms has allowed us to find the
configuration with the minimal NPC.
Fig. 8, 9 and 11 show the simulation results for one particular day, January 24
th
.
The number of cases evaluated is 910
6
, with a simulation time of 27h 46 (90 cases per second). Considering
that there are 12 control variables, and that each variable can have 10 different values (10% precision), the total
number of possible cases is 10
12
, taking a time of 352.3 years to solve if the cases are evaluated using an
enumerative technique (without using Genetic Algorithms).

6. Conclusions
We have developed a novel control strategy, optimized through Genetic Algorithms, for the control of stand-
alone renewable energy hybrid systems with hydrogen storage. The energy sources of the hybrid system can be
of the renewable type (wind, PV, hydro), as well as AC generators and fuel cells. The loads can be AC, DC
and/or H
2
.
The strategy proposed optimizes the control of the hybrid system, obtaining values of different variables that
make the total Net Present Cost of the system minimal.

20
We have explained the control strategy in detail, and we have also illustrated it with a representative example
using a PV-Diesel-batteries-hydrogen system, where the need to optimize the different control parameters to get
the lowest NPC possible can be seen. Genetic Algorithms perfectly fulfill this mission.

Acknowledgment
This work has been supported by IBERCAJA and the University of Zaragoza under the program Proyectos de
Investigacin IBERCAJA. Research Project: IBE2005-TEC-04.

References
[1] Muselli M, Notton G, Louche A. Design of hybrid-photovoltaic power generator, with optimization of
energy management. Sol Energy 1999;65(3):143-57.
[2] Ulleberg . The importance of control strategies in PV-hydrogen systems. Sol Energy 2004;76(1-3):323-9.
[3] Seeling-Hochmuth GC. A combined optimisation concept for the design and operation strategy of hybrid-
PV energy systems. Sol Energy 1997;61(2):77-87.
[4] Michalewicz Z, Fogel DB. How to solve it: modern heuristics, 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2004.
[5] Goldberg DE. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning. New York: Addison-
Wesley; 1989.
[6] Barley CD, Winn CB, Flowers L, Green HJ. Optimal control of remote hybrid power systems, Part I:
simplified model. In: Proceedings of wind power 95, Washington DC; 1995.
[7] Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewables (HOMER). Website:
www.nrel.gov/international/homer.
[8] Ulleberg . Stand-alone power systems for the future: optimal design, operation & control of solar-
hydrogen energy systems. PhD. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim: Department
of Thermal Energy and Hydropower; 1998.
[9] Fiscal A, Thornton J, Klein SA, Beckman WA. Developments to the TRNSYS simulation program. Journal
of Solar Energy Engineering 1995;117:123-7.
[10] Manwell J, Rogers A, Hayman G, Avelar C, McGowan J. Hybrid2a hybrid system simulation model:
theory manual, available at: http://www.ecs.umass.edu/mie/labs/rerl/hy2/.
[11] Mills A., Al-Hallaj S. Simulation of hydrogen-based hybrid Systems using Hybrid2. International Journal
of Hydrogen Energy 2004;29(10):991-9.
[12] Dienhart H, Siegel A. Hydrogen storage in isolated electrical energy systems with photovoltaic and wind
energy. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1994;19(1):61-6.
[13] Kauranen PS, Lund PD, Vanhanen JP. Development of a self-sufficient solar-hydrogen energy system.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1994;19(1):99-106.

21
[14] Hollumer 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(2):97-109.
[15] Agbossou K, Kolhe M, Hamelin J. Performance of a stand-alone renewable energy system based on energy
storage as hydrogen. IEEE Trans on Energy Conversion 2004;19(3):633-40.
[16] Santarelli M, Cal M, Macagno S. Design and analysis of stand-alone hydrogen energy systems with
different renewable sources. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2004;29(15):1571-86.
[17] Shakyaa BD, Aye L, Musgrave P. Technical feasibility and financial analysis of hybrid windphotovoltaic
system with hydrogen storage for Cooma. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2005;30(1):9-20.
[18] Cotrell J, Pratt W. Modeling the feasibility of using fuel cells and hydrogen internal combustion engines in
remote renewable energy systems. In: Proceedings of wind power 03, Austin, Texas; 2003.
[19] Vosen SR, Keller JO. Hybrid energy storage systems for stand-alone electric power systems: optimization
of systems performance and cost through control strategies. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
1999;24(12):1139-56.
[20] Kolhe M, Agbossou K, Kelouwani S, Anouar A, Fournier M, Hamelin J, Bose TK. Long-term performance
of stand-alone renewable energy system for hydrogen production. In: Proceedings of 14
th
World Hydrogen
Energy Conference, Montreal, QC, Canada; 2002.
[21] Nelson DB, Nehrir MH, Wang C. Unit sizing and cost analysis of stand-alone hybrid wind/PV/fuel cell
power generation systems. Renewable Energy, in press, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2005.08.031.
[22] Garcia RS, Weisser D. A winddiesel system with hydrogen storage: Joint optimisation of design and
dispatch. Renewable Energy, in press, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2005.11.003.
[23] Dufo-Lpez R., Bernal-Agustn JL. Design and control strategies of PV-Diesel systems using genetic
algorithms. Sol Energy 2005;79(1): 33-46.
[24] Downing SA, Socie DF. Simple rainflow counting algorithms. International Journal of Fatigue
1982;4(1):31-40.
[25] Manwell JF, McGowan JG. A lead acid battery storage model for hybrid energy systems. Sol Energy
1993;50(5):399- 405.
[26] Schuhmacher J. INSEL Interactive simulation of renewable electrical energy supply systems, reference
manual, University of Oldenburg, Renewable Energy Group, Dept. of Physics, PO Box 2503, D-26111
Oldenburg.
[27] Skarstein O, Ulhen K. Design Considerations with respect to long-term diesel saving in wind/diesel plants.
Wind Engineering 1989;13(2):72-87.
[28] Bck T, Fogel DB, Michalewicz Z. Evolutionary computation 1: basic algorithms and operators. Bristol
and Philadelphia: Institute of Physics Publishing; 2000.

22
List of Symbols:
a Number of PV panels in parallel
A

Coefficient of the AC generator consumption equation [l/kWh]
A
FC
Coefficient of the fuel cell consumption equation [kgH
2
/kWh]
b Type of PV panel
B

Coefficient of the AC generator consumption equation [l/kWh]
B
FC
Coefficient of the fuel cell consumption equation [kgH
2
/kWh]
c Number of wind turbines
C
bat
Battery bank acquisition cost []
C
Elyz
Acquisition cost of the electrolyzer []
C
cycling_bat
Cost of cycling the energy corresponding to a power P (kW) through the batteries during 1 hour []
C
cycling_Elyz-FC
Cost of cycling the energy corresponding to a power P (kW) through the electrolyzer and the fuel cell
during 1 hour []
C
FC
Acquisition cost of the fuel cell []
C
fixed_gen
Operating fixed cost of the Diesel generator []
C
N
Nominal capacity of the battery [Ah]
Cons
FC
Consumption of the fuel cell [kgH
2
/h]
cos Power factor of the AC loads
C
O&M_Elyz
Operation and maintenance cost of the electrolyzer [/h]
C
O&M_FC
Operation and maintenance cost of the fuel cell [/h]
C
O&M_gen
Operation and maintenance cost of the AC generator [/h]
C
P_FC
Average cost of supplying a certain P (kW) power with the fuel cell for 1 hour []
C
P_gen
Average cost of supplying a certain P (kW) power with the AC generator for 1 hour []
d Type of wind turbine
DOD Depth of discharge of the battery [% of C
N
]
e Type of hydro turbine
f Number of batteries in parallel
Factor
DC
Average annual value of the hourly ratio of the DC consumption vs. total consumption
fitness
main_i
Fitness of the ith combination of the main algorithm
fitness
sec_i
Fitness of the ith combination of the secondary algorithm
g Type of battery
h Type of AC generator
H
2_rest
H
2
load (for external consumption) that cannot be initially met by the H
2
stored in the tank [kg]
H
2
TANK
stp
Setpoint for the amount of H
2
stored in the tank [kg]
H
2
TANK
stp_opt
Setpoint for the amount of H
2
stored in the tank, value optimized by the program [kg]
i Type of fuel cell
j Type of electrolyzer
k Type of inverter
kgH
2
kilograms of hydrogen
Life
Elyz
Electrolyzer lifetime [h]
Life
FC
Fuel cell lifetime [h]
Life
gen
AC generator lifetime [h]
N
bat_p
Number of batteries in parallel
N
cycles_eq
Average of a battery lifetime in equivalent full cycles
N
gen_main_max
Number of generations of the main algorithm

23
N
gen_sec_max
Number of generations of the secondary algorithm
N
m
Population of the main algorithm
N
sec
Population of the secondary algorithm
NPC Total Net Present Cost of the system (investment costs plus the discounted present values of all future costs
during the lifetime of the system) []
P
charge
Total converted spare power produced by renewable sources on the DC side (spare DC power plus spare
AC power multiplied by the AC/DC converter efficiency) [W]
P
critical_FC
Fuel cell critical power limit. When the demanded power is lower than this value, the fuel cell works at
nominal power, using the extra power to charge the batteries up to the SOC
stp_FC_opt
[W]
P
critical_FC_opt
Fuel cell critical power limit, value optimized by the program [W]
P
critical_gen
AC generator critical power limit. When the demanded power is lower than this value, the AC generator
works at nominal power, using the extra power to charge the batteries up to the SOC
stp_gen_opt
state or to
produce H
2
in the electrolyzer up to the H
2
TANK
stp_opt
tank level [W]
P
critical_gen_opt
AC generator critical power limit, value optimized by the program [W]
P
demand
Power that must be supplied by the AC generator (or by the fuel cell) [W]
P
discharge
Load not met by the renewable sources [W]
P
FC
Power supplied by the fuel cell [W]
P
gen
Power supplied by the AC generator [W]
P
H2_rest_conv_DC
DC Power consumed by the electrolyzer to supply the hydrogen load (for external consumption) that cannot
be initially met by the H
2
stored in the tank (H
2_rest
) [W]
P
inv_max
Maximum active power that can be produced by the inverter [W]
P
load_AC
Power consumed by the loads in the AC bus [W]
P
load_DC
Power consumed by the loads in the DC bus (including P
H2_rest_ conv_DC
) [W]
P
lim_charge
Power below which it is more economical to store energy in the batteries than in the H
2
tank [W]
P
lim_charge_opt
Power below which it is more economical to store energy in the batteries than in the H
2
tank, value
optimized by the program [W]
P
max_load
Maximum value of the hourly power consumed by the demand [W]
P
min_Elyz
Electrolyzer minimum power [W]
P
min_FC
Minimum power of the fuel cell recommended by the manufacturer [W]
P
min_FC_opt
Minimum power of the fuel cell optimized by the program [W]
P
min_gen
Minimum power of the AC generator recommended by the manufacturer [W]
P
min_gen_opt
Minimum power of the AC generator optimized by the program [W]
P
N_FC
Fuel cell nominal power [W]
P
N_gen
AC generator nominal power [W]
P
rest
Remaining power than cannot be supplied by either the batteries or the AC generator or the fuel cell [W]
P
re_AC
Power produced by the renewable sources that are in the AC bus [W]
P
re_DC
Power produced by the renewable sources that are in the DC bus [W]
Pr
fuel
Fuel price for the AC generator [/l]
Pr
H2
Hydrogen price (if it is externally purchased) [/kg]
P
spare
Difference between the nominal power of the AC generator and the total power demanded by the load [W]
P1 Minimum value between P1
gen
and P1
FC
[W]
P1
FC
Intersection point of the cost of supplying energy with the batteries and the cost of supplying energy with
the fuel cell [W]
P1
FC_opt
P1
FC
value optimized by the program [W]

24
P1
gen
Intersection point of the cost of supplying energy with the batteries and the cost of supplying energy with
the AC generator [W]
P1
gen_opt
P1
gen
optimized by the program [W]
P2

Intersection point of the cost of supplying energy with the fuel cell and the cost of supplying energy with
the AC generator [W]
P2
opt
P2 optimized by the program [W]
SOC State of Charge of the battery, defined here as a percentage of the nominal capacity of the battery [% of C
N
]
SOC
max
Maximum State of Charge of the battery [100 % of C
N
]
SOC
min
Minimum State of Charge of the battery recommended by the manufacturer [% of C
N
]
SOC
min_opt
Minimum State of Charge of the battery optimized by the program [% of C
N
]
SOC
stp_FC
Batteries SOC setpoint for the fuel cell [% of C
N
]
SOC
stp_FC_opt
Batteries SOC setpoint for the fuel cell, value optimized by the program [% of C
N
]
SOC
stp_gen
Batteries SOC setpoint for the AC generator [% of C
N
]
SOC
stp_gen_opt
Batteries SOC setpoint for the AC generator, value optimized by the program [% of C
N
]
S Apparent power at the inverter output [VA]
S
AC_average
Average AC load (apparent power) [VA]
S
inv
Nominal apparent power of the inverter [VA]
U
AC
AC bus voltage [V]
U
DC
DC bus voltage [V]

AC/DC
Efficiency of the battery charger (AC/DC converter)

Elyz
Amount of H
2
produced for each kWh of electrical energy consumed in the electrolyzer [kgH
2
/kWh
input
].

FC
Amount of electrical energy output for each kg of H
2
consumed in the fuel cell [kWh
output
/kgH
2
]

global_bat
Overall efficiency of the batteries (roundtrip efficiency)

inv
Inverter efficiency for the average AC load (S
AC_average
)

inv
(S) Inverter efficiency

inv
(S
inv
) Efficiency of the inverter at its apparent nominal power