Smart Load Management with Energy Storage for Power Quality Enhancement in Wind-Powered Oil and Gas Applications

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reviewer's recommendations:

1.       Figure 1, Figure 2, figure 3: the letters of the text are too small, especially in wind speed diagram (Figure 1).

2.       Let the authors briefly explain how it can be “assumed the energy management system will maintain a minimum SOC to guarantee inertial support to the electrical grid.”

3.       In Discussion and further work, the authors mentioned only the advantages of the new proposed model. Is there any disadvantage of this model comparing to existing models?

Author Response

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the reviewer for the time spent with our manuscript and the constructive comments. Those were important to improve the quality of our work.

We kindly ask the reviewer to refer to our response letter attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In my opinion it is a good paper, well organized and with enough references. English language is also fine.

The authors propose a control algorithm that is incorporated in a system with smart load management and energy storage to mitigate the negative effects that loads and wind power variability have on the electrical system frequency and voltage. The developed system goal is to provide a solution to improve the power quality in an offshore oil and gas platform operating in island mode. The control solution is simulated in Matlab and the results and analysis made in the paper validate the system developed by the authors.

The quality of the paper is interesting from the point of view of the content, and it is also a topic of interest for the researchers in the related areas, and I think it has never been published.

My only concern about the paper is that there are many other solutions to the same problem and I am not clarified with two things:  firstly, the wind turbine challenges in OOGPs are like the ones that exist in land (sharp load variations, intermittent wind, balance between demand and supply, …). Authors must emphasize the differences and explain what distinguish a control scheme made to operate in land and OOGP and show what must be adapted or added to the OOGP system that is different from what is made in land turbines. The second thing is, what part of authors work is different from the others? What elements in the control chain have been changed or added compared to other existing solutions? Authors must clearly distinguish their added value to the state of the art.  

Thus, in my opinion the manuscript only needs some clarifications before acceptance for publication.

Small Comments

-          Line 58, is it the wind speed/power and loads forecasted, or the system adapt itself in real time? If it is not, the wind speed and loads forecast would benefit the system? Please provide some statements about it.

Author Response

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the reviewer for the time spent with our manuscript and the constructive comments. Those were important to improve the quality of our work. Not least, we would like also to thank for the positive feedback about our manuscript.

We kindly ask the reviewer to refer to our response letter attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper investigates power quality issues in a wind-powered offshore oil and gas platform operating in island mode, discussing how smart load management together with energy storage can mitigate the negative effects related to loads and wind power variability. Some results on the considered case study are presented and discussed.

In my opinion the work is enough clear and well written.

I only have a question: To what extent the proposed approach and models can be generalized? Are the proposed methodology and developed models system dependent, i.e. are they valid only for the considered case study, or do they have a more general validity?

Author Response

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the reviewer for the time spent with our manuscript and the constructive comments. Those were important to improve the quality of our work. Not least, we would like also to thank for the positive feedback about our manuscript.

We kindly ask the reviewer to refer to our response letter attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

•The authors need to describe and differentiate clearly with examples of two load types, i.e., the fix load and the flexible load in the context of offshore oil and gas platforms (OOGPs).

The authors need to give information about the flexible loads consumption model which follows the wind power production.

•The authors need to briefly explain the smart energy management method adopted from [10]. Since they propose to combine existing smart energy management method with their ESS.

•The authors just simply mention that wind turbines is started at t period at the simulation. How about the production rate, is follow any distribution?

•The evaluation method and results are not clear.

  - •Is flexible load or fix load? Just simple on/off load management?

  - •Effect of wind power production, smart load management, and ESS could not clearly detected.

•The authors need to modify and add more evaluation scenario

* for the simulation part, it would be better to include the settings of simulation as well as the purpose of the experiment.

Author Response

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the reviewer for the time spent with our manuscript and the constructive comments. Those were important to improve the quality of our work.

We kindly ask the reviewer to refer to our response letter attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors made many improvements by well handling of all the comments. The main contribution of the author is the simplified dynamic model of the hybrid energy systems (HES), however, one important thing is still missing, that is, the comparison of their proposed model to existing method on this matter. More information needs to be added to show that their method is comparable and have a scientific contribution.

1.       The authors handle our comment on wind turbine model by

introducing the wind speed dataset. Is the wind speed dataset for the wind turbine model, including the cut-in speed, nominal speed, and cut-out speed for the power curve that mentioned in line 77 to 81 measured by the authors? If not, please add the reference.

 

2.       The authors describe and give examples of both fixed and

flexible load model, by mentioning a similar type of load in line 84 to 91 and for the flexible load can be controlled by EMS. However, we can not find such a component in Figure 1 that represents EMS. It would be better for the author to include the EMS component in their electrical power system, and provide a flow-chart to explain how this EMS works on their smart EMS with ESS.

 

3.       The authors provide several examples of such forecasting

algorithms in line 109, to explain more about short time load forecasting, however, not all references represent a short time load forecasting method. Since each load forecasting method, very short-time interval (VSLF, 1s-1h), short-time (SLF, 1h-1day), etc have a different purpose, it would be better to change the references to the appropriate one.

Author Response

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the reviewer for the time spent with our manuscript and the constructive comments. Those were important to improve the quality of our work. Not least, we would like also to thank for the positive feedback about our manuscript.

We kindly ask the reviewer to refer to our response letter attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx