Techno-Economic Assessment of Hybrid Renewable Energy System: Utilizing

Rooftop Spaces and Waste-to-Energy Approaches for Institutional

Sustainability

PABNA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of

Bachelor of Science
in
Electrical and Electronic Engineering
By
Roll No: 190209
Session: 2018-2019
Reg. No: 1021385
Supervised by
-----------------
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Faculty of Engineering and Technology
Pabna University of Science and Technology,
Pabna-6600, Bangladesh
CERTIFICATE

The thesis entitled “Techno-Economic Assessment of Hybrid Renewable Energy System:

Utilizing Rooftop Spaces and Waste-to-Energy Approaches for Institutional Sustainability”
submitted by “, Roll No: 190209, Reg No:1021385, Session: 2018-2019” has been accepted as
satisfactory in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in
Electrical and Electronic Engineering in December, 2024.

Signature of thesis Supervisor

………………………….

ii
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION

In accordance with rules and regulations of Pabna University of Science and Technology following
declarations are made:

I hereby declare that, this thesis has been done by me under the supervision of
………………………………, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Pabna
University of Science and Technology, Pabna-6600. I also declare that neither this thesis nor any
part of this thesis has been submitted elsewhere for awarding of any degree and any material
reproduced in this thesis has been properly acknowledged.

…………………

Roll: 190209

Session: 2018-19

Department of Electrical and Electrical engineering,

Pabna University of Science and Technology, Pabna-6600.

iii
DEDICATION

This thesis is humbly dedicated to the Almighty God, whose blessings and guidance have
illuminated my path. To my beloved parents, for their unconditional love, encouragement, and
sacrifices that have shaped my journey, and to my esteemed teachers, whose wisdom and
mentorship have been invaluable.

I also extend this dedication to individuals with physical challenges, whose resilience and courage
in the face of adversity inspire us all to persevere and strive for greatness.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First, I express my heartiest thanks and gratefulness to almighty God for His divine blessing makes
me possible to complete the Bachelor’s degree successfully. This journey of my Bachelor’s degree
at Pabna University of Science and Technology (PUST) have been full with joy and acquiring
knowledges and experiences through different fields. I am grateful and deeply indebted to my
supervisor in the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Pabna University of
Science and Technology, for their invaluable guidance and support. His endless patience, scholarly
insight, continual encouragement, constant and energetic supervision have made it possible to
complete this thesis.

I would like to express my gratitude to other teachers of the department of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Pabna University of Science and Technology for their kind suggestions and
inspiration from time to time. I extend my sincere thanks to my course mates in the Department of
Electrical and Electronic Engineering for their active participation and support during discussions
and coursework. Finally, I must acknowledge with profound respect the constant support and
patience of my parents.

Author

PUST, Pabna-6600, BANGLADESH ----------------

10 December, 2024 Roll No: 190209
Session: 2018-19
Department of Electrical and
Electronic Engineering
Pabna University of Science & Technology, Pabna

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages
CERTIFICATE ii
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v
LIST.OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF TABLES ix
List of Acronyms x
Abstract xi
Chapter 1: General Introduction 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Power sectors overview in Bangladesh 3
1.3 Literature Review 6
Chapter 2: Materials and Methods 10
2.1 HOMER Pro Software 12
2.2 Site Location 16
2.3 Resources 17
2.3.2 Temperature 18
2.3.3 Wind Resources 19
2.3.4 Biomass Resources 20
2.4 Load Profile 21
2.5 Solar PV 24
2.6 Wind Turbine 25
2.7 Modeling of Batteries 25
2.8 Biogas Generator 26
2.9 Inverter 26
2.10 Grid Utility 26
2.11 Grid Outage 27
2.11 Technical Data for Components Used in the System 27
2.12 Technical Specifications and Costs of Components 29
2.13 Proposed study and optimization case 30
Chapter 3: Result and Discussions 32
3.1 Techno-economic Assessment of the Microgrid 32
vi
 3.2 Optimum System 37
3.3.1 Electric Consumption 39
3.3.2 Cost Summary 39
3.3.3 Cash Flow Analysis 40
3.3.4 Biogas Gen. Electrical Summary 41
3.3.5 PV Electrical Summary 41
3.3.6 Battery Performance 42
3.3.7 Hybrid Converter 43
3.3.8 Energy Transaction 43
3.3.9 Time series chart 44
3.3.10 Sensitivity analysis 45
3.3.11 Sensitivity analysis of parameters 45
3.3.12 Sensitivity Analysis of components for the Optimal Case 48
3.3.12 Comparison with Others Published Work 50
Chapter 4: Conclusion & Future work 51
References 53

vii
LIST.OF FIGURES Pages
Figure 1.1. Generation of power in Bangladesh 4
Figure 2.1.Flowchart of the proposed work [32] 11
Figure 2.2. Architecture of HOMER Pro software [35] 13
Figure 2.3. Relationship between optimization, simulation, and sensitivity analysis [38] 15
Figure 2.4. Geographic and Structural Layout of the college 17
Figure 2.5. Average Solar irradiance and Clearness index 18
Figure 2.6. Monthly Average Temperature 19
Figure 2.7. Monthly Average wind speed of the Location 20
Figure 2.8. Daily available biomass resources 21
Figure 2.9. Daily average Load profile 22
Figure 2.10. Daily scaled load profile 23
Figure 2.11. Scaled data monthly average 24
Figure 2.12. Grid Outages 27
Figure 2.13. Schematic diagram of different case 31
Figure 3.1. Comparison of capital cost and NPC 33
Figure 3.2 Comparison of COE and operating cost 34
Figure 3.3. Comparison of energy purchased and sold 35
Figure 3.4. Comparison of Ren. fraction excess electricity 36
Figure 3.5. Comparison of CO2 and CO emission 36
Figure 3.6. Comparison of SO2 and NO emission 37
Figure 3.7. Optimal case for Institutional Applications 38
Figure 3.8. Production of PV, Grid and Bio-Gen 39
Figure 3.9. Cost summary of components 40
Figure 3.10. Cash Flow (25 years) 41
Figure 3.11. Biogas Gen. Output (KW) 41
Figure 3.12. PV Output (KW) 42
Figure 3.13. Battery Stage of Charge (%) 43
Figure 3.14. Inverter Output 43
Figure 3.15. Monthly grid transaction 44
Figure 3.16. Time series chart (10 days) 45
Figure 3.17. Sensitivity of Parameters for COE 47
Figure 3.18. Sensitivity of Parameters for NPC 48

viii
LIST OF TABLES Pages
Table 1.1. Current state of power sector 5
Table 1.2. Current state of renewable energy 5
Table 2.1. Load and Rooftop space 22
Table 2.2. Technical Specifications of the Components 29
Table 2.3 Per-Unit Cost of Components 29
Table 2.4. Comparable cases 31
Table 3.1. Sensitivity parameter variations 46
Table 3.2. Impact of 20% variations of cost on NPC & COE 49
Table 3.3. Comparison of the proposed work with others’ published work 50

ix
List of Acronyms

BESS Battery Energy Storage System

Bio Gen Biogas Generator

BPDB Bangladesh Power Development Board

COE Cost OF Energy

HES Hybrid Energy System

HOMER Hybrid Optimization of Multiple Energy Resources

HRES Hybrid Renewable Energy System

IEA International Energy Agency

KW Kilowatt

LCOE Levelized Cost OF Energy

N𝑂𝑋 Nitrogen Oxide

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NPC Net present Cost

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

O &M Operation & Maintenance

PV Photovoltaic

RE Renewable Energy

RF Reliability Factor

SHS Solar Home System

SREDA Sustainable Renewable Energy Development Authority

WT Wind Turbine

x
Abstract

In densely populated regions with limited cultivable land, rooftop spaces and waste-to-energy
solutions offer promising pathways for sustainable energy generation. This study assesses the
technical and economic feasibility of a hybrid renewable energy system for institutional buildings
in Naogaon, Bangladesh, integrating solar photovoltaics (PV), biomass generators fueled by
human and kitchen waste-derived biogas, wind energy, Li-ion batteries, and grid electricity. Using
local meteorological data, energy demand, characterized by a peak load of 174.62 kW and daily
consumption of 1118.4 kWh, was modeled in HOMER Pro software. The analysis identified the
PV-biomass generator-battery system as the optimal configuration, achieving a levelized cost of
energy (COE) of USD 0.0286 and a net present cost (NPC) of USD 287,793. This system also
significantly reduced CO2 emissions by 92% compared to grid-only systems. By incorporating
biogas from human and kitchen waste into the energy mix, the proposed solution not only enhances
energy reliability but also addresses waste management challenges, reducing environmental
impacts and promoting renewable resource utilization. The study highlights the importance of
hybrid renewable energy systems in addressing energy demands sustainably while minimizing
environmental impact and operational costs. These findings demonstrate the adaptability of such
systems for densely populated regions, offering scalable solutions for broader applications in
similar global contexts.

Keywords: Hybrid renewable energy, techno-economic analysis, sustainable energy, hybrid

microgrid, feasibility study, sensitivity analysis, CO2 emission reduction, waste-to-energy, rooftop
photovoltaics, biogas generation.

xi
 Chapter 1: General Introduction

1.1 Introduction

Energy plays a vital role in enhancing various aspects of human activities, including cooking,
washing, transportation, and lighting. In developing nations, access to affordable energy is
essential for driving economic growth and improving quality of life. The rapid depletion of fossil
fuel resources and increasing global warming from emissions highlight the urgent need for
alternative electricity generation methods. In recent decades, studies have highlighted that the
adoption of renewable energy systems offers a significant opportunity for achieving sustainable
and secure energy production while mitigating the severe consequences of climate change
[1].Renewable energy sources, such as solar, biogas and wind, have been implemented, but
further integration into the grid and battery energy storage systems (BESS) are essential for
reliable power supply. This research explores strategies to achieve uninterrupted and sustainable
electricity from renewable systems, addressing challenges like weather and location dependency
[2]. The rising global temperatures and environmental issues caused by greenhouse gas
emissions from burning oil, gas, and coal highlight the urgent need for alternative,
environmentally friendly energy technologies. Global industrialization and excessive fossil fuel
usage have increased greenhouse gas levels, making carbon neutrality more challenging, with
only 4.5% of the world adopting it and most countries targeting the goal by 2050–2070 [3]. The
current global population stands at 7.7 billion and has been projected to increase by 2 billion in
the next 30 years, totaling 9.7 billion by 2050 and attain the peak by the end of the century with
total of 11 billion [4]. Global energy demand is projected to increase by 1.3% annually until
2040 unless there are changes in energy policies and improvements in energy efficiency, as
indicated by the current policy scenario [5]. Additionally, the rapid depletion of fossil fuels and
the need to address climate change are growing concerns. According to the International Energy
Agency (IEA) World Energy Outlook 2019, carbon dioxide emissions related to energy rose by
1.9% in 2018 and are expected to reach approximately 36 gigatons by 2050. To address this,
scientists and researchers must find ways to meet growing energy demands while adhering to
the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global temperature rise to below 2°C, preferably 1.5°C
[6].

1
By introducing RE sources such as wind power, biogas and PV into a country’s energy mix was
in response to energy conservation issues to solve the problem of energy security. The output
power from renewable energy sources is inherently uncertain due to their dependency on
weather conditions. This variability in generation often leads to operational challenges, such as
the "duck curve," which describes the mismatch in timing between peak electricity demand and
PV generation [7,8]. Battery energy storage systems (BESS) are considered effective solutions
for addressing these issues by storing excess energy for use during periods of lower power
generation. Batteries have gained popularity as storage devices due to their low emissions and
high efficiency. However, their adoption is limited by high capital costs, and improper or non-
optimal installation can result in increased costs, system inefficiencies, and excessive capacity
requirements. Future hybrid systems could benefit from optimal sizing strategies for installed
equipment to maximize power reliability while minimizing system costs [9]. The adoption of
renewable energy has been steadily growing in Bangladesh over recent years, particularly in the
biogas sector and small-scale solar power systems [10]. Wind turbines (WT), PV, and biogas
integrated with on-grid systems are essential for ensuring a reliable and sustainable energy
supply by utilizing diverse renewable resources. This combination reduces dependency on fossil
fuels, lowers greenhouse gas emissions, and enhances energy security through efficient grid
integration.

Hybridization of renewable energy sources can take various forms depending on the technical,
socio-economic, and environmental conditions. It is imperative to identify the most suitable
Hybrid Energy System (HES) configuration for a specific location, considering various
multidimensional variables. A techno-economic feasibility study is widely regarded as the most
effective approach to determine the optimal HES configuration. According to the Sustainable
Renewable Energy Development Authority (SREDA) of Bangladesh, the country’s current
installed capacity for renewable energy-based power generation stands at 1171.75 MW, with
solar contributing 80% and hydro 19.6%. Wind, biogas, and biomass make negligible
contributions. Bangladesh aimed to generate 5% of its total energy from renewables by 2015
and 10% by 2020 [11]. However, as of 2023, only 4.51% of this target has been achieved
(SREDA, 2023). This shortfall highlights the inadequacy of the current renewable power
generation strategy and underscores the need for systematic and step-by-step planning to
facilitate the sustainable and efficient development of renewable energy in Bangladesh.

2
Implementing Hybrid Energy Systems in educational institutions offers significant benefits;
however, ensuring sustainability and cost-effectiveness remains challenging. This necessitates
meticulous planning and the consideration of diverse factors to ensure both system reliability
and long-term viability [12] .Therefore, researchers evaluate the technical, economic, and
environmental performance of grid-connected hybrid systems as well as stand-alone systems.
These various aspects of the research enhance understanding of hybrid energy systems and offer
valuable insights for energy planners, policymakers, and researchers focused on developing
sustainable energy solutions.

1.2 Power sectors overview in Bangladesh

Bangladesh, as a developing nation, has significantly expanded its electricity generation

capacity over the past decades, primarily to support its growing export-oriented industrial sector
a key driver of sustainable economic development. However, the country faces significant
challenges in scaling up electricity supply due to a critical shortage of fossil fuels. The pie chart
1.1 [13] illustrates the distribution of power generation sources in Bangladesh. The largest
contributor is natural gas, accounting for 39.8% of the total power generation. Coal follows as
the second-largest source with 23.1%, signifying its substantial role in meeting the country's
energy demands. Diesel ranks third, contributing 18.9% to the power mix, indicating its critical
role in both utility and backup power systems. Furnace oil accounts for 9% of power generation,
reflecting its use in thermal power plants. Imported electricity makes up a smaller portion, at
4.7%, indicating the country's reliance on neighboring countries to fulfill its energy
requirements. Renewable energy sources contribute a minimal 0.9%, highlighting the limited
adoption of sustainable energy technologies in Bangladesh's current energy landscape. Lastly,
captive power generation, often used in industrial sectors, constitutes 3.7%.

This data underscores Bangladesh's heavy reliance on fossil fuels, particularly gas, coal, and
diesel, while renewable energy remains significantly underutilized. Diversifying the energy mix
by increasing the share of renewables and improving energy efficiency could help the country
move towards a more sustainable and resilient energy future

3
 Coal
9% Gas
Diesel
4.7% 23.1% Furnance Oil
3.7% Imported
Renewable
Captive

18.9%

0.9%

39.8%

Figure 1.1. Generation of power in Bangladesh

Bangladesh faces increasing energy demand due to rapid population growth, urbanization, and
industrial expansion. The country's economic development and improved living standards have
led to higher electricity consumption in households, businesses, and industries. For future
development, Bangladesh can meet the required energy demand by introducing renewable
energies like biomass, solar, wind, hydro, lighting, sea wave, geothermal, and biogas. Solar
energy is a bigger renewable energy resource in Bangladesh because of appropriate geographical
location [14]. The fiscal and financial stress caused by the power and energy sector is one the
single most-important factors for current macro-economic challenges [15]. Bangladesh has set
an ambitious target to generate over 4,100 MW of electricity from renewable sources by 2030
and aims to produce 40% of its power from clean energy by 2041 [16]. While programs like the
Solar Home System (SHS) and rooftop solar have been introduced, their contribution to the
energy mix remains limited. Additionally, the government plans to reach 40,000 MW of total
power generation by 2030 and an ambitious 60,000 MW by 2041, with the ultimate goal of
achieving zero net carbon emissions [15]. In table 1.1, Bangladesh's power sector has a total grid
generation capacity of 28,098 MW, with the highest recorded generation at 16,477 MW and a
41% reserve margin, ensuring energy availability. Per capita electricity consumption is 602 MW,
with 100% of the population having access to electricity, including renewable sources. The cost
of power generation is 11.03 BDT/kWh, while the tariff stands at 8.95 BDT/kWh. Table 1.2
presents the current state of power generation within the grid and highlights key metrics such as

4
a total power generation capacity of 1378.48 MW, comprising 998.31 MW from grid sources
and an additional 380.17 MW from off-grid systems. Actual generation from renewable energy
sources reached 1126 MWh, indicating a significant contribution towards sustainable power
generation within the overall capacity. These tables [17] underscore the importance of
integrating renewable energy into the power grid to enhance energy security and reduce
dependency on fossil fuels.

Table 1.1. Current state of power sector

Parameters Values
Power Generation Capacity (Grid) 28,098 MW
Highest Power Generation (Grid) 16477 MW
Reserve Margin (%) 41%
Per Capita Electricity Consumption 602 MW
Access Electricity (including renewable energy) 100%
Per Unit Power Generation Cost 11.03/Kwh
Tariff (Electricity) 8.95 /KWh

Table 1.2. Current state of renewable energy

Parameters Values
Power Generation Capacity (Grid) 998.31MW
Power Generation Capacity (Off-Grid) 380.17MW
Total Power Generation Capacity 1378.48MW
Actual Generation (Renewable Energy) 1,126 MWh

Research on hybrid microgrid systems in Bangladesh highlights the potential for integrating
renewable energy sources like solar, biomass, and wind into national energy policies to improve
energy security and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The study demonstrates economic
viability, with low energy costs and reasonable payback periods, encouraging investment and
community participation. It emphasizes the importance of tailoring energy solutions to local
environmental conditions for optimized energy generation. Additionally, the system's ability to
significantly reduce CO2 emissions supports Bangladesh's environmental sustainability goals

5
and climate commitments. Finally, the research advocates for infrastructure development and
scalability, enabling replication in other regions to address energy challenges nationwide.

1.3 Literature Review

The literature on HRES predominantly emphasizes standalone configurations for remote areas,
often overlooking urban institutional settings. This study addresses this gap by optimizing
hybrid PV/wind systems integrated with grid infrastructure, focusing on economic,
environmental, and sensitivity analyses. The research, Z. Serat et al. in [18] highlighted the
unique challenges faced by university campuses, such as limited space and high energy
demands, necessitating efficient grid integration without reliance on battery storage. Key
findings indicate that a hybrid PV/wind/grid system can significantly reduce costs and carbon
emissions while enhancing energy reliability. The study demonstrates that such configurations
can achieve a remarkably low COE and high renewable energy penetration, supporting the
transition to sustainable energy solutions in educational institutions. This work contributes
valuable insights for future research and practical implementation of HRES in urban
environments, promoting broader adoption of renewable energy technologies.
Diyoke et al. (2023) in [19] conducted a comparative analysis of grid and off-grid hybrid
systems, focusing on university buildings in Nigeria. HRES are emerging as effective solutions
to enhance energy reliability and sustainability, particularly in institutional settings. By
integrating renewable sources can optimize energy production while reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. The modeling of HRES typically involves energy audits, resource assessments, and
techno-economic analyses using tools such as HOMER Pro and RET Screen Expert. Location-
specific data plays a critical role in ensuring system performance across diverse climatic zones.
Comparative studies of grid-connected and off-grid systems highlight their cost-effectiveness
and environmental benefits, making HRES an attractive option for addressing energy challenges
in educational institutions. Tailored designs are essential to meet the unique energy needs of
institutional buildings, ensuring efficiency and sustainability. Jain et al. in [20] conducted using
HOMER Pro analyzed hybrid systems combining PV, biogas, and batteries for institutional
applications. It identified configurations with minimal COE and NPC, highlighting their
feasibility for sustainable energy generation and significant reductions in emissions.

6
The comprehensive reviewed by Pawar et al. [21] on renewable energy hybridization,
highlighting their insights into integration strategies for sustainable power generation. The
integration of hybrid renewable energy systems (HRES) has been extensively studied in recent
years, focusing on optimizing configurations for cost, efficiency, and environmental impact.
Combining photovoltaics (PV), biogas generators, batteries, and grid systems has emerged as a
promising solution. Recent studies emphasize the importance of modeling tools like HOMER
Pro to optimize system performance, considering local meteorological and demand data. A
detailed study [22] investigated the environmental advantages of combining solar and biomass
in hybrid systems, achieving over 85% renewable energy penetration in test scenarios. The
fundamental challenge in developing hybrid renewable energy systems lies in the decreasing
reliability of solar and wind energy systems due to their irregular nature and intermittent
availability. This paper explores the design of both off-grid and on-grid systems, comparing
their performance and effectiveness.

A recent review [23].underscored the critical role of Li-ion batteries in enhancing the reliability
of hybrid energy systems, especially when integrated with PV and biogas technologies. The
study highlighted their cost-effectiveness, long-term viability, and ability to optimize energy
storage and utilization, making them a cornerstone in sustainable hybrid energy solutions. These
systems are particularly suitable for off-grid or back up grid outage power generation, relying
on advanced battery storage to manage energy supply during resource scarcity.

In Pakistan, M. A. Rehan et al. [24] integrated of renewable energy in hybrid power systems
has gained significant attention due to its potential to address energy reliability and
environmental concerns in institutional setups. Existing studies focus on evaluating the techno-
economic feasibility of hybrid systems comprising solar PV, hydro, batteries, and backup
generators. These systems aim to reduce dependency on the grid while optimizing cost and
performance. Researchers employ software tools like HOMER and MATLAB to simulate
system configurations and analyze key performance indicators such as energy output, COE and
payback period. While technical feasibility hinges on resource availability and load profiles,
economic viability is influenced by capital investment, operational costs, and government
incentives. Despite challenges such as high initial costs and intermittent renewable energy,
hybrid systems are shown to significantly enhance energy reliability and reduce environmental
impacts, making them a promising solution for institutions.

7
F. Eze et al. [25] conducted a study, hybrid renewable energy systems are increasingly vital for
providing reliable, cost-effective, and sustainable power in institutional settings, especially in
developing nations. A study conducted at the School of Engineering, University of Nairobi,
evaluated the feasibility of an HRES using HOMER Pro. The optimal configuration,
incorporating grid, PV, and diesel generator components, achieved a COE of USD 0.0609 and
a NPC of USD 536,773 over a 25-year span. This system reduced grid electricity consumption
by 77% and electricity costs by 84%, demonstrating significant economic and environmental
benefits. The study [26] underscores the importance of grid-tied systems in areas with existing
grid infrastructure while advocating for future integration of biofuels to replace diesel
generators. These findings establish a replicable framework for energy optimization in
institutional buildings, contributing to sustainable energy transitions in similar regions.

M.R. Islam et al. [27] assessed the techno-economic feasibility of a grid-independent hybrid
energy system in rural Bangladesh and analyzed a hybrid renewable energy system
(PV/Wind/Battery/Diesel Generator) for Kutubdia Island using HOMER Pro software and the
NSGA-II algorithm. The optimized system achieved a NPC of USD 711,943 and highlighted a
2.69% reduction in costs when using the algorithm compared to traditional HOMER results.
This system proved to be effective in reducing CO2 emissions while maintaining energy
reliability in off-grid conditions.

M. R. Sunny et al. [28] explored the feasibility of standalone hybrid energy systems with battery
storage for educational buildings. Hybrid energy systems are increasingly recognized as
sustainable solutions for reducing emissions and alleviating dependency on national grids,
particularly in urban areas of developing countries. Studies using tools like HOMER for
optimization highlight the potential of configurations such as PV-WT-DG-BT in achieving cost-
effective energy solutions. A case study demonstrated significant environmental and economic
benefits, with employment generation and human development as additional advantages.
Sensitivity analyses emphasized the impact of variables like fuel prices and solar radiation on
the COE and NPC, revealing a PV slope angle of 23.88° and a 20-meter wind turbine hub height
as optimal parameters.

H. Chowdhury et al. [29] Studied on waste and energy challenges in refugee camps emphasize
the need for sustainable approaches. Research on Kutupalong camp in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh,
highlights massive waste generation and its potential for biogas production. A bottom-up
8
analysis estimated 7.16 Mm³ of biogas could be generated from organic waste in 2019, doubling
to 14.43 Mm³ by 2025, with potential electricity generation reaching 217.73 MJ annually by
2025. This study underscores biogas as a renewable energy source, addressing both waste and
energy needs in refugee. The finding collectively advocate for renewable energy systems as
sustainable solutions for energy and waste challenges in refugee camps globally. The research
[30] highlighted how hybrid configurations could be scaled for varying energy demands, making
them ideal for institutional and rural applications. Sensitivity studies emphasized the importance
of regional adaptations. This paper examined grid-supported hybrid models, demonstrating
enhanced performance reliability and lower NPC when integrating PV-biogas systems with
battery backup.

9
 Chapter 2: Materials and Methods

HRES is a system that combines several (two or more) electricity generating alternatives.
Renewable energy sources, fossil-fuel-based energy sources or an arrangement of the two is
possible. Hybrid systems are typically used to supplement a single renewable energy-based
producing choice such as sole wind or solar, as these are intermittent sources, as well as to
improve resource usage and minimize net cost [31]. The resources available in a specific region
are analyzed to determine the most suitable components for a hybrid energy system. Economic
analyses and optimization techniques are employed to identify the optimal system configuration.
In this study, the entire system is simulated using the HOMER Pro optimization tool, and the
results are analyzed. The primary objective is to optimize the cost of electricity generation while
maximizing the utilization of available resources.

The proposed work in the flowchart focuses on designing and optimizing a microgrid system
integrating renewable energy sources such as PV panels, biomass systems, battery energy
storage systems (BESS), and a utility grid. The process begins with collecting input data,
including location details, load requirements, resource availability, system components, and
utility grid tariffs. Based on this data, an initial microgrid layout is designed, and a baseline
simulation is conducted to assess its performance. If the system fails to meet the required
performance criteria, critical variables are identified, and adjustments are made. Sensitivity
analysis is then performed by varying input parameters such as solar radiation, temperature, and
biomass availability to evaluate the system’s behavior under diverse conditions. The results of
the sensitivity analysis are analyzed to identify scenarios where the system performs poorly. If
unacceptable performance scenarios are detected, the system configuration is further refined to
optimize parameters like NPC, COE, reliability factor (RF), emissions, and overall system
reliability. The optimized system is subjected to a final evaluation to assess its performance,
cost-efficiency, and environmental impact. This systematic approach ensures a reliable, cost-
effective, and sustainable microgrid design tailored to specific requirements and constraints.

10
Figure 2.1.Flowchart of the proposed work [32]

11
2.1 HOMER Pro Software

HOMER (Hybrid Optimization of Multiple Energy Resources) is recognized globally as the

standard software for microgrid design and optimization, developed based on decades of
experience and feedback from users worldwide. It supports the development and installation of
microgrids and distributed power systems, accommodating a mix of renewable energy sources,
storage solutions, and fossil-based generation systems. HOMER software products are built on
the trusted, market-leading HOMER platform, used by more than 250,000 system designers and
developers in over 190 countries. With decades of experience, we provide the most robust,
accurate solutions to help make hybrid power systems technically optimal and maximally cost-
effective. Explore which product is most suited for your project, or further understand our
approach to techno-economic analysis [33].

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in the United States developed HOMER,
a simulation program designed to facilitate the planning and design of renewable energy-
powered microgrids. HOMER models the performance and lifecycle costs of energy systems,
including capital and operational expenses, and evaluates distributed generation and grid
options, particularly for remote areas. The software addresses microgrid design challenges
through simulation, optimization, and sensitivity analysis, accounting for factors such as load
growth and future fuel prices [33]. Key economic metrics, such as NPC and Levelized Cost of
Energy (LCOE), are influenced by the system's total annualized costs, which HOMER calculates
by considering component costs and operational expenses [34]. The diagram (fig. 2.2) illustrates
the process of simulating and analyzing an energy system using the HOMER software. The input
phase involves data on load, available resources, system components, and optimization
parameters, which are fed into the HOMER simulation. The software determines an optimal
system configuration based on performance and cost criteria. This optimal system undergoes
economic analysis, considering factors like NPC, COE, initial capital cost, simple payback
period, and internal rate of return. The outputs provide a comprehensive understanding of the
system's technical and economic feasibility. This framework is particularly useful for designing
cost-effective and reliable energy solutions.

12
 Input

System
Load Resoures Optimization
Components

HOMER
Simulation

Optimal System

Economics Analysis

Levelized Cost of Initial Capital Cost

Net Present Cost
Energy

Renewable Fraction Initial Rate of Return

Output

Figure 2.2. Architecture of HOMER Pro software [35]

To simulate using HOMER, various input parameters are required, including component pricing,
load demand profiles, renewable resource data (e.g., solar radiation and wind speeds), and
technical specifications of system components [36]. As illustrated in Figure 1, HOMER Pro's
architecture enables users to identify the most technically and financially optimal system
configuration [35]. By simulating multiple system designs, HOMER selects the best
configuration based on LCOE and NPC, optimizing the use of renewable resources available in
the target region while ensuring technical compatibility and meeting energy demand. The
calculations of NPC and COE follow established equations, as shown in Equations (2.1.1) and
(2.1.2) [37].

Ca
CNPC = (2.1.1)
CRF(i,Np)

13
 Cal
COE = (2.1.2)
Ep+Egs+Ed

where CNPC represents the NPC, Ca represents the total cost (annualized), and CRF is the capital
recovery factor, which is dependent on i (annual real interest rate in percent) and Np (project
lifetime). However, CRF is constant here as it is dependent on i and Np. For each project, i and
Np are constant as different projects have different project lifetimes and annual real interest
rates. Cat represents the annual cost, Ep represents the primary load, Egs represents the sold
energy to grid (yearly), and Ed represents the deferrable load.

The Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) represents the average cost per kWh of electricity
generated over the system’s lifetime.

Total Life Time Cost

LOE = (2.1.3)
Total Life Time energy Produced

The Renewable Fraction measures the proportion of energy supplied by renewable sources. The
equation (4) indicates how dependent the system is on renewable energy.

Erenew
RF= (2.1.4)
Etot

Here Erenew is the energy from renewable sources (KWh) and Etot is total energy demand
(KWh).

The energy stored in batteries is calculated considering charging and discharging efficiencies.
The battery storage calculation equation in (2.1.5).

Estored = Cbattery × ηcharge × ηdischarge (2.1.5)

Where Estored represents the energy stored, Cbattery represents battery capacity, ηcharge and
ηdischarge illustrate the charging and discharging efficiency respectively.

The emission reduction formula is given to the equation number in (2.1.6). The emission factor
depends on the replaced energy.

14
 Emission saved = (Energy Replaced × Emission Factor) (2.1.6)

Working effectively with HOMER requires understanding its three core capabilities; simulation,
optimization, and sensitivity analysis; and how they interact following the Figure 2.3.

Simulation: At its core, HOMER is a simulation model. It attempts to simulate a viable system
for all possible combinations of the equipment you want to consider. Depending on how you set
up your model, HOMER may simulate hundreds or even thousands of systems.

Optimization: The optimization step follows all simulations. The simulated systems are sorted
and filtered according to criteria that you define, so you can see the best possible solutions.
Although HOMER fundamentally is an economic optimization model, you may also choose to
minimize fuel usage.

Sensitivity Analysis: This is an optional step that allows you to model the impact of variables
that are beyond your control, such as wind speed and fuel costs, and see how the optimal system
changes with these variations.

Figure 2.3. Relationship between optimization, simulation, and sensitivity analysis [38]

15
2.2 Site Location

The geographical location of the institute of Naogaon Government College plays a crucial role
in determining the viability and efficiency of renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and
biogas. Solar radiation is highly influenced by the latitude (24.83° N), longitude (88.94° E), and
weather patterns of the region. Naogaon, located in Bangladesh’s Rajshahi Division, generally
receives significant sunlight, making solar power a promising energy source. The region's
average solar radiation is well-suited for photovoltaic systems, especially during the dry season.
Similarly, wind speed in the area is critical for assessing wind energy potential. Naogaon, like
much of northern Bangladesh, does not have high average wind speeds compared to coastal
areas, which limits the effectiveness of wind turbines.

However, seasonal wind variations may still offer some energy potential, particularly during the
monsoon. Temperature, influenced by the location subtropical climate, affects both solar panel
efficiency and biogas production.

Higher temperatures can reduce the efficiency of solar panels but may benefit biogas production,
as organic matter decomposes more rapidly in warmer environments, increasing biogas yields.
Biogas production using human and kitchen waste is an efficient way for institutions to generate
renewable energy while managing waste. For institutions with a significant amount of organic
waste, such a system can reduce waste disposal costs, lower energy expenses, and promote
sustainability.

The three figures collectively depict the geographic location and structural layout of the College,
which is proposed to transition to renewable energy-based infrastructure. The first figure
provides a broader geographic context of the college's location in Bangladesh, highlighting its
accessibility. The second figure zooms in on the campus layout with specific annotations for key
buildings, such as academic building, boys and girls' hostel and college facilities. The third
figure shows the college's main building, showcasing its potential for integrating solar panels or
other renewable energy systems.

16
 Figure 2.4. Geographic and Structural Layout of the college

2.3 Resources

Data on renewable resources, including solar radiation, clearness index, temperature, and wind
speed, are crucial for accurate HOMER simulations. For the recommended site, solar irradiation
data is sourced from the NASA Surface Meteorological and Solar Energy Database. HOMER
Pro uses long-term climate data, typically spanning 22 years (1983–2005), from NASA to
calculate average temperature, wind speed, and solar radiation specific to the location [39].

17
2.3.1 Solar irradiance & clear index

The solar radiation data for the institute's location (24.83° N latitude and 88.94° E longitude)
was retrieved from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) database [7]. Figure 2.5
illustrates the average daily solar radiation (left axis) and the clearness index values (right axis).
The clearness index represents the fraction of solar insolation transmitted through the
atmosphere to the Earth's surface. It is a dimensionless value ranging from 0 to 1, defined as the
ratio of surface radiation to extraterrestrial radiation.

The daily solar radiation at the site varies between 4.03 kWh/m²/day and 6.33 kWh/m²/day, with
an annual average of 5.88 kWh/m²/day. The highest solar irradiance is observed in October,
while the lowest occurs in May.

7
Irradiance
0.9
Clearness Index
6 0.8

0.7
Irradiance (kWh/m²/day)

Clearness Index
0.6

4
0.5

3 0.4

0.3
2
0.2
1
0.1

0 0.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month

Figure 2.5. Average Solar irradiance and Clearness index

2.3.2 Temperature
The Figure 2.6 shows the average daily temperature and site location experiences an average
annual temperature of 26.18°C with notable seasonal variations. January is the coolest month,
averaging 17.23°C, while the temperature peaks in May at 32.45°C. The summer months (April–

18
June) are the warmest, with temperatures consistently exceeding 30°C, while the winter months
(December–February) average below 22°C. This temperature profile influences the efficiency
of renewable energy systems, such as solar panels and biogas production, with higher
temperatures benefiting anaerobic digestion but slightly reducing photovoltaic performance.

35 Temperature
32.45
31.39 31.23
30 29.5329.21
28.2
26.93
Daily Temperature (°C)

26.21
25
22.21
21.28
20
18.23
17.23
15

10

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Figure 2.6. Monthly Average Temperature
2.3.3 Wind Resources

Wind resource data was sourced from the NASA Surface Meteorology and Solar Energy
database [8]. The annual average wind speed at the site is 4.24 m/s, with monthly averages
ranging from 3.35 m/s to 5.41 m/s. The highest wind speed is recorded in June, while the lowest
occurs in October. Figure 2.7 presents the monthly average profiles of daily wind speed for the
institute's location.

19
 6
Average wind speed(m/s)
5.41 5.33

5 4.91
4.61

Average wind speed(m/s)

4.27 4.28 4.34

4 3.88
3.66
3.35 3.37 3.44

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month

Figure 2.7. Monthly Average wind speed of the Location

2.3.4 Biomass Resources

The institution has the potential to harness renewable energy, such as biogas, to alleviate issues
like load shedding and reduce energy cost. For example, using human and kitchen waste from a
hostel with 500 residents, a biogas plant can produce approximately 18.25 m³ of biogas daily
from human waste alone. This biogas translates to 36.5 kWh of electricity, considering 2 kWh
is usable per cubic meter [40]. Adding kitchen waste, at 0.36 kg per student, contributes
significantly to biogas production, as 1 kg of kitchen waste can generate 35 liters of biogas daily
[41]. This combined waste-to-energy approach ensures efficient use of organic waste while
addressing energy needs sustainably. Figure 8 illustrates the daily availability of biomass
resources sourced from students hall for utilization in a biomass generator aimed at continuity
service. The data indicates that the annual average biomass availability at the site is 0.34 tons
per day. This consistency in biomass availability, especially during peak months, supports the
feasibility of biogas production as a reliable energy source throughout the year. The Figure 2.8
displays the availability of biomass throughout the year, suggesting its potential for sustainable
energy generation. Organic waste can be processed into biogas through anaerobic digestion,
which generates electricity while producing nutrient-rich compost as a byproduct. This approach
promotes a circular economy by turning waste into valuable energy resources.

20
 14
Available Biomass
12

Available biomass (tonnes)

10

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month

Figure 2.8. Daily available biomass resources

2.4 Load Profile

The educational institution load profile differs from the industrial and commercial loads because
of the semester period and period of vacations. The load connected in the system is the assumed
load for the campus. The average electrical load of the center was calculated. It was observed
that the maximum electric load recorded was in the summer period. Whereas winter is the lowest
level of electric load. On the other hand, the average daily electrical base line load was about
1118.7 kWh/day over a full year, while 174.6kW recorded as the maximum for electric load,
may be a small portion varied. The Figure 2.9 shows daily load profile in KW and the table 2.1
shows the rooftop space in these building and connected among these building.

21
Table 2.1 Load and Rooftop space

Building Name Assumed rooftop space (sq. m2) Estimate connected load
(KW)
Administrative 420 26.8
Academic building -1 670 97.5
Academic building -2 612 78.6
Academic building -3 400 8.7
Girls’ Hostel 500 31.5
Boys Hostel 400 21
Central mosque & others 162 8.5

The load profile of a college indicates distinct variations based on academic, administrative, and
residential hall activities. During class hours (8 AM to 4 PM), the load peaks between 83–90
kW, driven by classroom equipment, lighting, and administrative operations. The load gradually
reduces in the evening as academic activities wind down, settling around 48–62 kW between 5
PM and 7 PM. At night (8 PM to early morning), the load drops significantly to 18–30 kW,
reflecting reduced hall activities and minimal essential operations. This profile highlights high
energy usage during class hours and a steady decline toward the nighttime.

100
Daily Load Profile

80

60
KW

40

20

0
3 7 11 15 19 23
Hours
Figure 2.9. Daily average Load profile
22
Figure 2.10 displays daily load profiles for each month, showing variations in electricity demand
throughout the day. Peaks generally occur during daytime hours, with the highest demand
observed in the summer months (June-August), likely due to increased cooling requirements.
Conversely, winter months (January-February) exhibit relatively lower peak demand levels.
These trends highlight the seasonal and diurnal variations in energy consumption, which are
crucial for energy system planning and load forecasting.

Figure 2.10. Daily scaled load profile

The Figure 2.11 summarizes the monthly averages of scaled data using a boxplot, illustrating
the range and distribution of electricity demand. The highest variability and demand levels occur
in the summer months, particularly in July and August, while the winter months show more
consistent but lower demand. The annual maximum of 130.56 kW and minimum of 6.27 kW
indicate significant variability in energy usage throughout the year. These insights emphasize
the need for adaptive energy strategies to accommodate seasonal fluctuations and ensure system
reliability.

23
 Figure 2.11. Scaled data monthly average

2.5 Solar PV

PV power generation mathematically depends on solar irradiance (sunlight intensity) and the
efficiency of the PV system, including factors like temperature and material properties. The
power output is proportional to the product of solar irradiance and the PV system's area and
efficiency. Equation (2.5) can be used by HOMER software to calculate the power output
produced by solar cells [42]. In this equation, PPV represents the power output of the PV system,
CPV denotes the rated capacity of the PV array, and DPV refers to the PV derating factor. IT is the
incident solar radiation, while Iref refers to the incident solar radiation under reference
conditions (1 kW/m²).

The coefficient KT indicates the temperature coefficient of maximum power, Tc represents the
PV cell temperature, and Tref is the PV cell temperature under reference conditions (Tref = 25°C).
The equation is given as:

IT
PPV= CPVDPV× [1+ K T (TC-Tref )] (2.5)
Iref

24
2.6 Wind Turbine

Equation (2.6) is used to estimate wind power at specific heights [43]. With the known wind
turbine density, one can calculate wind acceleration variations and vice versa. The wind turbine
power equation is expressed as:

1
P = 2 𝐶𝑃 𝐴 ρ𝑣 3 (2.6)

Where: P Wind turbine power (W), ρ Wind power density (W/m²), v Wind turbine velocity
(m/s), CP Rotor efficiency, A Rotor area (m²). The equation is essential for estimating the power
output in wind energy systems. This formula is pivotal for analyzing system efficiency,
optimizing turbine design, forecasting energy generation, and advancing sustainable renewable
energy solutions.

2.7 Modeling of Batteries

In hybrid energy system design, the storage component plays a vital role in ensuring a consistent
voltage supply during periods of low power production. Generally, lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries
are employed for energy storage due to their efficiency and reliability. Particularly during peak
demand hours or when solar input is insufficient to meet the charging station's energy
requirements. The maximum discharge of the battery can be calculated using the following
equation [44]:

( crNm + cNI e−c Δt +NT cr (1−e−cΔt ))

BD = (2.7.1)
(1– e−cΔt + r(c Δt – 1+ e−cΔt ))

Similarly, the maximum power capacity can be obtained using Equation (2.7.1):

cNI e−c Δt +NT cr (1−e−cΔt)

BD = (2.7.2)
1– e−cΔt + r(c Δt – 1+ e−cΔt)

Where Nm is defined as the capacity (maximum) of the battery in kWh, NI is the initial available
energy on the storage system, r is the ratio of the capacity of the selected battery, Δt is the time
length in hours, NT is the available energy in the battery bank (in total), and c is the battery rate
constant.

25
2.8 Biogas Generator

Based on the biomass resources availability, the output energy generated from biogas generator
was determined using the equation expressed by (2.8) [45]

Biogas availability (m3 ∕day )× CVBGG × ηBGG ×Δt

EBGG = (2.8)
860 ×hBGG

where EBGG is the hourly energy output of biogas generator, ηBGG is the system conversion
efficiency, CVBGG is the calorific value of biogas digester (4700 kcal/kg). This equation is
critical for determining the energy output of a biogas system, helps optimize biogas usage,
estimate energy production, and assess system performance, enabling efficient and sustainable
energy generation in waste-to-energy applications.

2.9 Inverter

The inverter in microgrid systems plays a crucial role by converting the direct current (DC)
output of solar photovoltaic panels into alternating current (AC), which is suitable for
distribution and use within the grid [46]. It ensures optimal energy flow and maintains voltage
and frequency consistency, enabling efficient integration of solar energy with the grid. The
conversion process can be represented mathematically as:

PAC=PDC ηinverter (2.9)

where PAC is the output power in AC (Watts), PDC is the input power in DC (Watts), and ηinverter
is the efficiency of the inverter, which may vary depending on the power level, inverter
technology, and operating conditions.

2.10 Grid Utility

In Bangladesh, the average retail electricity price for the educational institution is USD 0.064.
For renewable energy sources feeding back into the grid through net metering, the sellback price
for electricity is approximately USD 0.042 per kWh [47]. This rate is regulated by the
Bangladesh Energy Regulatory Commission to ensure consistent integration of renewable
energy into the grid while balancing affordability.

26
2.11 Grid Outage

The grid system depicted experiences a high outage frequency of 500 outages per year,
averaging more than one outage per day. With a mean repair time of 1 hour and a variability of
40%, the actual repair duration can vary significantly, potentially extending some outages. The
dense and evenly distributed pattern in the grid outages plot indicates random occurrences
throughout the year, with no seasonal trends or clustering. Such frequent and variable outages
highlight the unreliability of the grid, emphasizing the importance of implementing backup
power solutions or alternative energy systems to maintain a consistent power supply. The
following Figure 2.12 black spot shows the outage of electricity in the grid.

Figure 2.12. Grid Outages

2.11 Technical Data for Components Used in the System

Components Characteristics Values/ Type

Solar PV Brand name LONGi Solar LR6-72PE
Nominal power 350 W
Panel efficiency 19.1 %
Rated voltage 47.9 V
Rated current 9.97 A
Temperature coefficient 0.41 %/°C
Derating factor 80 %
Panel Type Flate Type
Lifetime 25 years
Wind Turbine Brand Name Sunway (SW-500H)
Rated capacity 5 kW
Rotor diameter 2.2 m

27
Components Characteristics Values/ Type
Start up wind speed 2.5 m/s
Rated wind speed 11.2 m/s
Output voltage 48V/96V/120V/220V
Hub height 10 m
Lifetime 20 years
Biogas Generator Rated Power 5 KW
Type Silent
Rated voltage 230V/400V
Rated speed 1500/1800rpm
Density 820 kg/m³
Displacement 1.73 L
Life time 15,000 h
SmatLi-672V-100AH-
Battery Brand name
F/S
Battery type Li-ion
Nominal capacity 4.8 kWh
Nominal voltage 48 V
Roundtrip efficiency 90 %
Maximum state of charge 100 %
Minimum state of charge 20 %
Lifetime 15 years
Hybrid Converter Inverter efficiency 94 %
Rectifier efficiency 95 %
Lifetime 15 years

28
2.12 Technical Specifications and Costs of Components

Table 2.2 shows the technical Specifications of the components and

Table shows the per unit cost of components [48 - 51].To get the best possible results,
considering available 3000 sq. meters area of the building rooftop (site) and the requirement per
kW to 10 sq. meters, a maximum of 300 kW of PV capacity can be installed. The project lifetime
of 25 years, PV systems are an optimal choice due to their durability, efficiency (19.1%), and
long lifespan, aligning with the project's duration. A Li-ion battery backup is recommended over
lead-acid batteries because of its higher energy density, longer lifecycle, and lower
environmental impact, reducing maintenance costs and emissions over time. Combining PV
with a Biogen system for peak-load flexibility and an inverter with 95% efficiency ensures an
efficient hybrid system. While Biogen has a shorter lifetime (15000 hours) and requires periodic
replacement, it diversifies energy sources and enhances reliability. Using Li-ion batteries
enhances system performance by minimizing energy losses and ensuring stable energy supply,
making this combination both technically and environmentally superior for the given project.

Table 2.2. Technical Specifications of the Components

Parameters PV BESS Bio Gen Inverter

Rated capacity 300 kW 4.8 KW 40 kW 172 kW
Efficiency 19.1%- 96% 30%- 95%
Lifetime 25 years 15 15000 Hours 15 Years

Table 2.3. Per-Unit Cost of Components

Parameters PV BESS Bio Gen Inverter WT

Capital cost USD USD USD USD 170/kW USD 7000/KW
420/kW 270/KW 250/kW
Replacement cost USD USD USD USD 170/kW USD 6800/KW
420/kW 270/KW 240/kW
Operating and
maintenance cost USD USD 2/KW USD0.05 /h USD 5/kW USD 80/kw
15/year

29
2.13 Proposed study and optimization case

The figure presents six renewable energy configurations designed to meet an electrical load of
1118.40 kWh/day and a peak demand of 174.62 kW. Case I includes a biogas generator, grid,
and storage, while Case II adds solar PV for enhanced sustainability. Case III incorporates wind
turbines alongside the biogas generator, grid, and storage for greater energy diversity. Case IV
combines biogas, PV, wind, and storage, offering a comprehensive hybrid system with high
reliability. Case V relies on wind turbines and the grid, while Case VI focuses on solar PV,
storage, and grid support. These configurations highlight the trade-offs between resource
utilization, grid dependency, and system complexity. Optimal selection depends on regional
resource availability, economic considerations, and energy demand profiles.

a) Case I b) Case II

30
 c) Case III d) Case IV

e) Case V f) Case VI

Figure 2.13. Schematic diagram of different case

Table 2.3. Comparable cases

Proposed System Cases

PV/Bio-Gen/Battery/Grid I
PV/WT/ Bio-Gen/Battery/Grid II
Bio-Gen/Battery/Grid III
PV/Battery/Grid IV
WT/ Bio-Gen/Battery/Grid V
PV/WT/Battery/Grid VI

The table presents six proposed hybrid energy systems combining various components, such as
PV, wind turbines , bio-generators, batteries, and the grid. The selection of the optimal system
depends on multiple criteria, including COE, NPC, initial capital cost ,operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs, renewable energy fraction, environmental impact, and excess
electricity generation. A system offering higher techno-economic efficiency while meeting load
demands and minimizing environmental impact would be deemed the best choice.

31
 Chapter 3: Result and Discussions

HOMER Pro software has been utilized to evaluate the technical, operational, and economic
aspects of the proposed microgrid system. Its advanced optimizer efficiently runs multiple
simulations to identify feasible configurations while discarding impractical designs. The
analysis considers a 25-year planning horizon, with hourly time-series simulations performed
for various microgrid setups. Among the seven scenarios analyzed, the base case is grid-only
connection, while others incorporate renewable sources such as solar PV, Li-ion batteries,
Biogen, and hybrid combinations. Simulations reveal that hybrid configurations to offer the best
balance of reliability, cost efficiency, and emissions reduction. The HOMER Pro software
prioritizes designs with the lowest NPC, ensuring economic viability over the long term. This
analysis highlights the importance of integrating diverse energy sources for resilience, while
advanced simulation tools like HOMER Pro streamline decision-making for optimal microgrid
planning.

3.1 Techno-economic Assessment of the Microgrid

From the figure 3.1, Case 1 is the most economical option among all the cases. It has the lowest
Net Present Cost (NPC) of $287,793.3, making it the least expensive system in terms of long-
term costs. The initial capital for Case 1 is $189,341.3, which is reasonable compared to other
cases. Case 2, while having a higher NPC ($324,771), also requires a higher initial capital
($218,378.3). Case 3 has the lowest initial capital ($66,865.06), but its NPC is significantly
higher at $434,225.8, making it less cost-effective. Case 6, with the highest NPC ($483,311.8)
and initial capital ($227,486.5), is the least economical. Overall, Case 1 offers the best balance
between upfront investment and operational costs, making it the most cost-efficient choice.

32
 250.0k
NPC ($)
500k Capital Cost ($)

200.0k
400k

Capital Cost ($)

150.0k
NPC ($)

300k

100.0k
200k

100k 50.0k

0 0.0
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI

Figure 3.1. Comparison of capital cost and NPC

The comparison of the six cases (Figure 3.2) based on COE and annual operating costs reveals
that Case 1 is the most economical option. It has the lowest COE of $0.0286 and an annual
operating cost of $6,819.65, making it the least expensive both in energy production and
maintenance. Case 2 has a slightly higher COE ($0.0322) and operating cost ($7,369.69),
remaining somewhat economical but less so than Case 1. Case 3 and Case 5 are the most
expensive, with COEs of $0.0651 and $0.0701, respectively, and very high operating costs of
over $25,000 per year. Case 4 and Case 6 are moderately expensive, with COEs of $0.0573 and
$0.0622, and operating costs exceeding $17,000 annually. Overall, Case 1 clearly stands out as
the most cost-effective in both operational and energy production terms.

33
 0.08 30.0k
COE ($)
Operating Cost ($)
0.07
25.0k

0.07012
0.06507
0.06

25918.55

0.06217
25446.64

Operating Cost ($)

20.0k

0.0573
0.05
COE ($)

0.04 15.0k

17165.31

17720.71
0.03
0.0322 10.0k
0.02862

0.02
7369.691
6819.65

5.0k
0.01

0.00 0.0
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI

Figure 3.2 Comparison of COE and operating cost

The comparison of energy purchased and sold (Figure 3.3 ) to the grid highlights Case 1 as the
most economical option. It requires the least energy purchase from the grid (32,632.46 kWh)
while selling the highest amount (288,351 kWh), ensuring a net positive energy balance and
reducing reliance on external power. Case 2 also performs well, with slightly lower energy
purchased (31,787.72 kWh) and higher energy sold (290,473.8 kWh), making it comparable to
Case 1. In contrast, Case 3 and Case 5 are the least economical, with high energy purchases
(185,255.8 kWh and 182,990.8 kWh, respectively) and minimal energy sold (54,284.3 kWh and
55,288.88 kWh). Case 4 and Case 6 perform moderately, with relatively high energy purchased
and sold values but falling short of the efficiency seen in Cases 1 and 2. Overall, Case 1 proves
to be the most economical by maximizing energy sales while minimizing grid dependency.

34
 200.0k Energy Purchased (kWh)
Energy Sold (KWh0 300.0k
180.0k

Energy Purchased (kWh)

160.0k 250.0k

Energy Sold (kWh)

140.0k
200.0k
120.0k

100.0k 150.0k
80.0k
100.0k
60.0k

40.0k
50.0k
20.0k

0.0 0.0
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI

Figure 3.3. Comparison of energy purchased and sold

From Figure 3.4, the data reveal that Cases 1 and 2 are nearly identical, with renewable fractions
(Ren Frac) of 95.31% and 95.45%, respectively, and excess electricity levels around 4.1%.
These two cases demonstrate the most efficient use of renewable energy while maintaining
moderate levels of excess electricity, making them ideal for sustainability-focused systems.

In contrast, Cases 3 and 5 have the lowest renewable fractions, at 59.93% and 60.50%,
respectively, with negligible excess electricity, both below 0.003%. While this minimizes
energy waste, their heavy reliance on non-renewable sources limits their environmental benefits.

Cases 4 and 6 show moderate renewable fractions of 70.37% and 70.53%, but their higher levels
of excess electricity, at 5.46% and 6.32%, indicate less efficiency in energy management
compared to Cases 1 and 2. This excess may lead to wasted resources despite their improved
renewable energy utilization over Cases 3 and 5.

Overall, while Cases 1 and 2 clearly lead in performance, Case 6 offers a balanced middle ground
between moderate renewable energy use and slightly higher energy waste. Cases 3 and 5,
however, rank lowest due to their dependence on non-renewable energy.

35
 7
Ren Fraction (%)
100 Excess Electricity (%)
6

6.3218
95.31477

95.45

Excess Electricity (%)

80 5

5.45993
Ren Fraction (%)

70.53105
70.37499
4
60

59.92549
4.08841

4.10786

60.5006
3
40
2

20

0.00278
1

0.0027
0 0
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI

Figure 3.4. Comparison of Ren. fraction excess electricity

The analysis of emissions (fig. 3.5) across the six cases shows notable variations in carbon
dioxide (CO₂) production, while carbon monoxide (CO) emissions remain relatively consistent.
Cases III and V exhibit the highest CO₂ emissions, at 117,101 kg/year and 115,603 kg/year,
respectively, making them less environmentally favorable. In contrast, Cases II and VI show
lower CO₂ outputs at 20,083 kg/year and 100,227 kg/year. Case IV is particularly noteworthy,
as it produces no CO, which improves its environmental profile compared to the others. Based
on emissions data alone, Case I and case II emerges as the most environmentally friendly, given
its minimal CO₂ output and consistent CO levels.

CO2 emission (kg/year)

120000 CO emission (kg/year)

2.0
100000
CO2 emission (kg/year)

CO emission (kg/year)

1.5
80000

60000
1.0

40000

0.5
20000

0 0.0
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI

Figure 3.5. Comparison of CO2 and CO emission

36
The emissions ( Figure 3.6) data reveal significant differences in sulfur dioxide (SO₂) and
nitrogen oxides (NOₓ) across the six cases. Cases I and II are nearly identical, with SO₂ emissions
of 89.4 kg/year and 87 kg/year, and NOₓ emissions of 45.7 kg/year and 44.5 kg/year,
respectively. These values are significantly lower than those of the other cases, suggesting a
more environmentally friendly profile.

In contrast, Cases III and V exhibit the highest levels of emissions, with SO₂ values of 508
kg/year and 501 kg/year and NOₓ emissions of 250 kg/year and 247 kg/year, respectively. Case
IV and VI also demonstrate relatively high emissions, though slightly lower than Cases III and
V, with SO₂ levels of 440 kg/year and 435 kg/year, and NOₓ outputs of 215 kg/year and 213
kg/year.

Given the data, Cases I and II stand out as the most sustainable, emitting far less SO₂ and NOₓ
compared to the others. This indicates that the systems or technologies used in these cases are
likely more efficient or environmentally optimized.

SO2 emission (kg/year)

500 NO2 emission (kg/year) 250
SO2 emission (kg/year)

NO emission (kg/year)
400 200

300 150

200 100

100 50

0 0
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI

Figure 3.6. Comparison of SO2 and NO emission

3.2 Optimum System

Based on the optimization results, Case I stands out as the best among the six cases when
evaluating key economic and environmental parameters. It has the lowest NPC at $287,793 and
the COE at $0.0286/kWh, making it the most cost-effective option. The operating cost is also
the lowest at $6820/year, which ensures long-term affordability for system operation.

37
The initial capital cost of $189,341 is reasonable compared to other cases, providing a balance
between affordability and system performance. In terms of environmental impact, Case I
produces the least CO₂ emissions, at 20,643 kg/year, significantly outperforming other
configurations. Furthermore, it ensures high renewable energy fraction at 87.1%, indicating
strong reliance on sustainable energy sources, with minimal dependence on the grid.

The system achieves low excess electricity (0.203%) and minimal unmet load (0.03%), ensuring
efficient energy utilization and reliable service to meet demand. Other cases have higher NPCs,
COE, and emissions, which compromise both economic and environmental goals. Therefore,
Case I is the most optimal choice for a cost-effective, reliable, and environmentally friendly
energy solution.

This figure illustrates an optimal renewable energy system integrating multiple energy sources,
including biogas generator, PV panels, and grid power. The system utilizes AC and DC buses
to connect components, a converter for efficient energy transfer, and storage for reliable power
supply. It is optimal because it balances renewable sources and grid reliability, ensuring
sustainability and energy security.

Bio Gen Load

AC Bus DC Bus PV

Converter Storage
Grid

Figure 3.7. Optimal case for Institutional Applications

38
3.3.1 Electric Consumption

The graph 3.8 illustrates the monthly energy production from three sources: PV, grid electricity,
and bio-generation (Bio. Gen). Throughout the year, PV consistently contributes the highest
proportion of energy production, with a noticeable peak in March, likely due to favorable solar
conditions. Bio-generation maintains a stable output across all months, indicating its role as a
dependable base-load energy source. Grid electricity contributes the smallest share, serving as a
supplementary source during periods of higher demand or lower renewable output. Overall, the
energy mix reflects a strong reliance on renewable sources, particularly PV, complemented by
the consistent supply from bio-generation and minimal reliance on the grid. This balanced
approach enhances energy security and sustainability.

75

63
Production (MWh)

50

38 PV

25 Grid
Bio. Gen
13

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Figure 3.8. Production of PV, Grid and Bio-Gen

3.3.2 Cost Summary

The cost summary graph (Figure 3.9) provide a breakdown of the NPC of different components
in the energy system. Solar PV accounts for the highest capital cost ($126,000) and significant
operating costs ($64,964), reflecting its prominent role in the system. The biogas generator has
moderate capital costs but incurs the highest operating and replacement costs, totaling $134,606.
The grid shows a substantial negative cost in operating ($-164,685), indicating revenue or
savings from grid integration.

39
The battery system and hybrid inverter contribute smaller but essential costs, primarily for
capital and replacement purposes. The overall NPC for the system amounts to $287,793,
highlighting the balance between investment, operational expenses, and the lifecycle costs of all
components. This analysis underscores the importance of optimizing resource allocation to
improve cost-effectiveness.

15000
Solar PV
Hybrid Inverter
Grid
10000 Battery
Biogas Gen.

5000
Biogas Gen.

0
Capital Operating Replacement Salvage
A
-5000

-10000

-15000

Figure 3.9. Cost summary of components

3.3.3 Cash Flow Analysis

The cash flow figure illustrates the financial performance of a hybrid energy system over a 25-
year lifecycle. The significant cost observed in year 2 reflects the replacement of the biogas
generator, highlighting a major expenditure early in the system's operation. Another notable
drop occurs at year 15, driven by the replacement of the converter and battery, which are critical
components for energy conversion and storage. Operational and maintenance (O&M) costs
persist throughout the timeline, represented by recurring smaller expenses.

Grid energy costs remain consistent, reflecting a stable dependency on external electricity. Solar
PV and hybrid inverters contribute effectively, with relatively lower maintenance demands. The
battery plays a key role but incurs higher costs during replacement. The biogas generator, while
sustainable, also requires occasional investments for optimal performance. This cash flow
analysis emphasizes the need for a balanced approach to initial investment, replacement
planning, and operational budgeting to ensure long-term system sustainability.

40
 25,000
0
-25,000
Solar PV
-50,000
Hybrid Inverter
-75,000
Grid
-100,000
Battery
-125,000
-150,000 Biogas Gen.

-175,000
-200,000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Figure 3.10. Cash Flow (25 years)

3.3.4 Biogas Gen. Electrical Summary
The biogas generator has an annual electrical production of 279,703 kWh with a mean electrical
output of 32.6 kW and a maximum of 40.0 kW. Its specific fuel consumption is 0.314 kg/kWh,
requiring 125 tons of fuel per year. The system operates with a mean electrical efficiency of
209% and a fuel energy input of 133,987 kWh annually. It has an operational life of 1.75 years,
indicating frequent replacements, and a capacity factor of 79.8%. The fixed generation cost is
$1.04 per hour, while the marginal generation cost is negligible.

The below Figure 3.11 shows the biogas generator operating consistently across all hours of the
year, with varying output levels. The heatmap indicates fluctuating performance, maintaining
output between 10 kW and 40 kW throughout the year.

40

24 30
18
Hours

kW

12 20
6
10
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
0
Year

Figure 3.11. Biogas Gen. Output (KW)

3.3.5 PV Electrical Summary
The Solar PV system has a rated capacity of 300 kW, with a maximum output of 265 kW and a
mean output of 49.7 kW. Its annual energy production is 435,270 kWh, achieved with a capacity
41
factor of 16.6%. The system operates for 4,375 hours annually, delivering reliable power at a
low levelized cost of $0.0304 per kWh. Daily, the mean energy output is 1,193 kWh, indicating
consistent solar power generation. The PV penetration is 107%, showcasing the system’s ability
to meet or exceed energy demands. This performance highlights the Solar PV system's efficiency
and cost-effectiveness for sustainable energy production.

The given Figure 3.12 illustrates the Solar PV output over the year, showing consistent energy
generation during daylight hours, with output peaking near the system's rated capacity. The
heatmap reveals fluctuations in output based on seasonal and daily solar availability,
maintaining output below 300 kW.

300
24
18 225
Hours

12

kW
6 150
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 75
Year
0

Figure 3.12. PV Output (KW)

3.3.6 Battery Performance
The performance and characteristics of a lithium-ion battery system with 21 batteries connected
in parallel, operating at a bus voltage of 48V. The system exhibits an annual throughput of 2,724
kWh/year, with negligible storage depletion and minor losses of 111 kWh/year. The average
energy cost is low, at $0.0261/kWh, showcasing its efficiency. The battery has a nominal
capacity of 101 kWh, with 85.7 kWh usable nominal capacity, supporting a lifetime throughput
of 40,860 kWh over an expected life of 15 years. The storage wear cost is economical, estimated
at $0.0729/kWh, indicating long-term cost-effectiveness.

The graph 3.13 shows the battery's state of charge (SOC) over a year, with a high level of
fluctuation but generally maintaining a SOC above 75%. This consistency highlights the
reliability of lithium-ion batteries for dynamic energy storage applications, ensuring stable
performance even with variable energy demands.

42
 100
24
18 75
Hours
12

%
6 50
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 25
Year
0

Figure 3.13. Battery Stage of Charge (%)

3.3.7 Hybrid Converter
The hybrid inverter system demonstrates moderate utilization, with an annual mean output of
44.1 kW and a capacity factor of 25.7%, as highlighted in the statistics table. The system operates
for 4,408 hours per year, delivering 386,251 kWh of energy while experiencing losses of 20,329
kWh, indicating room for efficiency improvements. The figure illustrates the hourly output
distribution over the year, with significant variability and occasional peaks reaching the
maximum capacity of 171 kW. Most of the output clusters below 100 kW, reflecting the
influence of variable energy inputs, possibly from renewable sources. These fluctuations
emphasize the importance of energy storage or load-shifting strategies to enhance system
reliability and performance. The consistent operation within this range demonstrates the system's
reliability under dynamic energy generation conditions.

200

24 150
18
Hours

12
kW

100
6
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 50
Year
0

Figure 3.14. Inverter Output

3.3.8 Energy Transaction
The energy purchase and sales data from Figure 3.15 reveal an annual pattern of energy trading
influenced by production and demand fluctuations. During the first quarter (January to March),
energy purchases are relatively low, while energy sales are at their highest, peaking in March
with 33,171 kWh sold. This suggests surplus energy generation, likely driven by high PV output
in favorable weather conditions.
43
In contrast, the summer months (June to August) see a significant increase in energy purchases,
reaching a peak in August at 6,619 kWh. Simultaneously, energy sales decrease drastically,
indicating higher local energy consumption or reduced renewable energy production due to
seasonal factors like decreased PV efficiency during prolonged heat.

The pattern reverses in autumn and winter (October to December), where energy purchases drop
and sales rise, with December marking another peak in sales at 30,561 kWh. This implies that
renewable generation (e.g., PV and bio-generation) resumes its dominance, meeting local
demand while enabling excess energy to be sold back to the grid.

Overall, the optimal scenario for energy trading occurs in months with high renewable
generation and low local demand (e.g., March and December). Conversely, summer months
highlight a need for strategies to reduce energy purchases, such as demand-side management or
enhanced energy storage capacity. Annually, 32,632 kWh of energy is purchased, while 288,351
kWh is sold, reflecting a significant surplus of renewable energy production. This demonstrates
the system's efficiency in generating excess energy, contributing to sustainability and economic
benefits through grid sales.

Energy purchased (KWh)

7000 Energy sold (KWh) 35000

6000 30000
Energy purchased (KWh)

Energy sold (KWh)

5000 25000

4000 20000

3000 15000

2000 10000

1000 5000

0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Figure 3.15. Monthly grid transaction

3.3.9 Time series chart
The time-series chart Figure 3.16 illustrates the dynamics of energy supply and demand for a
hybrid system over a ten-day period. The total electrical load served shows a daily cyclical
pattern, peaking during daytime hours. Solar PV power output corresponds to these peaks,
44
contributing significantly during daylight but dropping to zero at night. Biogas generation
maintains a relatively constant output, supplementing the solar system during periods of low
sunlight. Grid purchases occur sporadically, covering shortfalls in energy supply, while the
battery's input power fluctuates, indicating charging and discharging cycles to balance energy
availability. This integration of multiple sources demonstrates a coordinated approach to
meeting variable energy demands.

360

270

180 Total Electrical Load Served

Grid Purchases
kW

90 Biogas Gen. Power Output

Solar PV Power Output
0 Battery Input Power

-90

Figure 3.16. Time series chart (10 days)

3.3.10 Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis in HOMER Pro for renewable energy systems evaluates how changes in key
parameters, such as solar radiation, wind speed, fuel prices, or load demand, impact system
performance and costs. It helps identify critical factors influencing system optimization,
enabling designers to assess uncertainties and make robust decisions. By simulating various
scenarios, it ensures the renewable energy system remains efficient and cost-effective under
changing conditions

3.3.11 Sensitivity analysis of parameters

The graph illustrates the sensitivity of the cost of electricity (COE) to variations in key
parameters, including external inflation rate, nominal discount rate, temperature, solar
irradiance, and biomass availability. The results show distinct trends for each parameter's impact
on COE.

45
 Table 3.1. Sensitivity parameter variations

Input sensitive variables Values

Solar irradiance (KW/m2/day) 3.12, 3.9, 4.8767, 5.86,7

Temperature (0c) 21.2, 23.56, 26.175, 28.79, 31.67

Biomass availability (tons/day) 0.28, 0.3, 0.3433, 0.38, 0.42

Exp. Inflation rate (%) 6, 7, 8, 9,1 0, 11, 12

Nominal discount rate (%) 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

From fig. 3.17 the expected inflation rate has a moderate positive correlation with COE, as an
increase in inflation leads to higher costs. Conversely, the nominal discount rate displays a
relatively steep positive correlation, indicating that higher discount rates significantly increase
COE due to the higher cost of capital. Temperature has a minimal impact, with slight fluctuations
in COE across its range.

Solar irradiance shows an inverse relationship with COE, where increased solar availability
reduces costs, reflecting the efficiency gains from higher solar input. Biomass availability
exhibits a similar inverse trend, suggesting that greater resource availability reduces electricity
costs by improving system efficiency. Overall, nominal discount rate and resource availability
(solar and biomass) are the most influential parameters, highlighting their importance in
optimizing system performance and economic viability.

46
 0.050
Ex. inflation rate
Nominal discount rate
Temperature
0.045
Solar Irradiance
Biomass availability

COE ($/KWh)
0.040

0.035

0.030

0.025

0.020

60 80 100 120 140

Variation in Parameters (%)

Figure 3.17. Sensitivity of Parameters for COE

The sensitivity analysis (fig. 3.18) evaluates the impact of five key parameters biomass
availability, external inflation rate, nominal discount rate, solar irradiance, and temperature on
the Net Present Cost (NPC) of the system. Among these, biomass availability is the most critical,
showing a strong negative impact on NPC, as reduced availability significantly raises costs.
Similarly, the external inflation rate has a major positive effect on NPC, with higher inflation
increasing overall costs. The nominal discount rate moderately influences NPC, where higher
rates reduce future cost impacts, lowering NPC. In comparison, solar irradiance and temperature
have minimal financial sensitivity. The sensitivity ranking places biomass availability as the
most influential parameter, followed by the external inflation rate and nominal discount rate,
with solar irradiance and temperature being less significant. This emphasizes the importance of
ensuring a stable biomass supply and mitigating inflation risks to maintain economic feasibility.
While solar irradiance and temperature affect technical performance, their limited financial
impact suggests they should be secondary concerns in cost optimization. These findings guide
strategic planning for more resilient and cost-effective systems.

47
 380.0k
Ext. inflation rate
Nominal discount
360.0k
Temperature
Solar irradiance
340.0k biomass Avaibility

320.0k
NPC

300.0k

280.0k

260.0k

240.0k

220.0k

60 80 100 120 140

Figure 3.18. Sensitivity of Parameters for NPC

3.3.12 Sensitivity Analysis of components for the Optimal Case
The sensitivity analysis examines the impact of capital, replacement, and operation &
maintenance (O&M) cost variations on the NPC and the Cost of COE for the key components
in the system.

For Solar PV, a 20% decrease in costs leads to a reduction of 13.26% in NPC and 13.27% in
COE, while a 20% cost increase results in NPC and COE rising by 12.72% and 34.38%,
respectively. These significant variations indicate Solar PV's strong influence on overall system
economics.

The Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) shows a more modest response to cost variations,
with NPC changes ranging from -3.2% (20% cost decrease) to +2.81% (20% cost increase).
Correspondingly, COE variations are minimal, at -2.82% and +2.7%.

For the Biogas Generator, a 20% decrease in costs reduces NPC and COE by 9.36% and 9.35%,
respectively, while a 20% increase raises them by 9.05% and 9.02%. This highlights its moderate
impact on system cost variability.

48
The Converter demonstrates similar sensitivity patterns, with NPC changes of -6.19% for a 20%
cost decrease and +5.85% for a 20% increase. COE variations range from -6.96% to +6.9%,
indicating its substantial but slightly less critical role compared to Solar PV.

Overall, Solar PV has the greatest impact on both NPC and COE, followed by the Biogas
Generator and Converter, with BESS being the least sensitive. This analysis underscores the
importance of cost optimization in Solar PV to achieve a cost-effective system.

Table 3.2. Impact of 20% variations of cost on NPC & COE

Components Variations of Capital, Variation of Variation of

replacement and O & M cost NPC (%) COE (%)
Solar PV 20% decreases -13.26% -13.27%
20% increases 12.72% 34.38%
BESS 20% decreases -3.2% -2.82%
20% increases 2.81% 2.7%
Bio Gen 20% decreases -9.36% -9.35%
20% increases 9.05% 9.02%
Converter 20% decreases -6.19% -6.96%
20% increases 5.85% 6.9%

49
3.3.12 Comparison with Others Published Work
Table 3.3 presents a comparison between the proposed work and other published studies. This
table highlights how the proposed system aligns with or outperforms existing studies in
various parameters.

Table 3.3. Comparison of the proposed work with others’ published work

System structure System type Category Re Fraction(%) COE ($/KW)

PV-DG-WT-BESS [52] Off-grid Community - 0.1413
PV-WT-Grid [53] On-grid Community 97.8 0.0751
PV-WT-Bio.Gen-Grid-BESS [54] On-grid Residential 82 0.059
PV-Grid [55] On-grid Community 70 0.0357
PV-BESS-Grid [56] On-grid Residential - 0.041
PV- Grid-WT-BESS [57] On-grid Community 57.5 0.0442
PV-WT-BESS [58] Off-grid Community 98 0.03
PV-DG-WT-BESS [59] Off-grid Community - 0.03
PV-Bio.Gen-BESS-Grid (proposed) On-grid Community 95.3 0.0286

50
 Chapter 4: Conclusion & Future work

This study evaluates six configurations of hybrid energy systems (HESs) to identify the most
optimal solution for academic institutions, focusing on low cost, environmental sustainability,
and efficient resource utilization. Among the cases analyzed, the integration of PV systems, a
biogas generator, lithium-ion batteries, and a grid connection emerged as the most suitable
configuration. This system achieved the lowest COE, NPC, and operating costs, while also
significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional systems. The
proposed HES was further validated through a comprehensive sensitivity analysis, confirming
its resilience against variations in renewable resource availability and component costs.

The current energy system, which relies on grid electricity supplemented by diesel generators,
incurs higher costs and contributes significantly to environmental pollution due to fossil fuel
dependency. In contrast, the proposed hybrid system not only addresses these limitations but
also leverages the institution's locally available resources. Rooftop space is utilized for PV
installations, while organic waste from the campus is efficiently managed to produce biogas,
thereby promoting a sustainable and circular energy model. This approach maximizes the share
of renewable energy in the overall mix, minimizes reliance on conventional fuels, and reduces
the carbon footprint.

The analysis highlights that this hybrid configuration not only ensures cost-effective and reliable
energy supply but also aligns with environmental sustainability goals by integrating clean energy
technologies. By addressing both economic and environmental criteria, this optimized hybrid
system serves as a practical and scalable solution for meeting the energy demands of academic
institutions while promoting efficient waste management and resource utilization. This case
demonstrates the potential for sustainable energy solutions to transform the energy landscape in
institutions, providing reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly power generation.

Future work for this research could focus on enhancing the hybrid energy system's efficiency
and exploring additional renewable energy sources. Integrating other renewable technologies
such as wind turbines or micro-hydro systems could diversify the energy mix, making the system
more resilient to seasonal or resource variability. Additionally, exploring the potential of

51
advanced storage technologies, such as solid-state batteries or flow batteries, may further reduce
costs and improve energy storage efficiency.

Another avenue for future investigation is the development of a grid-connected microgrid

system. This approach could enable better management of excess energy, allowing surplus
electricity to be fed back into the grid or stored for future use. Expanding the analysis to include
demand-side management strategies, such as load shifting and peak shaving, could also improve
the system's operational efficiency. Moreover, the inclusion of a hydrogen-based energy system
in the hybrid mix could be explored, allowing for energy storage and load management through
hydrogen production and utilization. A hydrogen load management strategy could enhance
system flexibility by balancing energy supply and demand more effectively.

Economic and policy considerations can be incorporated into future studies. For example,
analyzing the impact of government incentives, carbon credits, or renewable energy subsidies
could provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the system's cost-effectiveness. Furthermore,
future research could assess the socio-economic benefits of hybrid energy systems, such as job
creation and improved community development.

Finally, integrating advanced optimization techniques and algorithms could refine the modeling
process, yielding even more accurate and reliable results. These developments could help design
hybrid systems tailored to other institutions or regions with varying energy demands and
resource availability. Future work should aim to build upon the foundations laid by this study to
create scalable, adaptable, and sustainable energy solutions for broader applications.

52
References

[1] M. K. Singla, J. Gupta, M. H. Alsharif, and A. Jahid, “Optimizing Integration of Fuel Cell
Technology in Renewable Energy-Based Microgrids for Sustainable and Cost-Effective
Energy,” Energies (Basel), vol. 16, no. 11, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.3390/en16114482.
[2] K. Sarita, R. Devarapalli, and P. Rai, “Modeling and control of dynamic battery storage
system used in hybrid grid,” Energy Storage, vol. 2, no. 3, Jun. 2020, doi:
10.1002/est2.146.
[3] L. Chen et al., “Strategies to achieve a carbon neutral society: a review,” Aug. 01, 2022,
Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. doi: 10.1007/s10311-022-
01435-8.
[4] “Access to electricity improves slightly in 2023, but still far from the pace needed to meet
SDG7 – Analysis - IEA.” Accessed: Nov. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.iea.org/commentaries/access-to-electricity-improves-slightly-in-2023-but-
still-far-from-the-pace-needed-to-meet-sdg7
[5] “World population projected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050, and 11.2 billion in 2100 | United
Nations.” Accessed: Nov. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.un.org/en/desa/world-population-projected-reach-98-billion-2050-and-112-
billion-2100
[6] F. Eze, J. Ogola, R. Kivindu, M. Egbo, and C. Obi, “Technical and economic feasibility
assessment of hybrid renewable energy system at Kenyan institutional building: A case
study,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 51, Jun. 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.seta.2021.101939.
[7] F. Fallahi and P. Maghouli, “An efficient solution method for integrated unit commitment
and natural gas network operational scheduling under ‘Duck Curve,’” International
Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems, vol. 30, no. 12, Dec. 2020, doi:
10.1002/2050-7038.12662.
[8] Q. Hou, N. Zhang, E. Du, M. Miao, F. Peng, and C. Kang, “Probabilistic duck curve in
high PV penetration power system: Concept, modeling, and empirical analysis in China,”
Appl Energy, vol. 242, pp. 205–215, May 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.03.067.
[9] J. T. Liao, Y. S. Chuang, H. T. Yang, and M. S. Tsai, “BESS-Sizing Optimization for
Solar PV System Integration in Distribution Grid,” in IFAC-PapersOnLine, Elsevier
B.V., Jan. 2018, pp. 85–90. doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.11.682.
[10] A. S. M. M. Hasan, M. A. Kabir, M. T. Hoq, M. T. Johansson, and P. Thollander, “Drivers
and barriers to the implementation of biogas technologies in Bangladesh,” Biofuels, vol.
13, no. 5, pp. 643–655, 2022, doi: 10.1080/17597269.2020.1841362.

53
[11] M. A. Hil Baky, M. M. Rahman, and A. K. M. S. Islam, “Development of renewable
energy sector in Bangladesh: Current status and future potentials,” 2017, Elsevier Ltd.
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.047.
[12] S. L. Gbadamosi, F. S. Ogunje, S. T. Wara, and N. I. Nwulu, “Techno-Economic
Evaluation of a Hybrid Energy System for an Educational Institution: A Case Study,”
Energies (Basel), vol. 15, no. 15, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15155606.
[13] “Electricity Generation Mix | National Database of Renewable Energy.” Accessed: Dec.
10, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://ndre.sreda.gov.bd/index.php?id=7
[14] M. Washim Akram, M. Arman Arefin, and A. Nusrat, “Prospect of green power
generation as a solution to energy crisis in Bangladesh,” Aug. 01, 2022, Springer Science
and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. doi: 10.1007/s12667-020-00421-9.
[15] D. Khondaker and G. Moazzem, “CPD Power and Energy Study Power and Energy
Sector Reform Agenda for the Interim Government,” 2024.
[16] “Target to generate 4,100MW by 2030 | The Daily Star.” Accessed: Dec. 03, 2024.
[Online]. Available: https://www.thedailystar.net/business/economy/news/target-
generate-4100mw-2030-2210291
[17] D. Khondaker and G. Moazzem, “CPD Power and Energy Study Power and Energy
Sector Reform Agenda for the Interim Government,” 2024.
[18] Z. Serat, M. Danishmal, and F. Mohammad Mohammadi, “Optimizing hybrid PV/Wind
and grid systems for sustainable energy solutions at the university campus: Economic,
environmental, and sensitivity analysis,” Energy Conversion and Management: X, vol.
24, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ecmx.2024.100691.
[19] C. Diyoke, M. O. Egwuagu, T. O. Onah, K. C. Ugwu, and E. C. Dim, “Comparison of
the Grid and Off-Grid Hybrid Power Systems for Application in University Buildings in
Nigeria,” International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, vol. 12, no. 2, pp.
348–365, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.14710/ijred.2023.49814.
[20] S. Jain, P. Singh, V. Chaudhary, and M. Pandit, “Optimal design of an off-grid hybrid
system using HOMER Pro,” in 2023 International Conference on Computer, Electronics
and Electrical Engineering and their Applications, IC2E3 2023, Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2023. doi: 10.1109/IC2E357697.2023.10262800.
[21] R. Pawar, K. P. Dalsania, A. Sircar, K. Yadav, and N. Bist, “Renewable energy
hybridization: a comprehensive review of integration strategies for efficient and
sustainable power generation,” Clean Technol Environ Policy, 2024, doi:
10.1007/S10098-024-02951-7.
[22] T. Chingkheinganba, I. C. Meitei, and B. A. Shimray, “Optimization of Hybrid
Renewable Energy System using Homer-Pro in both Standalone and Grid systems,” 2022
IEEE Calcutta Conference, CALCON 2022 - Proceedings, pp. 233–237, 2022, doi:
10.1109/CALCON56258.2022.10060545.

54
[23] P. Roy, J. He, T. Zhao, and Y. V. Singh, “Recent Advances of Wind-Solar Hybrid
Renewable Energy Systems for Power Generation: A Review,” IEEE Open Journal of
the Industrial Electronics Society, vol. 3, pp. 81–104, 2022, doi:
10.1109/OJIES.2022.3144093.
[24] M. A. Rehan, “Optimization of grid-connected hybrid renewable energy system for the
educational institutes in Pakistan,” e-Prime - Advances in Electrical Engineering,
Electronics and Energy, vol. 10, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.prime.2024.100781.
[25] F. Eze, J. Ogola, R. Kivindu, M. Egbo, and C. Obi, “Technical and economic feasibility
assessment of hybrid renewable energy system at Kenyan institutional building: A case
study,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 51, Jun. 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.seta.2021.101939.
[26] T. Chingkheinganba, I. C. Meitei, and B. A. Shimray, “Optimization of Hybrid
Renewable Energy System using Homer-Pro in both Standalone and Grid systems,” in
2022 IEEE Calcutta Conference (CALCON), 2022, pp. 233–237. doi:
10.1109/CALCON56258.2022.10060545.
[27] M. R. Islam, H. Akter, H. O. R. Howlader, and T. Senjyu, “Optimal Sizing and Techno-
Economic Analysis of Grid-Independent Hybrid Energy System for Sustained Rural
Electrification in Developing Countries: A Case Study in Bangladesh,” Energies (Basel),
vol. 15, no. 17, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15176381.
[28] M. R. Sunny, T. Ali, K. Aghaloo, and K. Wang, “Techno-economic feasibility of stand-
alone hybrid energy system with battery storage in educational buildings: A case study of
Uttara University,” Energy Build, vol. 304, Feb. 2024, doi:
10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.113852.
[29] H. Chowdhury, T. Chowdhury, M. I. Miskat, N. Hossain, P. Chowdhury, and S. M. Sait,
“Potential of biogas and bioelectricity production from Rohingya camp in Bangladesh: A
case study,” Energy, vol. 214, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.118837.
[30] P. A. N. Neto, B. M. W. Soares, J. G. A. Da Silva, C. S. Gehrke, and I. R. F. M. P. Da
Silva, “Control of Hybrid Energy Storage System for Providing Grid Support Services,”
2021 Brazilian Power Electronics Conference, COBEP 2021, 2021, doi:
10.1109/COBEP53665.2021.9684148.
[31] S. Bahramara, M. P. Moghaddam, and M. R. Haghifam, “Optimal planning of hybrid
renewable energy systems using HOMER: A review,” 2016, Elsevier Ltd. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.039.
[32] Md. F. Ali, Md. A. Hossain, M. Md. Julhash, M. Ashikuzzaman, M. S. Alam, and Md. R.
I. Sheikh, “A Techno-Economic Analysis of a Hybrid Microgrid System in a Residential
Area of Bangladesh: Optimizing Renewable Energy,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 18, p.
8051, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16188051.
[33] “HOMER - Hybrid Renewable and Distributed Generation System Design Software.”
Accessed: Nov. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://homerenergy.com/
55
[34] M. R. Douiri, “A Predictive Model for Solar Photovoltaic Power based on Computational
Intelligence Technique,” Arab J Sci Eng, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 6923–6940, Aug. 2019, doi:
10.1007/s13369-019-03725-w.
[35] F. Eze, J. Ogola, R. Kivindu, M. Egbo, and C. Obi, “Technical and economic feasibility
assessment of hybrid renewable energy system at Kenyan institutional building: A case
study,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 51, Jun. 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.seta.2021.101939.
[36] M. A. Hossain, H. R. Pota, S. Squartini, F. Zaman, and K. M. Muttaqi, “Energy
management of community microgrids considering degradation cost of battery,” J Energy
Storage, vol. 22, pp. 257–269, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.est.2018.12.021.
[37] D. M. Mahmud, S. M. M. Ahmed, S. Hasan, and M. Zeyad, “Grid-connected microgrid:
Design and feasibility analysis for a local community in Bangladesh,” Clean Energy, vol.
6, no. 3, pp. 447–459, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1093/ce/zkac022.
[38] S. M. Dawoud, “Developing different hybrid renewable sources of residential loads as a
reliable method to realize energy sustainability,” Alexandria Engineering Journal, vol.
60, no. 2, pp. 2435–2445, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.12.024.
[39] T. Zhang, P. W. Stackhouse, W. S. Chandler, J. M. Hoell, D. Westberg, and C. H.
Whitlock, “A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES:
NASA’S PREDICTION OF WORLDWIDE ENERGY RESOURCES (POWER)
PROJECT.” [Online]. Available: http://earth-www.larc.nasa.gov/power/
[40] M. F. Ali and R. Islam, “Designing Human and Kitchen Waste Based Biogas & Solar
Plant for PabnaUniversity of Science & Technology (PUST)Campus and Cost Benefit
Analysis after Renewable Energy Interconnection on PUST Campus’s Grid Network,”
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER), vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 28–34, 2014,
[Online]. Available: www.ajer.org
[41] H. Yaqoob et al., “The potential of sustainable biogas production from biomass waste for
power generation in Pakistan,” Jul. 20, 2021, Elsevier Ltd. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127250.
[42] Md. F. Ali, Md. A. Hossain, M. Md. Julhash, M. Ashikuzzaman, M. S. Alam, and Md. R.
I. Sheikh, “A Techno-Economic Analysis of a Hybrid Microgrid System in a Residential
Area of Bangladesh: Optimizing Renewable Energy,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 18, p.
8051, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16188051.
[43] T. K. Das and D. Kundu, “Feasibility and sensitivity analysis of a self-sustainable hybrid
system: A case study of a mountainous region in Bangladesh,” Energy Conversion and
Management: X, vol. 20, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ecmx.2023.100411.
[44] H. Akter, H. O. R. Howlader, A. Y. Saber, P. Mandal, H. Takahashi, and T. Senjyu,
“Optimal sizing of hybrid microgrid in a remote island considering advanced direct load
control for demand response and low carbon emission,” Energies (Basel), vol. 14, no. 22,
Nov. 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14227599.
56
[45] A. B. Kanase-Patil, R. P. Saini, and M. P. Sharma, “Development of IREOM model based
on seasonally varying load profile for hilly remote areas of Uttarakhand state in India,”
Energy, vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 5690–5702, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.057.
[46] “Solar Integration: Inverters and Grid Services Basics | Department of Energy.”
Accessed: Dec. 03, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-
integration-inverters-and-grid-services-basics
[47] “Tarif-rate - Bangladesh Power Development Board-.” Accessed: Nov. 30, 2024.
[Online]. Available: https://www.bpdb.gov.bd/site/page/c413c44f-9611-4320-82da-
b298fe69157e/%E0%A6%9F%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AF%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%
B0%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%AB-%E0%A6%B0%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%9F
[48] “48V 100Ah High Performance Lithium Telecom Battery Price in Bangladesh | Bdstall.”
Accessed: Dec. 01, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.bdstall.com/details/48v-
100ah-high-performance-lithium-telecom-battery-111565/
[49] “5 KVA Biogas Generator, 180 V at Rs 105000 in Kolkata | ID: 15910879148.”
Accessed: Dec. 01, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/5-
kva-biogas-generator-
15910879148.html?srsltid=AfmBOoqDHGwVa6pbd4htZ3SD92YuNrD9G1YlHCoQZ
TKmAIBwTHIaYdMj
[50] “Sunway Vertical Wind Turbine 2kw 3kw 5kw 10kw 230v Wind Turbine Generator -
Buy Vertical Wind Turbine wind Turbine 10kw 230v Wind Turbine Generator Product
on Alibaba.com.” Accessed: Dec. 01, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Sunway-vertical-wind-turbine-2kw-
3kw_1600767296067.html
[51] “Hybrid Off-grid System 48v 5kw Pure Sine Wave Inverter Inverter Mppt Hybrid - Buy
Mppt Solar Inverter 48v Hybrid Solar Inverter solar Charge Inverter Product on
Alibaba.com.” Accessed: Dec. 01, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Hybrid-Off-grid-System-48v-
5kw_1600742848577.html
[52] A. A. Rathod and S. Balaji, “Modified Harris Hawks optimization for the 3E feasibility
assessment of a hybrid renewable energy system,” Sci Rep, vol. 14, no. 1, Dec. 2024, doi:
10.1038/s41598-024-70663-5.
[53] N. C. Alluraiah and P. Vijayapriya, “Optimization, Design, and Feasibility Analysis of a
Grid-Integrated Hybrid AC/DC Microgrid System for Rural Electrification,” IEEE
Access, vol. 11, pp. 67013–67029, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3291010.
[54] K. Haleema, S. Kumari Juluri, S. Pooja Sree, P. Karnekota, and K. Murugaperumal,
“Sustainable Designing of Hybrid Renewable Electrification System for Urban
Residential Community Load,” 2023 4th International Conference for Emerging
Technology, INCET 2023, 2023, doi: 10.1109/INCET57972.2023.10170125.

57
[55] M. Zeyad, S. M. M. Ahmed, S. Hasan, and D. M. Mahmud, “Community microgrid: an
approach towards positive energy community in an urban area of Dhaka, Bangladesh,”
Clean Energy, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 926–939, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1093/CE/ZKAD027.
[56] S. Hasan, M. Zeyad, S. M. M. Ahmed, and M. S. T. Anubhove, “Optimization and
planning of renewable energy sources based microgrid for a residential complex,”
Environ Prog Sustain Energy, vol. 42, no. 5, p. e14124, Sep. 2023, doi:
10.1002/EP.14124.
[57] D. M. Mahmud, S. M. M. Ahmed, S. Hasan, and M. Zeyad, “Grid-connected microgrid:
Design and feasibility analysis for a local community in Bangladesh,” Clean Energy, vol.
6, no. 3, pp. 447–459, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1093/ce/zkac022.
[58] M. Ashraful Islam, M. M. Naushad Ali, A. Al Mamun, M. Shahadat Hossain, M. Hasan
Maruf, and A. S. M. Shihavuddin, “Optimizing energy solutions: A techno-economic
analysis of solar-wind hybrid power generation in the coastal regions of Bangladesh,”
Energy Conversion and Management: X, vol. 22, p. 100605, Apr. 2024, doi:
10.1016/J.ECMX.2024.100605.
[59] M. D. Hossen, M. F. Islam, M. F. Ishraque, S. A. Shezan, and S. M. Arifuzzaman, “Design
and Implementation of a Hybrid Solar-Wind-Biomass Renewable Energy System
considering Meteorological Conditions with the Power System Performances,”
International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2022, 2022, doi: 10.1155/2022/8792732.

58