A systematic approach to evaluating the influence of demand side management resources on the interarea capacity benefit margin

Bulletin of Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Vol. 8, No. 4, December 2019, pp. 1441~1450
ISSN: 2302-9285, DOI: 10.11591/eei.v8i4.1587  1441
Journal homepage: http://beei.org/index.php/EEI
A systematic approach to evaluating the influence of demand
side management resources on the interarea capacity
benefit margin
Olatunji Obalowu Mohammed1
, Mohd Wazir Mustafa2
, Daw Saleh Sasi Mohammed3
, Sani Salisu4
,
Nabila Ahmad Rufa’i5
1,2,3,4
School of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
1
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria
4
Department of Electrical Engineering, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
5
Department of Electrical Engineering, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Nigeria
Article Info ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received Mar 29, 2019
Revised May 27, 2019
Accepted Jun 19, 2019
Available transfer capability is an index to measure the security and
economic viability of an interconnected system. However, to accurately
determine this index, other associated parameters need to be accurately
evaluated. One of these parameters is the capacity benefit margin (CBM).
For efficient power generation reliability and sustainability, a certain amount
of supply capacity is commonly reserved by utilities, which in most cases
remain unused, to reduce the effect of generation outage. To minimize this
unused reserve, utilities usually reserve a predetermined amount of tie-line
capacity between interconnected areas to have access to external supply. This
tie-line reserved for this purpose is termed as capacity benefit margin
(CBM). In this paper a technique for computing CBM is used, the sensitivity
of CBM support from other areas to the increase in load in one of the areas is
investigated, and conclusively, demand side management is proposed to
improve the quantification of CBM. The contribution of this work is the
assessment of the CBMs support from other areas during a critical condition,
using the flexibility of DSM technique. The modified 24-bus IEEE reliability
test system is employed for the verification of the approach.
Keywords:
Capacity benefit margin
Demand side management
Generation reliability
Loss of load expectation
Copyright © 2019 Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science.
All rights reserved.
Corresponding Author:
Olatunji Obalowu Mohammed,
Department of Power System Engineering, School of Electrical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
81310 Johor Bahru. Malaysia.
Email: oomohammed2@live.utm.my
1. INTRODUCTION
Overestimation of available transfer capability (ATC) can lead to system instability which could
result to cascading collapse [1-4] and underestimation of ATC value capable of causing underutilization of
the power system resources which can subsequently lead to loss of capital as a result of ineffective marketing
operations [5]. For example, the major blackout in the North-eastern United States and Ontario in August
2003 was a result of an overestimation of ATC [4, 6]. Therefore, the consequence of under/over-estimation
of ATC has enormous adverse effects on the utility. Essentially, ATC is a measure of the transfer capability
remaining in the physical transmission network over and above already committed uses, for future
commercial activity [7]. The value of ATC is obtained by considering various parameters relating to power
transfer capabilities: total transfer capability (TTC), transmission reliability margin (TRM) and capacity
benefit margin (CBM). TTC is the summation of all the parameters (ATC+TRM+Existing transmission

 ISSN: 2302-9285
Bulletin of Electr Eng and Inf, Vol. 8, No. 4, December 2019 : 1441 – 1450
1442
commitment+CBM), TRM is the network margin reserved for system uncertainties while the CBM indicates
the transfer capability margin reserved for accidental generation outages [7, 8].
In order to maintain electricity supply reliability and sustainability, power utilities usually keep
some reserve capacity in case of an emergency power supply shortage due to generation outage or/and an
unexpected increase in power demand. Because this reserve capacity commonly remains unused, the reserve
capacities of interconnected areas can be reduced without degradation in generation reliability. This can be
achieved by providing margin in the interconnected tie-lines for the purpose of power interchange between
areas in an event of power shortage in any of the connected areas. This margin is termed as capacity benefit
margin (CBM). It is determined either by deterministic or probabilistic approaches [9]. Accurate evaluation
of CBM value is essential for available transfer capability (ATC) determination. Over/under-estimation of
CBM value can leads to inaccuracy of ATC results, which can respectively lead to ineffective utilization of
transmission system facilities and sudden generation deficiency in case of unexpected generator outages
[4, 10]. The CBMs of the interconnected areas are usually evaluated by using the reliability index, loss of
load expectation (LOLE). The LOLE is evaluated using the cumulative probability of the least capacity
outage that can result in loss of load due to insufficient generation for a given hourly peak load.
The LOLE is the average number of days or hours in a given period (usually one year) in which
there is a loss of load i.e. the daily peak load or hourly load is expected to exceed the available generating
capacity [11]. The value of LOLE authorized by the Mid-Atlantic Area Council (MAAC) is presently set at 1
day per 10 years (assumed to be 2.4 hours/year) as stipulated in the MAAC Reliability Principles and
Standards [12]. If the LOLE index of an area in an interconnected system is higher than the specified value
(2.4 hours/year), the area needs to improve its generation reliability by importing power from external areas
to meet the generation reliability requirement. However, if the area LOLE is less than the specified value, the
area is rich in generation capacity and it has the ability to export power to support other areas facing
power deficiency.
For more than a decade, various techniques have been proposed to evaluate CBM [9, 13-19]. The
simple technique used to calculate the CBM for interconnected areas is established by using trial and error
[9], by predefining 5% of the maximum transfer capability [20] or using an assumption of taking CBM as
zero [21, 22]. Sun et al. [15] proposed an exponential analytic model (EAM) to evaluate multi-area
generation reliability and sequential quadratic programming (SQP) is applied to find the CBM value
considering the loss of load probability (LOLP) criterion. Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) and differential
evolution (DE) is employed in [16] to determine the reliability index (LOLE) and CBM respectively. Othman
et al. [13] employed evolutionary programming (EP) and the cumulative probability of generation outage to
determine CBM and LOLE respectively. Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is used in [17, 18] to optimize
the three different objectives formulated for the evaluation of the CBM, the cumulative probability method is
also employed to evaluate LOLE. The first objective is to minimize the total LOLE of the interconnected
areas, the second objective is to minimize the deviation of the LOLE of the supporting areas from their base
case value and the third objective is to minimize the CBM of the interconnected areas. This is to provide
multiple options for the market participants to select from the various options based on their first priority.
The effect of wind power generation is incorporated in [18]. A Pareto-based evolutionary programming
method was employed in [14] to determine the CBM of the interconnected areas simultaneously. However,
most of these previous works use the LOLE criterion for the CBM evaluation, the LOLE is evaluated by
using the area peak load demand and the reserve capacity. The system peak demand usually occurs within a
few weeks in a year, therefore the long period of off-peak demand is not efficiently accounted for in the
LOLE evaluation. Therefore, the reliability of the areas can be improved by using demand side management
(DSM) activity to peak-shaved the load demand during the on-peak period and valley filled with the DSM
resources during the off-peak period.
In this paper, a probabilistic approach is used to compute LOLE of each area for reliability
assessment and a conventional method of computing interarea tie-line CBM is employed, the sensitivity of
other areas’ supply reliability to the change in load of one area is investigated, and finally DSM is proposed
to improve interarea generation reliability and tie-line CBM. The modified 24 bus IEEE reliability test
system is employed for the verification of the approach.
2. RESEARCH METHOD
In this section, LOLE computation using probabilities of capacity outages [23], CBM evaluation
procedures, the sensitivity of reliability index to power exchange and DSM techniques, are discussed.

Bulletin of Electr Eng and Inf ISSN: 2302-9285 
A systematic approach to evaluating the influence of demand side… (Olatunji Obalowu Mohammed)
1443
2.1. Probabilities of capacity outages
The capacity outage probabilities are commonly employed to compute LOLE. Capacity outage
probabilities of systems with identical generating units can be simply calculated by employing binomial
distribution [23]. However, it is impractical to use binomial distribution for practical systems because
practical systems contain non-identical generating units. Hence, the equivalent assisting unit technique is
employed to compute the probabilities of the capacity outages of various units. This method is robust and
uses a repetitive approach in which the units are sequentially added to give the complete representation of the
probability of capacity outage [23]. The individual unit capacity outage probability can be obtained using (1).
( )
( )
(1)
where, ( ): Capacity outage probability of the individual unit at state , : number of state for the capacity
outage, : the total number of states, A: system availability, U: system unavailability or forced outage
rate (FOR).
2.2. Computation of the lole and cbm evaluation
LOLE shows the expected risk of loss of load for a particular period under study, it indicates system
supply reliability and it is employed for the determination of CBM required for each area in an
interconnected system. It can be calculated using (2), which is the summation of all the capacity outage
probability that result in a capacity deficiency for a given forecasted demand at hour h.
∑ ( ) ( ) (2)
where, : the total number of hours considered, h: hours, : available capacity at hour h, : forecasted
demand at hour h, ( ): the probability of outage at the moment in which there is a risk of loss of
load. The procedure for CBM evaluation is as follows;
a. Following the determination of the available generation of all the interconnected areas and the peak
demand of each area, the base case LOLE is computed. Any area with LOLE above the specified value
(2.4 hr/year) indicates that in an event of generation outage, that particular area will experience loss of
load. Therefore it needs an additional external generation from other interconnected areas whose LOLE
are below the specified value. The areas with LOLE less than 2.4 hr/year are generation rich areas in
which in an event of generation outage they will be able to serve their local loads and in addition support
other areas. In this work, the area with LOLE above 2.4 hr/year is termed as deficient area while the area
with LOLE below 2.4 hr/year is termed as generation-rich area.
b. Improve the generation capacity of the deficient area until its LOLE is less than 2.4 hr/year by importing
power from other areas in incremental steps in inverse proportion to their LOLE, i.e. more power will be
exported from the area with lowest LOLE. After the improvement, the LOLE of every area is recalculated
if any area has LOLE above 2.4 hr/year, then its generation capacity is improved by importing power to
the area to bring down the LOLE to the specified value.
2.3. Sensitivity of lole of areas to a change in power in one area
In an interconnected system, where power interchange is used to alleviate the supply shortage
among areas, a change in power in one of the areas influences the LOLE of other areas and vice versa [15].
Therefore, the application of DSM in one area can influence the supply reliability of other areas.
2.4. Demand side management
The DSM technique is an efficient method which incorporates the economic benefit with system
reliability [24]. The use of DSM resources will improve reliability and mitigate network congestion [25]. In
this work, the basics of DSM techniques which are peak clipping and valley filling are employed to enhance
the generation reliability thereby improving the LOLE. The step involved in DSM application is as follows;
a. The peak load (usually within one week to three weeks) from the chronological load
curve is extracted.
b. The extracted peak load is converted to the load duration curve (LDC) for the probabilistic simulation of
DSM as the generating unit [26].
c. The peak clipping action gives a pre-specified percentage of the peak load i.e. the original peak load from
the chronological load curve has been reduced by a certain percentage to give the
pre-specified value.

 ISSN: 2302-9285
1444
d. The pre-specified value will be used to replace the original peak load in the chronological load curve
within the period in which it was extracted resulting in a modified chronological load curve having a
reduced peak load.
e. The modified three weeks load model will be incorporated back to the one year chronological
load model.
f. The new peak load in the whole system (one year) will now be used for the computation of LOLE.
g. During the off-peak period, the same amount of energy is refilled back into the system load but at a
different period of time.
In the modified chronological load model (MCLM), the peak load is restricted to a pre-specified.
The peak clipping and valley filling can be modelled using (3) [27], where Ps is pre-specified peak load of the
system which was obtained by the activities of the DSM.
̅ ( ) {
( ) ( )
(3)
[
∑ ( )
] (4)
where, ( ) is the original load model, ̅ ( ) is the MCLM, is the off-peak period during which the
clipped energy is refilled, represents the interval during which the energy is refilled, is the set of on-
peak hours during which the energy is reduced, K is the energy refilled at each hour of , b is the fraction of
the clipped that is recovered during off-peak hours, it actually depends on the customer demand in the off-
peak hours, h is the number of off-peak hours in [25, 27]. Finally, the MCLM will be used in the LOLE
computation, and this will subsequently enhance both the system reliability and the economic operation in an
interconnected power system.
3. DETAILS OF THE TEST SYSTEM
Modified three areas IEEE 24-bus RTS data [9] is employed for the implementation of the proposed
method. The complete data for the system can be found in [28, 29]. The details of the three areas are
highlighted in Table 1. Four units (1x400 MW, 3x155 MW) were added to Area 1 (A1) which make the
generation to increase from 1170 MW to 2035 MW, one unit (1x197 MW) was added to Area 2 (A2)
resulting in generation in A2 to increase from 1551 MW to 1748 MW and one unit (1x100 MW) was also
added to Area 3 (A3) which increases its generation from 684 MW to 784 MW. Their margin increases from
45 MW to 910 MW, 410 MW to 607 MW and 100 MW to 200 MW respectively as shown in Table 1. The
three area system is as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Modified IEEE 24-bus system

1445
Table 1. Details of the IEEE 24-bus three area RTS
Area Bus
Initial Generation
(MW)
Modified
Generation
(MW)
Load (MW)
Initial
Margin
(MW)
Modified
Margin (MW)
1
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
21, 24
1170 2035 1125 45 910
2
5, 6, 8, 9, 10,11, 12,
13, 20, 22, 23
1551 1748 1141 410 607
3 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 24 684 784 584 100 200
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
At the base case, after the modification of system generation, the total generation of A1 is 2035
MW, A2 is 1748 MW and A3 is 784 MW as shown in Table 1, and their respective LOLEs are 4.776
hours/year, 0.6375 hours/year and 0.6913 hours/year as shown in Table 2. It can be seen that the LOLE of A1
is above 2.4 hours/year, and the LOLE of A2 and A3 are below 2.4 hours/year. This indicates that A1 is a
deficient area and it requires external power generation to meet the generation reliability requirement in case
of generator outage, whereas A2 and A3 have the reserve capacity to support A1. Therefore, A2 and A3 need
to transfer power to A1 in order to compensate for the deficiency. The two generation-rich areas improve the
generation capacity of A1 by exporting power to A1 until its LOLE is lower than 2.4 hours/year as shown in
Table 3. Consequently, the CBM of A2 and A3 become -88 MW and -33 MW respectively. Hence, the
combine supports from the two supporting areas results in 121 MW value of CBM for A1, as the required
CBM to compensate for its deficiency. The generation capacity of all areas are therefore updated to 2156
MW, 1660 MW and 751 MW for A1, A2 and A3 respectively. The negative sign of the CBM in A2 and A3
shows that power is injected into an external area.
Table 2. The results of LOLEs of all areas for the
base case
Area Gen (MW) Load (MW) LOLE (hours/year)
1 2035 1125 4.7760
2 1748 1141 0.6375
3 784 584 0.6913
Table 3. The LOLE and CBM results by updating the
generation capacity of the areas
Area Gen (MW) CBM LOLE (hours/year)
1 2156 121 2.3972
2 1660 -86 1.3943
3 751 -35 1.3569
4.1. Sensitivity of the increase in load in area 2 to change in lole and cbm of all areas
It can be seen from Figure 2 that a successive increase in load in A2, leads to decrease in capacity
support from the area from 86 MW to 60 MW after which its LOLE value is violated, while the support from
A3 keep increasing from 35 MW to 57 MW after which its LOLE is violated, hence there is continuous
degradation in the supply reliability in all the areas until it reaches a point where the LOLE in A2 is violated
(LOLE>2.4 hour/year) as can be seen in Figure 3. Further increase in load in A2 leads to the violation of
LOLE in all the areas. The increase in load from 1211 MW to 1221 MW, causes 4 MW decrease in the
contribution to A1, this 4 MW could not be met by two areas (A2 and A3) and 100 MW is not enough for
generation reliability in A1 and therefore the LOLE of areas are violated. In this critical condition, it is
unrealistic to build another generating unit to support the deficiency because of the huge financial
implications involved. If the situation required 50% of the peak load, it is reasonable to build more
generating units, however, only 4 MW capacity is required to support the inadequacy. The most economical
way to solve the problem is by employing the activities of DSM in A2. A2 is used as a case study because it
contains renewable energy (hydro units) which is usually not fully utilized [26].

 ISSN: 2302-9285
1446
Figure 2. Effect of increase in load in area 2 on the CBM of all areas
Figure 3. Effect of increase in load in area 2 on the LOLE of all areas
4.2. The results of demand side management implementation
In this work, the DSM activities are performed in A2. The renewable energy units are employed to
peak-clipped the peak loads above the specified value of 1142.5 MW. The last three weeks of the year is
selected for the DSM implementation and a total of 14835 MWh energy is clipped during the on-peak hours
and the same amount of energy is filled during the off-peak hours. The specified value is 93.6% of the peak
demand (1221 MW) in A2, therefore, the peak demand within the three weeks is 93.6% of the peak demand.
However, the LOLE computation will scan through the whole year and pick up the most peak load in the
system which is 94.2% in week 49 [28], and this is equivalent to 1150.182 MW. The result of the DSM
actions on the chronological load model for the three weeks (504 hours) is depicted in Figure 4. The
influence of the DSM actions can be seen from Figure 5 and 6, the system load has improved the interarea
CBM and the LOLE of every area. The LOLEs of A2 and A3 are remarkably reduced, and the CBM
contribution from A2 has doubled (from 42 MW to 84 MW). As described in section 4.1, the continuous
increase in A2 demand results in reliability and CBM degradation such that the LOLE of all areas have been
violated. However, due to the peak clipping action of the DSM, the LOLE and CBM of all areas
are improved.
1141
1151
1161
1171
1181
1191
1201
1211
1221
121
121
120
116
116
115
114
114
100
-86
-84
-81
-72
-69
-65
-60
-57
-42
-35
-37
-39
-44
-47
-50
-54
-57
-58
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A2 load A1 CBM A2 CBM A3 CBM
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A1 LOLE A2 LOLE A3 LOLE

1447
Figure 4. The three weeks DSM implementation on the chronological load model
Figure 5. Effect DSM activities on interarea CBM
Figure 6. Effect DSM activities on the LOLE of areas
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400 1
16
31
46
61
76
91
106
121
136
151
166
181
196
211
226
241
256
271
286
301
316
331
346
361
376
391
406
421
436
451
466
481
496
DSM
BASE LOAD DSM_ LOAD
1141
1151
1161
1171
1181
1191
1201
1211
1221
1150,182
121
121
120
116
116
115
114
114
100
121
-86
-84
-81
-72
-69
-65
-60
-57
-42
-84
-35
-37
-39
-44
-47
-50
-54
-57
-58
-37
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A2 load A1 CBM A2 CBM A3 CBM
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A1 LOLE A2 LOLE A3 LOLE

 ISSN: 2302-9285
1448
5. CONCLUSION
This paper has presented a systematic approach to evaluating the influence of DSM resources on
interarea CBM and LOLE as indices for generation reliability. The sensitivity of CBM and LOLE to load
increase in A2 was investigated and the continuous increase in load in A2 results in LOLE and CBM
degradation in all areas. The DSM resources are used to improve the generation reliability in a critical
situation at which the CBM from A2 and A3 can no longer support A1. The contribution of this work is the
assessment of the CBMs support from A2 and A3 at a critical condition, using the flexibility of DSM
technique. This technique is beneficial economically to the utilities in strengthening the generation reliability,
it improves the reserve capacity during on-peak periods. It also contributes to congestion management, as the
heavy load in some part of the network can be reduced using load clipping actions of DSM, thereby lessen
the stress on the system components. The algorithm for the proposed method is developed in MATLAB
R2018a and Microsoft Excel 2013. IEEE 24-bus RTS is employed for the verification of the proposed
technique. The results indicate that DSM activities, specifically peak clipping, have a remarkable
contribution to CBM and LOLE improvement.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The remarkable technical support from Prof. M. W. Mustafa is highly appreciated. I would like to
acknowledge the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) for providing the facilities and enabling environment
which is quite imperative to research activities. This research is funded by Research University Grant of
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, under Grant Number: Q.J130000.2523.17H10.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Zhu, Optimization of power system operation. John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
[2] J. F. Smith, "Critical infrastructures at risk: Securing the European electric power system," ed: BERKELEY
ELECTRONIC PRESS 2809 TELEGRAPH AVENUE, STE 202, BERKELEY, CA 94705 USA, 2008.
[3] P. Kundur et al., "Definition and classification of power system stability IEEE/CIGRE joint task force on stability
terms and definitions,"in IEEE transactions on Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1387-1401, Aug. 2004.
[4] S. C. Savulescu, "A metric for quantifying the risk of blackout," IEEE PES Power Systems Conference and
Exposition, 2004., New York, NY, 2004, pp. 1661-1664 vol.3.
[5] O. O. Mohammed, M. W. Mustafa, D. S. S. Mohammed, and A. O. Otuoze, "Available transfer capability
calculation methods: A comprehensive review," International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems,
Research Article 2019.
[6] M. Jacobs, "of the largest power outages in history–and what they tell us about the 2003 northeast blackout.“,"
Union of Concerned Scientists, vol. 8, p. 2013.
[7] N. Rep, "Available transfer capability Definitions and determinations," North American Electric Reliability
Council (NERC), 1996.
[8] I. Dobson et al., "Electric power transfer capability: concepts, applications, sensitivity and uncertainty," PSERC
Publication, no. 01-34, 2001.
[9] Y. Ou and C. Singh, "Assessment of available transfer capability and margins," in IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 463-468, May 2002.
[10] A. Gheorghe, M. Masera, M. Weijnen, and L. De Vries, "Critical infrastructures at risk," Securing the European
electric power system, 2006.
[11] W. Li, “Reliability assessment of electric power systems using Monte Carlo methods”. Springer Science
& Business Media, 2013.
[12] A. P. Ford and W. L. Harm, "Market based adequacy: reliability and CBM/ATC calculations. An independent
system operator's perspective," 2002 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings
(Cat. No.02CH37309), New York, NY, USA, 2002, pp. 18-23 vol.1.
[13] M. M. Othman, A. Mohamed, and A. Hussain, "Available transfer capability assessment using evolutionary
programming based capacity benefit margin," International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 28,
no. 3, pp. 166-176, 2006.
[14] M. M. Othman, N. Abd Rahman, I. Musirin, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, and A. Rajabi-Ghahnavieh, "A Heuristic
Ranking Approach on Capacity Benefit Margin Determination Using Pareto-Based Evolutionary Programming
Technique," The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2015, 2015.
[15] R.-F. Sun, Y.-H. Song, and Y.-Z. Sun, "Capacity benefit margin assessment based on multi-area generation
reliability exponential analytic model," IET generation, transmission & distribution, vol. 2,
no. 4, pp. 610-620, 2008.
[16] R. Rajathy, R. Gnanadass, K. Manivannan, and H. Kumar, "Computation of capacity benefit margin using
differential evolution," International Journal of Computing Science and Mathematics, vol. 3,
no. 3, pp. 275-287, 2010.

1449
[17] M. Ramezani, M. Haghifam, C. Singh, H. Seifi and M. P. Moghaddam, "Determination of Capacity Benefit Margin
in Multiarea Power Systems Using Particle Swarm Optimization," in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.
24, no. 2, pp. 631-641, May 2009.
[18] M. Ramezani, H. Falaghi, and C. Singh, "Capacity benefit margin evaluation in multi-area power systems including
wind power generation using particle swarm optimization," in Wind Power Systems: Springer, 2010, pp. 105-123.
[19] N. B. A. Rahman, M. M. Othman, I. Musirin, A. Mohamed and A. Hussain, "Capacity Benefit Margin (CBM)
assessment incorporating tie-line reliability," 2010 4th International Power Engineering and Optimization
Conference (PEOCO), Shah Alam, 2010, pp. 337-344.
[20] Y. Liu, J. Wang, L. Zhang, and D. Zou, "Research on Effect of Renewable Energy Power Generation on Available
Transfer Capability," JSW, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 802-808, 2013.
[21] T. Akbari, A. Rahimikian, and A. Kazemi, "A multi-stage stochastic transmission expansion planning method,"
Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 2844-2853, 2011.
[22] H. Farahmand, M. Rashidinejad, A. Mousavi, A. Gharaveisi, M. Irving, and G. Taylor, "Hybrid mutation particle
swarm optimisation method for available transfer capability enhancement," International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 240-249, 2012.
[23] R. Allan, “Reliability evaluation of power systems”. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
[24] H. Daryabad, "Investigating the Effect of Demand Side Management on the Power System Reliability," Bulletin of
Electrical Engineering and Informatics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 96-102, 2015.
[25] Ming Zhou, Yajing Gao and Gengyin Li, "Study on improvement of available transfer capability by Demand Side
Management," 2008 Third International Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power
Technologies, Nanjing, 2008, pp. 545-550.
[26] A. Malik, "Simulation of DSM resources as generating units in probabilistic production costing framework," in
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1528-1533, 1998.
[27] M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad and R. Billinton, "Impact of load management on composite system reliability evaluation
short-term operating benefits," in IEEE Transactions on power systems, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 858-864, 2000.
[28] R. T. Force, "The IEEE reliability test system-1996,"in IEEE Trans. Power Syst, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1010-1020,
Aug. 1999.
[29] R. Billinton and R. N. Allan, “Reliability assessment of large electric power systems”. Springer Science &
Business Media, 2012.
BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS
Olatunji Obalowu Mohammed received the B.Eng. degree in Electrical Engineering from Bayero
University Kano, Kano State, Nigeria, and MSc in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from
Coventry University, Coventry, UK in 2010 and 2014 respectively. He is currently a Ph.D.
student at the School of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). He is
also currently a Lecturer at the Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, University
of Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. He is a registered Engineer with Council for the regulation of
engineering in Nigeria (COREN), Member of the Nigerian Society of Engineers (MNSE) and
IEEE member. His research area is on Energy efficiency, Demand side management, transfer
capability assessment, sustainability and control of Renewable energy and distributed system.
Mohd Wazir Mustafa received his B. Eng. Degree (1988), M. Sc. (1993) and PhD (1997) from
University of Strathclyde, Scotland, UK. He is currently a Professor and the Chair of the School
of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. He is a member of Institution of
Engineers, Malaysia (IEM) and a member of IEEE. His research interest includes power system
stability, FACTS, wireless power transmission and power system distribution automation. He
has published books, and has more than 300 publications in variouis Journals and conference
proceedings.
Daw Saleh Sasi Mohammed received his B. Eng. Degree (2004), M. Sc. (2010) and PhD (2017)
in Electrical Engineering from the University of Sirte Libya, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
(UTM), Universiti Technologi Mara respectively (UiTM). He is currently a Lecturer at TMC
college Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. In June 2006 until November 2007, he held a position as the
Head of Planning Department branch Sirte-Libya at the GECOL electric power utility. His
research interests are in energy efficiency, demand side management, transfer capability
assessment, reliability assessment and probabilistic study in power system.

 ISSN: 2302-9285
1450
Sani Salisu received the B.Eng. degree from Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna State,
Nigeria, and MSc in Renewable Energy Systems from Kingston University London, UK in 2010
and 2013 respectively. He is currently a Ph.D. student at the School of Electrical Engineering,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). He is also currently a Lecturer at the Department of
Electrical Engineering, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria. He is a
registered Engineer with Council for the regulation of engineering in Nigeria (COREN),
Member of the Nigerian Society of Engineers (MNSE) and IEEE student member. His research
area is on Renewable energy and distributed system.
Nabila Ahmed Rufa’i received her B.Eng. degree in Electrical Engineering from Bayero
University Kano, Kano State, Nigeria, and MSc. (Eng.) in Electrical Engineering and Renewable
Energy Systems from the University of Leeds, Leeds, UK in 2010 and 2013 respectively. She is
currently pursuing a PhD in Electronic and Electrical Engineering from the University of Leeds.
She is also currently a Lecturer at the Department of Electrical Engineering, Bayero University
Kano, Kano State, Nigeria. She is a member of the University of Leeds Institute of
Communications and Power Networks (ICaPNet). Her research area is on Microgrid modelling
and control in a weak grid.

A systematic approach to evaluating the influence of demand side management resources on the interarea capacity benefit margin

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Similar to A systematic approach to evaluating the influence of demand side management resources on the interarea capacity benefit margin (20)

More from journalBEEI (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A systematic approach to evaluating the influence of demand side management resources on the interarea capacity benefit margin