arXiv:1509.01693v1 [cs.CE] 5 Sep 2015

The Economic Dispatch for Integrated Wind Power
Systems Using Particle Swarm Optimization
Mohamed Abuella

Constantine J. Hatziadoniu

Departmtent of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Charlotte, USA
Email: mabuella@uncc.edu

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Southern Illinois University
Carbondale, USA
Email: hatz@siu.edu

Abstract—The economic dispatch of wind power units is quite
different from that in conventional thermal units; since the
adopted model should take into consideration the intermittency
nature of wind speed as well. Therefore, this paper uses a
model that takes into account the aforementioned consideration
in addition to whether the utility owns wind turbines or not.
The economic dispatch is solved by using one of the modern
optimization algorithms: the particle swarm optimization
algorithm. A 6-bus system is used and it includes wind-powered
generators besides to thermal generators. The thorough analysis
of the results is also provided.
Keywords—Economic dispatch; particle swarm; wind energy.

I. I NTRODUCTION
As a result of the intermittency nature of wind power,
the economic dispatch of resources that include wind power
is quite different of that in pure conventional thermal units.
Therefore, how can the economic dispatch of this promised
future resource of energy be achieved?
Various mathematical programming approaches used to solve
this kind of optimization problem in power systems, based on
linear and nonlinear programming were proposed, including
Newton method, quadratic programming, and interior-point
method [1]. The mathematical methods utilize the first or
second derivative information in essence. In this way, it is
apt to fall into local optima. Furthermore, there is a difficulty
of applying gradient-based optimization techniques. Therefore,
various non-classical optimization methods have emerged to
cope with some of the traditional optimization algorithms’
shortcomings. The main modern optimization techniques are
genetic algorithm (GA), evolutionary programming (EP), artificial neural network (ANN), simulated annealing (SA), ant
colony optimization (ACO), and particle swarm optimization
(PSO). They have been successfully applied to wide range
of optimization problems in which global solutions are more
preferred than local ones [2],[3].
Kennedy and Eberhart first introduced particle swarm optimization (PSO) in 1995 as a new heuristic method [4].
In [3] there is a comprehensive coverage of different PSO
applications in solving optimization problems in the area of
electric power systems up to 2006. The review in [5] is about
the historical research production of the economic dispatch

considering the wind power, besides that it also presents some
models and different optimization algorithms as well.
In 2008 [6] is one of the pioneer studies about the economic
dispatch including the wind power was reported. It also
includes the definitions about the wind power cost and its
factors in wind energy conversion systems (WECS) combining
both cases, whether the operator owns WECS or not. In
addition to the direct cost of wind power, cost factors of the
overestimation and underestimation of wind power have also
been proposed.
This paper is intending to investigate the interconnection
of wind generators besides the conventional generators into
power systems and its impact on the generation resource
management. The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
Section II introduces the motivation and the problem statement. Section III it discusses the analysis and characterization
of wind speed and power. Section IV the particle swarm
optimization (PSO) algorithm is described. In Section V the
results of the implementation of PSO to find the economic
dispatch of a benchmark system are discussed to some extent.
Finally, Section VI gives the conclusions.
II. P ROBLEM F ORMULATION
A. Problem objectives
The objective function of the optimization problem in this
paper is to minimize the operating cost of power generation
power from a combination of wind-powered and conventional
generators. The operating cost of conventional thermal generators is represented by a quadratic equation as following [7]:
Ci = ai p2i + bi pi + ci

(1)

Where pi is the generation power from the ith conventional
generator; and a, b and c are the operating cost coefficients of
the ith generator. The wind power generation cost Cw which
may be not exist if the power operator owns the wind poweredgenerators, but it could be considered as a payback cost or a
maintenance cost [6]:
Cw,i = di wi

(2)

Since wi is the scheduled wind power from the ith windpowered generator; and di is the direct cost coefficient for
the ith wind generator.

Because of the uncertainty of generated wind power, there
are two scenarios of wind power costs. The surplus of wind
power as a result of underestimation of the available wind
power and hence scheduling the wind power wi less than what
it would be. Thus, Cp appears as a penalty cost [6].
wr,i

Z

Cp,i = kp,i

(w − wi )fw (w)dw

(3)

wi

C. Problem Statement
In summary, the objectives of optimal economical dispatch
is to minimize the operating cost from the conventional and
wind-powered generators includes the penalty of underestimation and overestimation of wind power, subject to the certain
constraints.
The model of economic dispatch for thermal and windpowered generators [6]:

Where fw is the Weibull distribution function for wind power,
for more details see section (III-C); and kp is the penalty cost
coefficient.
On the other hand, a deficit of wind power which occurs by
the overestimation of the available wind power and scheduling
the wind power wi more than it would be available. At that
situation, the deficit will be compensated by a reserve power
sources. That means there is also a cost for the deficit of wind
power. Thus, Cr is presented as a reserve cost.
Z wi
(wi − w)fw (w)dw
(4)
Cr,i = kr,i

subject to: The constraints that are represented as in equations
(5) - (8).
Note using a classic economic dispatch approach for the
model in equation (9), which takes the partial derivative of the
objective function respect to generator outputs; it’s difficult
due to the integrals in the wind power cost terms as in
equations (3) and (4), Therefore, Particle Swarm Optimization
(PSO) algorithm is used for solving this optimization problem.

kr,i is the reserve cost coefficient for the ith wind generator.

III. T HE A NALYSIS OF W IND S PEED AND P OWER

0

M
X

Ci (pi ) +

N
X

Cw,i (wi ) +

Cp,i (wi ) +

N
X

Cr,i (wi ) (9)

i=1

i=1

i=1

i=1

N
X

A. Probability Analysis of Wind Power
B. Problem Constraints
Due to the physical or operational limits in practical systems, there is a set of constraints that should be satisfied
throughout the system operations for a feasible solution [8].
Generation capacity constraints:
For normal system operations, real power output of each
generator is restricted by lower and upper limits as
follows:
pmin
i

≤ pi ≤

pmax
i

0 ≤ wi ≤ wr,i

•

(6)

Since wr,i is the rating wind power from the ith windpowered generator.
The transmission line losses constraints:
max
Sline,i ≤ Sline,i

•

(5)

(7)

B. Wind Speed Characterization
The wind speeds in a particular place can be considered as
a Weibull distribution over time [9]. The probability density
function (pdf) of the Weibull distribution fV (v) is given by:
  
k
v (k−1) −( v )k
fV (v) =
0 < v < ∞ (10)
e c ,
c
c
Where v is the wind speed; c is scale factor; k is the shape
factor. Fig. 1 illustrates the Weibull pdf with shape factors
k=2, and curves of scale factor c = 5 m/s, 15 m/s, and 25
m/s are indicated.
0.18

Sline,i is losses of the ith transmission line.
Power balance constraint:
The total power from conventional and wind generators
must cover the total demand.
M
X
i=1

pi +

N
X

0.16

C=5

0.14

0.12

Probability

•

Before starting the discussion of economic dispatch of
systems that contain wind-powered generators, it will be a
good idea to identify the wind speed characterization by
probability principles and its subsequent transformation to
wind power.

0.1

0.08

C=15
0.06

wi = D

(8)

0.04

C=25

i=1

Where M number of conventional power generators; N
number of wind-powered generators; and D is the demand
which equals to the system load and losses.

0.02

0
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Wind speed−v

Fig. 1.

Weibull pdf of wind speed for several values of scale factor c [9]

The cumulative distribution function (cdf) of Weibulll distribution FV (v) is obtained by integration of pdf:
Z v
v k
(11)
FV (v) =
fV (v) dv = 1 − e−( c )
0

C. WECS Input/Output and Probability Functions
For wind energy conversion systems (WECS) as it is shown
in Fig. 2, the wind power curve from probability point of view
can be represented in three regions as in equation (12) [6].

(v < vi or v ≥ vo )
 0;
(v−vi )
w=
wr (v
;
(vi ≤ v < vr )
(12)
r −vi )

wr ;
(vr ≤ v < vo )

Where w is the wind power; wr is the rating power of WECS;
vi is the cut-in wind speed; vo is the cut-out of wind speed;
vr is the rating wind speed at which the rating power wr is
captured.
w
wr

0

vr

vi

Fig. 2.

v

vo

The linear transformation from wind speed to wind power
in the linear region (vi ≤ v < vr ) is done as following [6]:
∴ v = T −1 (w) ⇒ v =

(w − b)
a

So now v in terms of w, and thus fV (v) ⇒ fW (w) as follows:
∴ fW (w) = fV



w−b
a



1
a

(13)

where:
T is the general transformation; w wind power random variable; v wind speed random variable;
For Weibull distribution function, the transformation will
lead to discrete and continuous ranges as following: For
discrete portions:
vi k

P r{W = 0} = FV (vi )+(1−FV (vo )) = 1−e−( c

)

+e−(

vo k
c )

(14)
P r{W = wr } = FV (vo ) − FV (vr ) = −e−(

vr
c

)k

− e−(

vo k
c )

(15)
While for the continuous portion of the wind power curve:

(k−1)  (1+ρl)v k
i
klvi (1 + ρl)vi
−
c
fW (w) =
e
(16)
wr c
c
ρ=

w
,
wr

l=

(vr − vi )
vi

The PSO is originally suggested by Kennedy and Eberhart
based on the analogy of swarm of bird and school of fish
[4]. The algorithm was simplified and used for solving the
optimization problems.
A. Standard PSO Algorithm
The following is the conventional terminology of the parameters in PSO: Let x and v denote a particle coordinates
(position) and its corresponding speed magnitude (velocity)
in a search space, respectively. Therefore, the ith particle is
represented as xi = [xi1 , xi2 , ...., xim ]. Since m is the last
dimension or coordinate of the position of the the ith particle
in the search space and so that the dimension d = 1, 2, ..., m.
The best previous position of the ith particle is saved and
represented as [10],
pbesti = [pbesti1 , pbesti2 , ...., pbestim ].
The position of the best particle among all the particles in the
group is represented by the gbest. In a particular dimension d
there is a group best position which is gbestd.
The velocity for the ith particle is represented as, vi =
[vi1 , vi2 , ...., vid ]. The modified velocity and the position of
each particle can be calculated by using the following formulas:
k+1
k
vid
= w∗vid
+c1 ∗U ∗(pbestkid −xkid )+c2 ∗U ∗(gbestkd −xkid )
(17)

The captured wind power curve [9]

∵ w = T (v) = av + b

IV. PARTICLE S WARM O PTIMIZATION A LGORITHM

k+1
xk+1
= xkid + vid
id

(18)

i = 1, 2, ...., n;
d = 1, 2, ..., m
k
the position and the velocity of the ith particle
Where xkid ,vid
in the dth dimension at an iteration k; n number of particles in
a group; m number of members in a particle; w inertia weight
factor; c1 , c2 acceleration factors; U uniform random number
in the range [0,1];
The velocity should between vdmin ≤ vid ≤ vdmax If vdmax
is too high, particles might move past good solutions. While
if vdmax is too small, particles may not explore sufficiently
beyond local solutions. In many experiences with PSO, was
often set at 10 - 20% of the dynamic range of the variable on
each dimension [10].
The constants c1 and c2 represent the weighting of the
stochastic acceleration terms that pull each particle toward the
pbest and gbest positions. The acceleration constants c1 and
c2 are often set to be 2 according to past experiences [10].
Suitable selection of inertia weight w in equation (17) provides
a balance between global and local explorations, to find a
sufficiently optimal solution. In general, the inertia weight is
set according to the following equation:
w = wmax −

(wmax − wmin )
× iter
itermax

(19)

Where itermax is the maximum number of iterations (generations). PSO algorithm flowchart is shown in Fig. 3.

TABLE I
G ENERATORS DATA OF 6- BUS SYSTEM

Start

Initialize particles with
random position and velocity
vectors

For each particle’s position
(x) evaluate objective
function (J)

If J(x) better than
J(pbest)
then pbest = x

Set best of pbest as gbest

Update
vi = ω vi + c1 U (pbesti-xi) + c2U (gbest-xi)
x i = x i + vi

o

Is Iter.=maxiter?
Is adequate objective
function reached?

Gen. No.
1
2
3
4

a

b

($/MW^2.hr)

($/MW.hr)

0.012
0.0096
0
0

12
9.6
8
6

c

PG_low

PG_high

(MW)

(MW)

105
96
0
0

50
50
0
0

250
250
40
40

output of each wind-powered generator is 40 M W . While
the direct cost of wind power 8 and 6 $/(M W.hr) for
wind-powered generator 3 and 4 respectively. The difference
in direct cost of wind power is for including the variety
purpose in the study, and to get more options of dispatching.
The parameters of the wind turbine are cut-in wind speed
vi = 5m/s, rating wind speed vr = 15m/s, and cut-out wind
speed vo = 45m/s.
B. The Objective Function

Yes
Stop: giving gbest, optimal
solution

Fig. 3.

PSO algorithm flowchart

V. PSO I MPLEMENTATION ON IEEE B ENCHMARK S YSTEM
PSO algorithm is coded in MATLAB to determine the
economic dispatch of the generation power for an electrical
power system with considering various levels of wind power
penetration. In this paper, the PSO algorithm is implemented
for solving the economic dispatch of a 6-bus system that
includes wind-powered generators in addition to the conventional generators. Since the used model in equation (9)
has an objective function that contains some terms that need
integration, the PSO algorithm can be applied efficiently to
solve this type of objective functions.

The aim is to implement the PSO algorithm with the model
which is discussed in section II. The
PMobjective function is
presented by equation (9), the term i=1 Ci (pi ) is the cost
PN
of the real power of thermal-generators,
i=1 Cw,i (wi ) is
PN
the direct cost of wind power, i=1 Cp,i (wi ) is the penalty
cost
PN of the underestimation of the available wind power, and
i=1 Cr,i (wi ) is the reserve cost of the overestimation of the
available wind power. The two latter terms in the objective
function have integrals as they are represented in equations
(3) and (4).
Fig. 5 illustrates the cumulative probability distribution of
wind power, it is produced from the integration of equation
16. This figure has such importance for the next investigations.
Note: w is the available wind power, while wr is the rating
wind power.
C.Prob. vs W/Wr)

1

C=5

The 6-Bus System in Fig. 4 is adopted to calculate the
optimal economic dispatch of generation power including wind
power. This system consists of six buses and four generators
at buses 1, 2, 3, and 4, generators at buses 3 and 4 are windpowered generators. There are seven transmission lines, and
there are no LTC transformers or VAR compensation devices
in this system. For all detailed data of this 6-bus system refer
to [11].

Comulative. Probability

A. The Data of The System
0.8

0.6

C=15
0.4

C=25

0.2

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

W/Wr

Fig. 5. Cumulative probability distribution of wind power vs. normalized
wind power

C. PSO Solution for Base Case

Fig. 4.

Single-line diagram of 6-bus system [11]

As TABLE I is shown, the system has two conventional
thermal units and two wind-powered generators. The higher

The base case with total load of 400 M W . The parameters
of Weibull distribution of wind speed here are scale factor
c =5m/s, while the shape factor k is 2. By assumption,
the reserve cost coefficient as a result of overestimation of
available wind power would be 1 $/M W.hr. On the other
hand, penalty cost coefficient as a result of underestimation of
available wind power is 0 $/M W.hr, this means the utility
owns wind turbines so there is no penalty of surplus produced
wind power. The changing of these coefficients and their effect
on the total cost will be investigated later.

300

300

250

250

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

The economic dispatch of the base case is in TABLE II.
The minimum cost of real power from both thermal and wind
power generators is 4777.49 $/hr. Wind-powered generators
in these conditions supply maximum outputs because they
are more economic. While the first thermal generator supplies
less power to the system than the second generator because
its generated power is more expensive. All generators’ cost
coffeceitns are in TABLE I.
As it is shown in TABLE II the outputs of generators are equal
to the demand plus losses in the system.

200
150
100
50
0
5

10

Scheduled Outputs(MW)

PSO RESULT OF ECONOMIC DISPATCH FOR BASE CASE (400M W )
PG4
(MW)

Losses

Cost

(MW)

($/hr)

92.82

230.64

40

40

3.462

4777.49

C =5 m/s, K=2. (Weibull PDF parameters)
Kr=1 $/MW.hr, Kp=0 $/MW.hr as utility owns wind turbines (wind power cost factors).

D. PSO Solution for Different Loading
The economic dispatch solution by PSO algorithm when the
system load increases gradually is as in TABLE III. The limits
of the transmission lines losses are neglected because they are
relatively low.
TABLE III
PSO RESULT FOR ED OF DIFFERENT LOAD CASES OF 6- BUS SYSTEM

(MW)
400
450
500

P G2

P G3

P G4

(MW)

(MW)

(MW)

(MW)

($/hr)

86.66
120
170

PG1

233.34
250
250

40
40
40

40
40
40

4728.225
5448.225
6222.225

Cost

C =5 m/s, K=2. (Weibull PDF parameters)
Kr=1 $/MW.hr, Kp=0 $/MW.hr.



E. The Effects of Wind Power Cost Coefficients
Next the variety of wind power cost coefficients and wind
speed factors will be investigated. So that their effects on the
output schedule of the generators and hence the total cost for
the base case 400 M W are presented as following.
The shape factor of wind speed probability Weibull distribution k = 2 and it is kept constant at this value. While the scale
factor c is changing between 5m/s to 25 m/s. The constant
direct costs of wind power from wind-powered generators
3 and 4 are 8 and 6 $/(M W.hr) respectively. For sake of
convenience, hereinafter the units will be dropped from these
coefficients.
1) The Effects of Reserve Cost Coefficient: First, assume
that the utility owns wind turbines, so that the penalty cost of
additional available wind power over scheduled power will be
0, and this also means the coefficient kp = 0 as it is derived
from equation (3).
Fig. 6 shows the result of PSO algorithm for the economic
dispatch of generators’ outputs as a function of the scale factor
of Weibull distribution of wind speed c for different values of
reserve cost coefficient kr .
When c scale factor of Weibull distribution of wind speed
increases, the reserve cost decreases. That can be verified
from Fig. 5. When c increases, the probability of wind power
decreases, then the reserve cost reduces as well. Thus, the

50
0
5

25

10

15
C Weibull scale factor

20

25

(b) kr =10

300

G1
G2
G3
G4

250
200
150
100
50
0
5

10

15

20

25

(c) kr =100
Fig. 6. Generators’ outputs vs. Weibull scale factor (c) for some values of
reserve cost in base case 400 M W

reserve cost reduces by increasing c, the scheduled outputs
of wind-powered generators will increase gradually as in
Fig. 6b. In Fig. 6c there is a small increase in wind-powered
generators form c =20 to c =25, it is a small change because
the reserve cost coefficient in this case relatively high kr =100.
2) Critical Reserve Cost Coefficient: Fig. 7 shows the
outputs of generators for a variation of reserve cost coefficient
kr for two values of scale factor c = 5 and c = 20 in order
to see where the critical change in wind power schedule
begins. In Fig. 7a when c=5, the critical change in wind
300

300

250
200

G1
G2
G3
G4

150
100
50
0

2

4

6
8
10
12
14
Kr Reserve cost factor when C=5

16

18

20

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

PG3
(MW)

100

C Weibull scale factor

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

PG2
(MW)

20

150

(a) kr =1

TABLE II

PG1
(MW)

15
C Weibull scale factor

200

250
200
150
100
50
0

5

10

15
20
25
30
35
Kr Reserve cost factor, C=20

40

45

50

(a) c=5
(b) c=20
Fig. 7. Generator outputs vs. reserve cost coefficient (kr ) for two values
of scale factor (c) in base case 400 M W

power schedule starts when kr = 6 for generator (3) and
kr = 8.6 for generator (4). The drop of outputs happens in
generators (3) before generator (4) because generator (3) has
a higher direct cost (8 $/M W.hr) than that of generator (4)
(6 $/M W.hr). While in the other case when c=20 as in Fig.
7b, the change of wind power scheduling occurs at higher
values of kr because in this case, the scale factor c of Weibull
distribution of wind speed has a higher value.
3) The Effects of Penalty Cost Coefficient: When kr = 0
and kp 6= 0, the schedule of generators as in Fig. 8a for
various values of kp remains constant for different values of
scale factor c. In this case it should get all available wind
power since there is a penalty cost for a surplus wind power.
Fig. 8b shows that penalty cost Cp =0, thereby all available
wind power is scheduled from both wind-powered generators
as Fig, 8a shows.
4) The Effects of The Reserve and Penalty Cost Coefficients:
The effect of both of the reserve and the penalty cost coefficients of the economic dispatch outcomes) is illustrated in

10

250
200
150

G1
G2
G3
G4

100
50
0

10

20

30

40

50

Kp Penalty cost factor,

60

70

80

90

Penalty Cost ($/MWh)

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

300

Cp3
8

Cp4

6
4
2
0

100

0

When C=5 or C=20

20

40

60

Kp Penalty cost factor,

80

100

when C=5 or C=20

(a) Generators’ Outputs
(b) Penalty Cost Cp
Fig. 8. Generators’ outputs and penalty cost Cp vs. penalty cost coefficient
kp for two values of scale factor c in base case 400M W

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

300
250
200

G1
G2
G3
G4

150
100
50
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scheduled Outputs(MW)

Fig. 9 for the base case with a scale factor c=5 and the wind
cost coefficients are not equal to zero (kr 6= 0 and kp 6= 0).
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

100

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Kp Penalty cost factor, C=5

Kp Penalty cost factor, C=5

R EFERENCES

(a) kr = 0
(b) kr = 60
Fig. 9. Generators’ outputs vs. penalty cost coefficient kp for some values
of reserve cost coefficient kr in the base case 400M W and c = 5m/s

When the reserve cost coefficient kr increases, the scheduled wind power decreases. Until no scheduled power comes
from wind-powered units when kr ≥ 60; because the high
value of kr makes the wind power to be not an economic
option. Thereby, all the scheduled power comes from thermalpowered units for any value of kp , as in Fig. 9b.
Fig. 10 can be considered as a part of Fig. 9 when kr=20
but now for two higher values of the scale factor c=10 and
c=20.
G1
G2
G3
G4

250
200
150
100
50
0

300

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

Scheduled Outputs (MW)

300

250
200
150
100
50
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Kp Penalty cost factor, Kr=20, C=10

90

100

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

electric power operators. The used model of the economic
dispatch that consideres the wind power uses the manipulation
of the probability of the underestimation and overestimation
of the availability of the wind power. It also takes into account
whether the utility owns wind turbines or not; these are the
main features of this model. The variations of wind speed
parameters and their impacts on the total cost investigated by
6-bus system, some valuable conclusions have been noticed.
The incremental reserve and penalty costs of the available
wind power can be compared to the incremental cost in the
conventional-thermal units that have a quadratic cost; this comparison could lead to useful simplifications of the economic
dispatch models that include thermal and wind power. PSO
algorithm needs some work on selecting proper parameters
and it also needs some further mathematical description for
its convergence.

80

90

100

Kp Penalty cost factor, Kr=20, C=20

(a) c = 10
(b) c = 20
Fig. 10. Generators’ outputs vs. penalty cost coefficient kp for two values
of scale factor c when kr =20

As it is shown in Fig. 10, with a higher scale factor c of the
probability distribution of wind speed, the outputs of windpowered generators become higher as well. Furthermore, Fig.
10a illustrates that the wind power outputs will increase with
higher values of the penalty cost coefficient kp .
This is what happens when the utility does not own the wind
turbine, therefore the scheduled wind power is produced as a
compromise between the penalty cost and the reserve cost of
wind power.
VI. C ONCLUSION
The PSO algorithm is appropriate for finding the optimal
economic dispatch of generators’ outputs that include windpowered generators. Moreover, PSO algorithm is simple and
easy to apply since it has fewer number of parameters to
deal with comparing to other modern optimization algorithms.
PSO can be applied in wind power bid marketing between

[1] C.-R. Wang, H.-J. Yuan, Z.-Q. Huang, J.-W. Zhang, and C.-J. Sun,
“A modified particle swarm optimization algorithm and its application
in optimal power flow problem,” in Proc. Int Machine Learning and
Cybernetics Conf, vol. 5, pp. 2885–2889, 2005.
[2] J. G. Vlachogiannis and K. Y. Lee, “Economic load dispatch—a comparative study on heuristic optimization techniques with an improved
coordinated aggregation-based pso,” vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 991–1001, 2009.
[3] M. R. AlRashidi, M. F. AlHajri, and M. E. El-Hawary, “Enhanced particle swarm optimization approach for solving the non-convex optimal
power flow,” World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology,
vol. 62, pp. 651–655, 2010.
[4] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, “Particle swarm optimization,” in Proc.
Conf. IEEE Int Neural Networks, vol. 4, pp. 1942–1948, 1995.
[5] R. Boqiang and J. Chuanwen, “A review on the economic dispatch
and risk management considering wind power in the power market,”
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 2169–
2174, 2009.
[6] J. Hetzer, D. C. Yu, and K. Bhattarai, “An economic dispatch model
incorporating wind power,” vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 603–611, 2008.
[7] A. J. Wood and B. F. Wollenberg, Power Generation, Operation and
Control. New York: Wiley, 2nd ed., 1996.
[8] L. Wang and C. Singh, “Pso-based multi-criteria economic dispatch
considering wind power penetration subject to dispatcher’s attitude,”
in Proc. 38th North American Power Symp. NAPS 2006, pp. 269–276,
2006.
[9] M. R. Patel, Wind and Solar Power Systems. CRC Press, 1999.
[10] Z.-L. Gaing, “Particle swarm optimization to solving the economic
dispatch considering the generator constraints,” vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1187–
1195, 2003.
[11] M. A. Abuella, “Study of particle swarm for optimal power flow in
ieee benchmark systems including wind power generators.” [Online].
Available: http://opensiuc.lib.siu.eud/theses, 2012.

BIOGRAPHIES
Mohamed A. Abuella (IEEE student member). He is a PhD student at
University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He received his Bachelor’s degree
from College of industrial Technology, Misurata, Libya in 2008, and MSc
degree from Southern Illinois University Carbondale in 2012. His research
interests are in planning and operations of power systems.
C.J. Hatziadoniu (IEEE M’87, SM’06). He is a professor of electrical and
computer engineering at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. His research
interests include power systems control and protection and application of
power electronics to power systems.

