炭素回収デカップリングとV2G連携を考慮した統合エネルギーシステムの低炭素経済運用

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a novel coordinated dispatch model combining CCPP and V2G, with detailed frequency-band analysis of balancing contributions.

🏢実務担当者:Offers a framework for optimizing integrated energy systems with carbon capture and EV flexibility, potentially reducing operational costs and emissions.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights the value of coordinating carbon capture and V2G to enhance grid flexibility and reduce wind curtailment, informing renewable integration policies.

High wind-power penetration increases balancing requirements in integrated energy systems (IESs), while solvent-storage-assisted carbon capture power plants (CCPPs) and electric vehicle (EV) aggregators provide complementary flexibility at different timescales. This paper proposes an electric–carbon dual time-shift coordinated dispatch approach coupling carbon-energy shifting with vehicle-to-grid (V2G) electrical-energy shifting. First, a reduced-order model represents the dominant thermal inertia and short-term response of solvent regeneration. Second, EV availability uncertainty is characterized by Monte Carlo sampling, with quantile-based power and mobility-energy envelopes incorporated into aggregate SOC and mobility constraints together with a throughput-based battery-degradation cost. Finally, a 15-min mixed-integer linear programming model integrating power-to-gas, hydrogen-blended combined heat and power, thermal storage, and tiered carbon trading is solved using CPLEX. Compared with the baseline, the proposed coordinated dispatch strategy reduces operating cost from USD 77.19 × 104 to 58.65 × 104, net carbon emissions from 5841.71 to 2742.46 tCO2, and the wind-curtailment rate from 42.98% to 1.15%. Specifically, relative to the same system without EV–V2G coordination, incorporating EV–V2G further reduces operating cost and net carbon emissions by 0.93% and 3.93%, respectively, while lowering the wind-curtailment rate from 4.23% to 1.15%, corresponding to a 72.8% relative reduction. Frequency-band analysis shows that the CCPP and electrolyzer provide the two largest contributions to low-frequency balancing, at 42.85% and 30.02%, respectively, whereas EV–V2G and CHP provide the two largest contributions to higher-frequency balancing, at 45.37% and 23.71%, respectively. The main limitations are the reduced-order regenerator model, fleet-level EV aggregation without distribution-network constraints, and fixed equipment capacities.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.3390/en19174060first seen 2026-09-02 04:51:22