International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)

Approach of economic‐emission load dispatch

using Ant Lion Optimizer
Jorge de Almeida Brito Júnior1, Manoel Henrique Reis Nascimento 2, Carlos
Alberto Oliveira de Freitas3, Jandecy Cabral Leite4, Tirso Lorenzo Reyes
Carvajal5
1 Research department, Institute of Technology and Education Galileo of Amazon - ITEGAM, Manaus, AM, Brazil
Email: [email protected] m
2 Research department, Institute of Technology and Education Galileo of Amazon - ITEGAM, Manaus, AM, Brazil
Email: [email protected]
3 Research department, Institute of Technology and Education Galileo of Amazon - ITEGAM, Manaus, AM, Brazil
Email: [email protected]
4 Research department, Institute of Technology and Education Galileo of Amazon - ITEGAM, Manaus, AM, Brazil
Email: [email protected]
5 Research department, Institute of Technology and Education Galileo of Amazon - ITEGAM, Manaus, AM, Brazil
Email: [email protected]

Abstract— To solve the problem of the economic to be minimized (Chopra, Kumar, & Mehta, 2016). This
emission load dispatch (EELD) is necessary minimize the is a complex problem to solve because of its large size, a
total cost of fuel consumption and carbon emission. In nonlinear objective function and a wide number of
this study is applied the ant lion optimizer (ALO) to this restrictions (Bhattacharya & Chattopadhyay, 2010).
problem. The cost function and emission function with Various evolutionary, heuristic and meta-heuristics
their respective restrictions are being using. To present optimization algorithms have been developed such as:
the results this proposal is applied in IEEE 30 bus system Grey Wolf Optimization (GWO) (Chopra et al., 2016;
that consists of six thermal units. The results for this case Hong, MH, & Mohd Rusllim, 2014), non-dominated
study with the application of ant lion with all generators sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) (Basu, 2008; Moraes
on with demand being met, the total fuel cost is et al., 2018), hybrid genetic algorithm (Thenmozhi &
48915.36652 ($/h). The results this method can be Mary, 2004), Tabu Search Algorithm (Li, Yang, Tseng,
compared with another metaheuristic algorithms and Wang, & Lim, 2018), Simulated annealing (Júnior,
helps the plant operators in the decision making of Nunes, Nascimento, Rodríguez, & Leite, 2017; Ziane,
preventive maintenance. Benhamida, & Graa, 2017), Neural Networks (Deng, He,
Keywords— Ant lion Optimizer, EELD, Power Plants. & Zeng, 2017), Harmony Search Algorithm (El Ela, El-
Sehiemy, Shaheen, & Shalaby, 2017), particle swarm
I. INTRODUCTION optimization (De et al., 2018), Differential Evolution
The Thermal Power Plant (TPP) operation is dependent (Jebaraj, Venkatesan, Soubache, & Rajan, 2017), Ant
upon incineration of fossil fuel which generates sulfur Colony Optimization (Zhou et al., 2017), Biogeography-
dioxide (SO2 ), carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and nitrogen oxides Based Optimization (Ma, Yang, You, & Fei, 2017),
(NOx) which create atmospheric pollution. Reduce the genetic algorithm controlled by fuzzy logic (Song, Wang,
emission level and total cost of generation and at the same Wang, & Johns, 1997).
time accomplishing the demand for electricity from the This research use the emission function and economic
power plant is is the goal of economic emission load function in the multiobjective optimization ALO, with
dispatch (EELD). To solve the EELD problem is restrictions.
necessary minimize the total cost of fuel consumption and
carbon emissions (De, Das, Mandal, & Mandal, 2018; II. MATERIAL AND METHODS
Moraes, Bezerra, Moya Rodríguez, Nascimento, & Leite, To solve a problem of EELD, two important objectives in
2018). The problem is formulated as a multiobjective an electrical power system must be considered; they are:
economic emission load dispatch (EELD) problem in environmental, and economy impacts (Basu, 2014).
which both the objectives (emission and economy) have 2.1 Economic Load Dispatch

www.ijaers.com Page | 184

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
The fuel cost is considered as an essential criterion for where Pi is the output power of each i generator, PD is the
economics analysis in ELD. The most simplified cost load demand and PL are transmission losses, in other
function of each generator can be assumed to be words, the total power generation has to meet the total
approximated by a quadratic function of generator power demand PD and the actual power losses in transmission
output Pi (Ghosh, Chakraborty, Bhowmik, & lines PL (Dewangan, Jain, & Huddar, 2015).
𝑛
Bhattacharya, 2017; Jebaraj et al., 2017):
𝑁 ∑ 𝑃𝑖 = 𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃𝐿 (3)
𝐹1(𝑃𝑖 ) = ∑ (𝑎𝑖 + 𝑏𝑖 𝑃𝑖 + 𝑐𝑖 𝑃𝑖2 ) $/ℎ (1) 𝑖=1

𝑖 =1 The calculation of power losses PL involves the solution

where a i , b i and ci are the fuel cost coefficients of the ith of the load flow problem, which has equality constraints
unit generating, N the number of generators and Pi the in the active and reactive power on each bar as follows
active power of each generator. Fig. 1 illustrates the fuel (Nwulu & Xia, 2015):
𝑛
cost curve without valve-point effects and emissions.
𝑃 = ∑ 𝐵𝑖 𝑃𝑖2
𝐿
(4)
𝑖 =1
A simplification is applied to model the transmission
losses, setting them as a function of the generator output
through Kron’s loss coefficient derivatives of the Kron
formula for losses (Huang et al., 2018).
𝑛 𝑛 𝑛
𝐿
𝑃 = ∑ ∑ 𝑃𝑖 𝐵𝑖𝑗 𝑃𝑗 + ∑ 𝐵0𝑖 𝑃𝑖 + 𝐵00 (5)
𝑖=1 𝑗=1 𝑖 =1

where Bij , B0i and B00 are the energy loss coefficients in
the transmission network and n is the number of
generators. A reasonable accuracy can be obtained when
the actual operating conditions are close to the base case,
where the B coefficients were obtained (Gitizadeh &
Ghavidel, 2014).
2.3.2 Production Capacity Constraint
Fig.1: Fuel cost and emission function of the thermal The power capacity total generated from each generator is
generator. restricted by the lower limit and by the upper limit, so the
Source: (Gitizadeh & Ghavidel, 2014) constrain is (De et al., 2018):
𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑛 .𝑖 ≤ 𝑃𝑖 ≤ 𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 .𝑖 (6)
2.2 Economic Emission Dispatch where Pi is the output power of the i generator, Pmin.i , is
Emissions can be represented by a function, that links the minimal power of the i generator and Pmax.i , the
emissions with power generated by each unit. The maximal power of the i generator.
emission function in kg/h, which normally represents the 2.3.3 Fuel Delivery Constraint
emission of SO2 and NOx, is a function of the power At each time interval, the amount of fuel supplied to all
output of the generator, and it can be expressed as follows units must be less than or equal to the fuel supplied by the
(Swain, Sarkar, Meher, & Chanda, 2017): seller, i.e. the fuel delivered to each unit in each interval
𝑁 should be within its lower limit Fmin,i and its upper limit
𝐹2(𝑃𝑖 ) = ∑ (𝑑 𝑖 + 𝑒𝑖 𝑃𝑖 + 𝑓𝑖 𝑃𝑖2 ) 𝑘𝑔/ℎ (2) Fmax,i so that (Qu et al., 2018):
𝑖 =1 𝐹𝑚𝑖𝑛 .𝑖 ≤ 𝐹𝑖𝑚 ≤ 𝐹𝑚𝑎𝑥 .𝑖 , 𝑖 ∈ 𝑁 , 𝑚 ∈ 𝑀, (7)
Where d i , ei and fi are the emission coefficients of the ith where Fi,m is the fuel supplied to the engine i at the interval
unit generating, N the number of generators and Pi the m, Fi,min is the minimum amount of fuel supplied to i
active power of each generator, from the TPP. generator and Fmax,i is the maximum amount of fuel
2.3 Economical load dispatch constrains supplied to i generator.
2.3.1 Equality power balance constraint 2.3.4 Optimization problem
The real power of each generator is limited by the lower The multi-objective optimization problem is defined as
and upper limits. The following equation is the equality follow:
restriction of power balance (Rizk-Allah, El-Sehiemy, & 𝑀𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑧𝑒 (𝑃 ) = [ 𝐹1 (𝑃) , 𝐹2 (𝑃) ] (8)
Wang, 2018). where F1 (P), F2 (P) are the objective functions to be
𝑛
minimized over the set of permissible decision vector P.
∑ 𝑃𝑖 − 𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃𝐿 (2)
2.3.5 Incremental fuel cost method
𝑖 =1

www.ijaers.com Page | 185

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
The incremental fuel cost can be obtained from the where 𝑐𝑖𝑡 is the minimum of i-th variable at t-th iteration,
following equation (Tiwari, Dave, & Dwivedi, 2017): 𝑑 𝑖𝑡 indicates the maximum of i-th variable at t-th iteration,
𝐼𝐶𝑖 = (2. 𝑎𝑖 . 𝑃𝑔 𝑖 + 𝑏𝑖 ) $/𝑀𝑊ℎ (9) 𝑎𝑖 is the minimum of random walk of i-th variable, and 𝑏𝑖
where ICi is the incremental fuel cost a i are the values of is the maximum of random walk in i-th variable.
the different points of the actual curve of the incremental To simulate the trapping of ants the mathematical
cost and b i are the values of the points on the expression of the trapping of the ants to the ant lion’s pits
approximated curve (linear) of incremental cost. Pgi is the is given by following equations (Trivedi et al., 2016):
𝑡
total power generation. The curve of incremental fuel cost 𝑐𝑚 = 𝐴𝑛𝑡 − 𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑡 − 𝑐 𝑡 (13)
𝑡 𝑡 𝑡
is show in the following Figure. 2: 𝑑 𝑚 = 𝐴𝑛𝑡 − 𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑛 − 𝑑 (14)
To construction of trap, the fittest ant lion is selected
using the roulette wheel method.
To simulate the sliding ants towards ant lions, the
boundaries of random walks should be reduced adaptively
as follows (Mirjalili, 2015):
𝑐𝑡
𝑐𝑡 = (15)
𝐼
𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝑡 = (16)
𝐼
𝑡
where 𝐼 = 10𝑤 , t is current iteration, S is the maximum
𝑠
number of iterations and w is a constant whose value is
given by (Raju, Saikia, & Sinha, 2016):
Fig.2: Incremental Cost Curve of Power Generator. 2 𝑖𝑓 𝑡 > 0.1𝑆
Source:(Nascimento, Nunes, Rodríguez, Leite, & Junior, 3 𝑖𝑓 𝑡 > 0.5𝑆
𝑤= 4 𝑖𝑓 𝑡 > 0.75𝑆 (17)
2016)
5 𝑖𝑓 𝑡 > 0.9𝑆
{6 𝑖𝑓 𝑡 > 0.95𝑆
2.4 Ant lion optimization
To catching the ants by ant lion and re-building the pit can
The Ant Lion Optimizer (ALO) is a algorithm ins pired
be mathematically described as [28]:
by nature (Mirjalili, 2015). The ALO algorithm mimics
𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑗𝑡 = 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡 , 𝑖𝑓 𝑓( 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡 ) > 𝑓(𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑗𝑡 ) (18)
interaction between antlions and ants in the trap. To model
such interactions, ants are required to move over the where 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑗𝑡 indicates the position of selected jth ant
search space, and antlions are allowed to hunt them and lion at tth iteration and 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡 shows the position of ith ant
become fitter using traps. Since ants move stochastically at tth iteration. t shows the current iteration.
in nature when searching for food, a random walk is Finally the last operator in ALO, that is elitism, calculated
chosen for modelling ants’ movement as follows [28]: using roulette wheel as follows equation (Trivedi et al.,
2016):
𝑅𝐴𝑡 + 𝑅𝐸𝑡
𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡 = (19)
where cumsum calculates the cumulative sum, n is the 2
maximum number of iteration, t shows the step of random where, 𝑅𝐴𝑡 = the random walk nearby the ant lion chose by
walk (iteration in this study), and r(t) is a stochastic means of the roulette wheel at t th iteration, 𝑅𝐸𝑡 = the
function defined as follows (Trivedi, Jangir, & Parmar, random walk nearby the elite at t th iteration, 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡 = the
2016): location of ith ant at tth iteration.
1 𝑖𝑓 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 > 0.5 2.5 ALO applied to EELD
𝑟 (𝑡) = { (11) Initialize random walks on ants using Eq (10) and save
0 𝑖𝑓 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
where t shows the step of random walk (iteration in this generation scheduling of generating units as ant position
study) and rand is a random number generated with using Eq (20) described below:
uniform distribution in the interval of [0, 1].
To keep the random walk in the boundaries of the search
space and prevent the ants from overshooting, the random
walks should be normalized using the following equatio n
(Yao & Wang, 2017): where 𝑀𝐴𝑛𝑡 is the matrix for saving the position of each
(𝑋𝑖𝑡 −𝑎 𝑖)×(𝑑𝑡𝑖 −𝑐 𝑡𝑖 )
𝑋𝑖𝑡 = + 𝑐𝑖𝑡 (12) ant, 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖,𝑗 shows the value of the jth variable (dimension)
(𝑏𝑖−𝑎 𝑖)
of ith ant, n is the number of ants, and d is the number of
variables.

www.ijaers.com Page | 186

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
For evaluating each ant (i.e., generating units), the
following objective functions described in Eq. (1) and Eq
(2) are utilized during optimization and following matrix
stores the fitness value of all ants:

where 𝑀𝑂𝐴 is the matrix for saving the fitness of each ant,
𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖 ,𝑗 shows the value of jth dimension of ith ant, n is the
number of ants, and f is the objective function.
Save the optimal cost and generation scheduling using
Eqs. (22) and (23) described below:

where 𝑀𝑂𝐴𝐿 is the matrix for saving the fitness of each ant
lion, 𝐴𝐿𝑖,𝑗 shows the jth dimension’s value of ith ant lion, Fig.3: Diagram of IEEE 30-bus test system.
Source: (Lee & Darwish, 2008)
n is the number of ant lions, and f is the objective function.
This solution comprises the number of generations of
The data of IEEE 30 bus test system to apply in ALO
the system that will be optimized, which results in
optimizer is presented in table 1, table 2 and table 3.
minimization of cost and emissions described in Eq (8) by
fulfilling all constraints described in Eq (3), Eq (6) and Eq
Table.1: Characteristic data of the generators from the
(7).
case study power plants.
Equation (8) are applied in the performance evaluation
Gen ci bi ai Pmin Pmax
of the EELD until the optimum cost and emission is
($/MW ($/M ($/h) (MW (MW
achieved. For inequality constraints, similar to any other 2 h) Wh) ) )
techniques, when the solutions obtained for any iteration
0.1524 38.539 756.79 10 125
are out of boundaries, ALO chooses the boundaries values,
G1 7 73 886
while for equality constraint, when it is violated, the
0.1058 46.159 451.32 10 150
penalty factor of 1000 is implemented and embedded in
G2 7 16 513
the cost function as per Eq. (8). The algorithm will
0.0280 40.396 1049.3 40 250
continue until the maximum iteration is met, and the
G3 3 55 2513
optimum results are obtained.
0.0354 38.305 1243.5 35 210
III. SIMULATION TESTS AND RESUTS
G4 6 53 311
The power plant selected for the case study consists of six
0.0211 36.327 1658.5 130 325
generating units with a load demand of 900 MW where
G5 1 82 696
generation limits, fuel cost and emission coefficients for
0.0179 38.270 1376.2 125 315
case study is take from Ref (Lee & Darwish, 2008;
G6 9 41 7041
Manteaw & Odero, 2012).
Source: (Manteaw & Odero, 2012)
The EELD problem simulated with the ALO algorithm,
the systems of standard IEEE 30 bus systems have been
taken into consideration (figure 3).

Table.2: Coefficients of emission of the 6 generating unit.

Unit di ei fi
G1 0.00419 0.32767 13.85932
G2 0.00419 0.32767 13.85932

www.ijaers.com Page | 187

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
0.00683 -0.54551 40.2669 Source: Authors.
G3
0.00683 -0.54551 40.2669
G4 The graphics with power, emission and cost are presented
0.00461 -0.51116 42.89553 in figure 5, 6 and 7 respectively.
G5
0.00461 -0.51116 42.89553
G6
Source: (Manteaw & Odero, 2012)

Table.3: Loss coefficients (x10 -6 ).

2022 -286 -534 -565 -454 -103
-286 3243 16 -307 -422 -147
-535 16 2085 831 23 -270
-565 -307 831 1129 113 -295
-454 -422 23 113 460 -153
-103 -147 -270 -295 -153 898
Source: (Manteaw & Odero, 2012)
The results after running the simulation of the proposed
ALO algorithm, are displayed in Tables 4.The simulation
of the proposed ALO algorithm is tested in MATLAB Fig.5: Power generated in each generator.
R2016 to meet the demand of 900MW. Source: Authors.

Table.4: Coefficients of emission of the 6 generating

unit.
Ge Power of Emission of Cost of each
ner each each engine engine in $/h
ato generator in in Kg/h
r Mw
G1 125 8238.41182 7956.60886
G2 92.7026704 3382.26922 5640.22656
G3 86.4365762 4403.87432 4750.48463
G4 151.819543 23857.7694 7876.38287
G5 240.571054 64104.5546 11619.7208
G6 229.179195 55417.1514 11071.9428
Tot 925.709039 159404.0308 48915.36652
al
Source: Authors Fig.6: Emission in each generator.
Source: Authors.
The graphics with pareto front of costs versus emissions
and the using all generators is presented in fig. 4.

Fig.7: Cost of each generator.

Fig.4: Pareto front of cost vs emission. Source: Authors.

www.ijaers.com Page | 188

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
IV. CONCLUSION solution for the economic emission load dispatch in
The ant lion optimizer is successfully applied to a 30 bus power system operations. Paper presented at the
test system, to solve the EELD problem, so now it is 2017 7th International Conference on Power
possible to use these results to compare with other Systems (ICPS).
techniques that apply to this same IEEE bus test system [10] Gitizadeh, M., & Ghavidel, S. (2014). Improving
system. This application can also help workers to operate transient stability with multi-objective allocation and
more efficiently the generators in a power plant. parameter setting of SVC in a multi-machine power
system. IETE Journal of Research, 60(1), 33-41.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS [11] Hong, M. S., MH, S., & Mohd Rusllim, M. (2014).
To the Institute of Technology and Education “Galileo” An application of grey wolf optimizer for solving
from Amazonia (ITEGAM), The Federal University of combined economic emission dispatch problems.
Para (UFPA), The Research Support Foundation State of International Review on Modelling and Simulations
Amazonas (FAPEAM) for the financial support to this (IREMOS), 7(5), 838-844.
research. [12] Huang, W.-T., Yao, K.-C., Chen, M.-K., Wang, F.-
Y., Zhu, C.-H., Chang, Y.-R., . . . Ho, Y.-H. (2018).
REFERENCES Derivation and Application of a New Transmission
[1] Basu, M. (2008). Dynamic economic emission Loss Formula for Power System Economic
dispatch using nondominated sorting genetic Dispatch. Energies, 11(2), 417.
algorithm-II. International Journal of Electrical [13] Jebaraj, L., Venkatesan, C., Soubache, I., & Rajan,
Power & Energy Systems, 30(2), 140-149. C. C. A. (2017). Application of differential
[2] Basu, M. (2014). Fuel constrained economic evolution algorithm in static and dynamic economic
emission dispatch using nondominated sorting or emission dispatch problem: a review. Renewable
genetic algorithm-II. Energy, 78, 649-664. and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 77, 1206-1220.
[3] Bhattacharya, A., & Chattopadhyay, P. K. (2010). [14] Júnior, J. d. A. B., Nunes, M. V. A., Nascimento, M.
Application of biogeography-based optimization for H. R., Rodríguez, J. L. M., & Leite, J. C. (2017).
solving multi-objective economic emission load Solution to economic emission load dispatch by
dispatch problems. Electric Power Components and simulated annealing: case study. Electrical
Systems, 38(3), 340-365. Engineering, 1-13.
[4] Chopra, N., Kumar, G., & Mehta, S. (2016). Multi- [15] Lee, J. Y., & Darwish, A. H. (2008). Multi-objective
objective Economic Emission Load Dispatch using environmental/economic dispatch using the bees
Grey Wolf Optimization. International Journal of algorithm with weighted sum. Paper presented at the
Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 3(11). EKC2008 Proceedings of the EU-Korea Conference
[5] De, M., Das, G., Mandal, S., & Mandal, K. (2018). on Science and Technology.
Investigating economic emission dispatch problem [16] Li, L., Yang, Y., Tseng, M.-L., Wang, C.-H., & Lim,
using improved particle swarm optimization M. K. (2018). A novel method to solve sustainable
technique Industry Interactive Innovations in economic power loading dispatch problem.
Science, Engineering and Technology (pp. 37-45): Industrial Management & Data Systems, 118(4),
Springer. 806-827.
[6] Deng, T., He, X., & Zeng, Z. (2017). Recurrent [17] Ma, H., Yang, Z., You, P., & Fei, M. (2017). Multi-
neural network for combined economic and objective biogeography-based optimization for
emission dispatch. Applied Intelligence, 1-19. dynamic economic emission load dispatch
[7] Dewangan, S. K., Jain, A., & Huddar, A. (2015). A considering plug-in electric vehicles charging.
traditional approach to solve economic load dispatch Energy, 135, 101-111.
problem considering the generator constraints. IOSR [18] Manteaw, E. D., & Odero, N. A. (2012). Multi-
Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, objective environmental/economic dispatch solution
10(2), 27-32. using ABC_PSO hybrid algorithm. International
[8] El Ela, A. A., El-Sehiemy, R. A., Shaheen, A., & Journal of Scientific and Research Publicatio ns,
Shalaby, A. (2017). Application of the crow search 2(12).
algorithm for economic environmental dispatch. [19] Mirjalili, S. (2015). The ant lion optimizer.
Paper presented at the Power Systems Conference Advances in Engineering Software, 83, 80-98.
(MEPCON), 2017 Nineteenth International Middle [20] Moraes, N. M., Bezerra, U. H., Moya Rodríguez, J.
East. L., Nascimento, M. H. R., & Leite, J. C. (2018). A
[9] Ghosh, B., Chakraborty, A. K., Bhowmik, A. R., & new approach to economic‐emission load dispatch
Bhattacharya, A. (2017). Krill Herd algorithm

www.ijaers.com Page | 189

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science (IJAERS) [Vol -5, Issue-7, July- 2018]
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.5.7.26 ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
using NSGA II. Case study. International [32] Zhou, J., Wang, C., Li, Y., Wang, P., Li, C., Lu, P.,
Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems, e2626. & Mo, L. (2017). A multi-objective multi-
[21] Nascimento, M. H. R., Nunes, M. V. A., Rodríguez, population ant colony optimization for economic
J. L. M., Leite, J. C., & Junior, J. A. B. (2016). New emission dispatch considering power system
solution for resolution of the Economic Load security. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 45, 684-
Dispatch by different mathematical optimization 704.
methods, turning off the less efficient generators. [33] Ziane, I., Benhamida, F., & Graa, A. (2017).
[22] Nwulu, N. I., & Xia, X. (2015). Multi-objective Simulated annealing algorithm for combined
dynamic economic emission dispatch of electric economic and emission power dispatch using
power generation integrated with game theory based max/max price penalty factor. Neural Computing
demand response programs. Energy Conversion and and Applications, 28(1), 197-205.
Management, 89, 963-974.
[23] Qu, B., Zhu, Y., Jiao, Y., Wu, M., Suganthan, P., &
Liang, J. (2018). A survey on multi-objective
evolutionary algorithms for the solution of the
environmental/economic dispatch problems. Swarm
and Evolutionary Computation, 38, 1-11.
[24] Raju, M., Saikia, L. C., & Sinha, N. (2016).
Automatic generation control of a multi-area system
using ant lion optimizer algorithm based PID plus
second order derivative controller. International
Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 80,
52-63.
[25] Rizk-Allah, R. M., El-Sehiemy, R. A., & Wang, G.-
G. (2018). A novel parallel hurricane optimization
algorithm for secure emission/economic load
dispatch solution. Applied Soft Computing, 63, 206-
222.
[26] Song, Y., Wang, G., Wang, P., & Johns, A. (1997).
Environmental/economic dispatch using fuzzy logic
controlled genetic algorithms. IEE Proceedings-
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, 144(4),
377-382.
[27] Swain, R., Sarkar, P., Meher, K. C., & Chanda, C.
K. (2017). Population variant differential evolution–
based multiobjective economic emission load
dispatch. International Transactions on Electrical
Energy Systems, 27(10), e2378.
[28] Thenmozhi, N., & Mary, D. (2004). Economic
emission load dispatch using hybrid genetic
algorithm. Paper presented at the TENCON 2004.
2004 IEEE Region 10 Conference.
[29] Tiwari, S., Dave, M., & Dwivedi, B. (2017).
Economic load dispatch using particle swarm
optimization: LAP LAMBERT Academic
Publishing.
[30] Trivedi, I. N., Jangir, P., & Parmar, S. A. (2016).
Optimal power flow with enhancement of voltage
stability and reduction of power loss using ant-lion
optimizer. Cogent engineering, 3(1), 1208942.
[31] Yao, P., & Wang, H. (2017). Dynamic Adaptive Ant
Lion Optimizer applied to route planning for
unmanned aerial vehicle. Soft Computing, 21(18),
5475-5488.

www.ijaers.com Page | 190