Research Article
Charge Scheduling of an Energy Storage System under Time-of-Use Pricing and a Demand Charge
Table 5
Comparison between MSM and RCGA.
| Case | MSM | RCGA | Ave. cost (Std.) | Saving | Ave. cost (Std.) | Saving |
| 1 | 67.31 (0.60) | 20 | 63.87 (0.63) | 24 | 2 | 65.99 (0.60) | 20 | 62.90 (0.61) | 24 | 3 | 91.59 (0.77) | 12 | 86.19 (1.09) | 18 | 4 | 100.04 (0.71) | 10 | 98.32 (1.09) | 12 | 5 | 155.49 (0.84) | 16 | 150.08 (0.97) | 19 | 6 | 146.52 (0.96) | 17 | 140.67 (1.22) | 20 | 7 | 202.14 (0.77) | 10 | 197.37 (0.74) | 13 | 8 | 212.02 (0.74) | 9 | 207.44 (0.69) | 11 | 9 | 76.37 (0.82) | 19 | 71.75 (0.72) | 24 | 10 | 75.00 (0.73) | 19 | 70.43 (0.76) | 24 | 11 | 102.51 (0.78) | 11 | 96.32 (1.20) | 16 | 12 | 110.77 (0.87) | 9 | 108.42 (1.31) | 11 | 13 | 170.30 (1.06) | 15 | 163.75 (1.26) | 19 | 14 | 160.89 (1.04) | 16 | 153.75 (1.33) | 20 | 15 | 217.18 (0.83) | 10 | 211.49 (1.09) | 12 | 16 | 226.66 (0.88) | 9 | 221.26 (0.90) | 11 |
|
|
The average costs in US cents are obtained over 100 runs.
|