Optimal Energy Configuration of Integrated Energy Community Considering Carbon Emission

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission

Manuscript #: sustainability-2740665

This paper tries to explore the optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community. To the contents and results of this paper, I propose some questions and suggestions as follows:

1.      What is the novelty of this paper? What is the difference from the existing studies?

2.      The contributions and purpose of this paper are unclear. What is the important of this paper?

3.      In the section 2.1, the statements lack the support of the existing studies.

4.      The policy related implications are limited. This study needs to provide more specific and operational suggestions.

5.      What are the full names of SPEA2 and TOPSIS?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work. We are very grateful to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions on our paper, which are of great help to our paper improvement. We have modified our paper according to the reviewer's comments, and used word's revision mode in the revised manuscript to record our deletion. We have also carried out grammar checks and revisions to our papers to improve their readability and accuracy. We hope the revised paper would satisfy you. Below are our point-by-point responses to reviewer comments:

Point 1: What is the novelty of this paper? What is the difference from the existing studies?

Response 1:

Differences from existing research:

By consulting a large number of domestic and foreign reference materials, it is found that currently, in the integrated energy community energy management system, there has been a lot of research on shared energy storage, but there is a lack of multi-energy sharing research; in terms of research on integrated energy community operations, the main focus is on In the business model and economic dispatch, more economic and technical indicators are considered, while its environmental benefits are ignored. At the same time, there are few studies in the existing literature that apply multiple energy sharing and energy storage sharing to the community level.

The novelty of this paper lies in:

(1) Based on the concept of sharing, a multi-energy and energy storage sharing operation model of an integrated energy community has been constructed, which can realize unified deployment and control of energy in the community and reduce the energy allocation cost and carbon emissions of the community.

(2) A comprehensive energy system with complementary electricity, gas, cold and heat is an important direction for the development of distributed energy systems in the future. Compared with traditional equipment such as micro gas turbines, this article uses solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) as a comprehensive energy source. The core thermoelectric power equipment of the community has the advantages of high energy utilization rate, good waste heat quality, and low carbon emissions, which can improve the energy utilization efficiency and environmental benefits of the integrated energy community.

(3) This paper studies the shared operation model and comprehensive energy management strategy of the integrated energy community, taking into account the economy and environment, establishing a dual-objective optimal allocation model, and converting it into a single-objective decision-making problem through the ε-constraint method. The Big-M method and McCormick relaxation method linearize the nonlinear constraints, so that the optimal configuration model is converted from MINLP to MILP for easy solution. The numerical example analysis verified the effectiveness and rationality of the built model.

Point 2: The contributions and purpose of this paper are unclear. What is the important of this paper?

Response 2:

In order to achieve the goals of carbon peak and carbon neutrality, promote the decentralized utilization of renewable energy and the multi-energy complementary utilization of electricity-gas-cooling-heat comprehensive energy, based on the concept of sharing, a multi-energy and energy storage sharing of an integrated energy community has been constructed The operation mode can realize the unified deployment and control of energy in the community, reducing the community's energy allocation cost and carbon emissions. It helps to improve the energy elasticity and resilience of integrated energy communities, and promotes the green transformation, energy conservation and emission reduction of integrated energy communities.

Point 3: In the section 2.1, the statements lack the support of the existing studies.

Response 3:

Some reference studies are as follows:

Reference [2] proposed a Multi-energy Complementary Distributed Energy System (MCDES), involving multiple energy networks such as cooling, heating, electricity, and gas, and studied its low-carbon dispatch.

Reference [4]: A model combining equipment investment constraints and capacity planning of integrated energy system is established, taking into account the total annual cost and carbon emissions.

Reference [7]: A new distributed energy system combining multiple energy storage is proposed. Its novelty is that it considers three types of energy storage: cold, heat, and electricity at the same time.

Reference [11]: The optimal planning of residential-scale island solar biogas IES is proposed and formulated as a two-stage MILP problem. Harnessing the complementary nature of solar energy and biogas to meet a home’s multiple energy needs.

Publicly published papers describe the composition framework and operation methods of integrated energy communities, as well as optimal dispatching and other aspects. Based on the advantages of SOFC equipment such as high energy utilization and low carbon emissions, this article builds a multi-energy and energy storage sharing operation model for an integrated energy community based on the concept of electricity-gas-cold-heat multi-energy complementation.

Point 4: The policy related implications are limited. This study needs to provide more specific and operational suggestions.

Response 4:

It is true that applying the concept of sharing to energy optimization allocation and research will be affected by policies and even the interests of all parties. This is an inevitable problem.

However, this paper takes the entire integrated energy community as the research object, considers the coupling and complementarity between multiple energy sources, and selects the annual total operating cost and annual carbon emissions as the optimal allocation goals for the integrated energy community from an economic and environmental perspective. The optimal energy allocation in energy communities provides new ideas and methods. According to the different target needs of decision makers, specific energy and energy storage allocation plans are given. It has certain operability and is a useful exploration. Relevant studies are presented in the following literature：

Reference1: Zichi,W;Bingyin,L;Lingyi,Y. Multi-objective double-step optimal dispatching of regional integrated energy system considering combined electric and heat demand response.Proceedings of the CSU-EPSA. 2021, 33, 120-127.

This paper shows that due to the coupling and complementarity between multiple energy sources in the regional integrated energy system, combined electric and thermal demand response provides a new means for the optimal dispatch of the regional integrated energy system.

Reference 2: Guo,Z; Zhang,R;Wang,L;et al. Optimal operation of regional integrated energy system considering demand response. Applied Thermal Engineering.2021, 191,116860.

This paper Introduces the concept of power market DR into the energy cooling and heating system. In order to realize collaborative optimization of the supply and demand side of the energy system, a RIES optimization operation planning method considering user-side demand response is proposed.

At the same time, as the electricity market advances in China, some of the ideas and methods in this article can also provide certain guidance for integrated energy communities to participate in market demand response.

 

Point 5: What are the full names of SPEA2 and TOPSIS?

Response 5:

SPEA2 and TOPSIS have been introduced in the original text

SPEA2：Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 2

TOPSIS：Technology for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution

We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I add file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work. We are very grateful to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions on our paper, which are of great help to our paper improvement. We have modified our paper according to the reviewer's comments, and used word's revision mode in the revised manuscript to record our deletion. We have also carried out grammar checks and revisions to our papers to improve their readability and accuracy. We hope the revised paper would satisfy you. Below are our point-by-point responses to reviewer comments:

Point 1: Abstract: They must incorporate both the main quantitative and qualitative results.

Response:

Some expressions of the quantitative results of the numerical example analysis have been added to the abstract, and more quantitative results are specifically stated in the numerical example analysis and conclusions in the text:

The calculation example analysis gives the energy allocation results and corresponding carbon emission amounts in five scenarios, verifying the effectiveness and rationality of the model built in this article. At the same time, the calculation example analysis results show that as the ɛ value decreases, the energy configuration of the integrated energy community will shift from natural gas to clean energy. From this perspective, the energy equipment configuration and operating costs will increase. However, the thermal storage system and power storage System sharing can effectively reduce energy allocation capacity and costs.

Point 2: Introduction: The creative point of this article should be made clearer at the end of the Introduction section. The authors explain the state of the research, but it is necessary to distinguish the innovation and contributions of this study. In addition, it is necessary to clarify the key problem, objective and structure.

Response:

Replace the original text:

“The carbon emission index is taken as one of the objective functions, and the minimum planning economic cost and the minimum planning carbon emission are considered as the objective functions. A bi-objective mixed integer nonlinear programming model for optimal configuration of multi-energy equipment in the integrated energy community is constructed. The Big-M method and McCormick relaxation method are used to linearize the mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) model. Then, the ε-constraint method is used to transform the multi-objective optimization decision-making problem into a single-objective optimization decision-making problem. Finally, a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) model is obtained and then solved by a commercial solver. Finally, an example is constructed according to the actual project data. The example analysis verifies the effectiveness of the proposed integrated energy optimization configuration method, and also confirms the rationality of the proposed sharing mode and energy management strategy.”

Change Into:

“which can achieve unified deployment and control of electricity, gas, cold and heat energy sources.  The model utilizes solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) as the core equipment, which has high energy efficiency, good waste heat utilization and low carbon footprint. The paper also develops a dual-objective optimal configuration model that considers both economic and environmental factors, and aims to minimize the total planned cost and carbon emis-sions of the community energy system. The paper applies the ε-constraint method to transform the multi-objective problem into a single-objective problem, and uses the Big-M method[21] and the McCormick relaxation method[22] to linearize the nonlinear constraints, which simplifies the solution process and improves the computational efficiency. The paper conducts a case study based on actual project data to demonstrate the effectiveness and rationality of the proposed method and model, and shows that they can significantly reduce the energy costs and carbon emissions of the community. The paper provides a practical and innovative solution for the optimization planning of the integrated energy community based on SOFC, and contributes to the research and development of the sus-tainable and clean-energy future.”

Point 3: Results and discussions. It is the most critical part

• -Although their case study is interestingly presented and explained correctly, this section lacks

depth due to the lack of discussion and analysis compared to other energy community models.

Response:

The configuration results of various energy sources in different scenarios are expressed in “Table 6. Results of integrated energy optimization configuration obtained by minimizing total annual operating cost under scenario 2, scenario 3, scenario4, scenario 5.”

Based on the newly added Figure 5, the discussion and analysis of the calculation example analysis results in "5.3.2 Analysis Of Energy Configuration Results In Different Ccenarios." in the article have been modified.

• -Add other graphs (like Figure 5) but with energy indicators

Response:

New “Figure 5. The storage and clean energy capacity of integrated energy community configuration results in different scenarios.” has been added to the original text “5.3.2 Analysis Of Energy Configuration Results In Different Ccenarios.”

Point 4: Details:

• -4.2 is all in lowercase

Response :

The title” 4.2. model linearization” has been changed to” 4.2. Model Linearization”

• -Figure 2 and 3, clarify x-axis unit

Response :

Added the x-axis coordinate unit of Figure 2 and Figure 3 as h.

We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is about Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community 2 considering carbon emission. For it to be accepted, certain issues need to be addressed, as follows:

1) What is the novelty of this work? There is no clear identification of the gap in research that this paper is addressing.

2) The conclusion is too long. I suggest the authors review the conclusion and mention the major points

3) I want to know further why did the authors used SOFC-based multi-energy and energy storage  sharing operation model of integrated energy community of electricity-gas-cooling-heat I believe that this technique have been used before not only for electricity-gas cooling heat but for different types of microgrids.

4) why did the authors used the annual total operating cost as the more important objective in optimization planning mode. There are other parameters like LCOE that can provide a better optimization analysis.

5) I can see that the integrated energy system is connected to the power grid and there is no study on power system stability evaluation.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work. We are very grateful to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions on our paper, which are of great help to our paper improvement. We have modified our paper according to the reviewer's comments, and used word's revision mode in the revised manuscript to record our deletion. We have also carried out grammar checks and revisions to our papers to improve their readability and accuracy. We hope the revised paper would satisfy you. Below are our point-by-point responses to reviewer comments:

Point 1: What is the novelty of this work? There is no clear identification of the gap in research that this paper is addressing.

Response 1:

Differences from existing research:

By consulting a large number of domestic and foreign reference materials, it is found that currently, in the integrated energy community energy management system, there has been a lot of research on shared energy storage, but there is a lack of multi-energy sharing research; in terms of research on integrated energy community operations, the main focus is on In the business model and economic dispatch, more economic and technical indicators are considered, while its environmental benefits are ignored. At the same time, there are few studies in the existing literature that apply multiple energy sharing and energy storage sharing to the community level.

The novelty of this paper lies in:

(1) Based on the concept of sharing, a multi-energy and energy storage sharing operation model of an integrated energy community has been constructed, which can realize unified deployment and control of energy in the community and reduce the energy allocation cost and carbon emissions of the community.

(2) A comprehensive energy system with complementary electricity, gas, cold and heat is an important direction for the development of distributed energy systems in the future. Compared with traditional equipment such as micro gas turbines, this article uses solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) as a comprehensive energy source. The core thermoelectric power equipment of the community has the advantages of high energy utilization rate, good waste heat quality, and low carbon emissions, which can improve the energy utilization efficiency and environmental benefits of the integrated energy community.

(3) This paper studies the shared operation model and comprehensive energy management strategy of the integrated energy community, taking into account the economy and environment, establishing a dual-objective optimal allocation model, and converting it into a single-objective decision-making problem through the ε-constraint method. The Big-M method and McCormick relaxation method linearize the nonlinear constraints, so that the optimal configuration model is converted from MINLP to MILP for easy solution. The numerical example analysis verified the effectiveness and rationality of the built model.

Point 2: The conclusion is too long. I suggest the authors review the conclusion and mention the major points

Response 2:

Delete original text:

“Based on the concept of sharing, this paper constructs a multi-energy and energy storage sharing operation mode of electric-gas-cold-heat integrated energy community based on SOFC. On this basis, a unified energy management strategy for integrated energy community is proposed, and a multi-objective integrated energy community multi-energy equipment optimization configuration model based on this strategy is established. Among them, considering the economic objective function as a more important planning objective, the ε-constraint method is used to transform the environmental objective function into the constraint conditions under the decision-making of the economic single objective function, so that the multi-objective decision-making problem is transformed into a single-objective decision-making problem. At the same time, the model contains a large number of nonlinear constraints. The Big-M method and McCormick relaxation method are used to linearize the nonlinear constraints in the constraints, so that the optimal allocation model is transformed from MINLP to MILP, and the linear solution is carried out. By calculating and analyzing the configuration results in five scenarios, the economy and feasibility of the proposed model are verified. The conclusions of the example analysis are as follows:

1) This paper proposes an optimal configuration model of multi-energy equipment based on SOFC in the electric-gas-cold-heat integrated energy community, which can be used for the unified optimization planning of energy in the intelligent integrated energy community, so as to improve the energy utilization efficiency and reduce the energy allocation cost.

2) With the decrease of the ε value, that is, the reduction of the maximum estimated value of the annual total carbon emissions of the integrated energy community by the decision makers, the total annual operating cost of the integrated energy community gradually increases, from 6.9130 million yuan when the ε value is 2708 tons to 7.9547 million yuan when the ε value is 1162 tons, that is, when the decision makers have the demand for energy conservation and emission reduction, the decision makers need to increase the investment in the configuration and operation of energy equipment, and exchange the investment of funds for environmental benefits.

3) When the ε value decreases, the decision-makers have higher requirements for carbon emission reduction. Driven by the goal of energy conservation and emission reduction, the planning and configuration of the integrated energy community will shift from natural gas to clean energy of wind power and photovoltaic. On the one hand, more wind power, photovoltaic and storage systems are configured to reduce the interaction between the community and the power grid. On the other hand, fewer SOFCs are configured to minimize the consumption of natural gas while ensuring economy. Therefore, decision-makers need to pay higher economic costs in this process.

4) The sharing of heat storage system and power storage system can effectively reduce the configuration capacity and planning cost of the integrated energy community, improve the utilization efficiency of energy and the utilization rate of energy equipment. At the same time, the cost of heat storage system is lower than that of power storage system. The use of power storage system can reduce the demand for power storage equipment, but the excessive configuration of heat storage system is not conducive to the carbon emission reduction of the integrated energy community. Therefore, in the actual planning, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the economic cost and energy saving and emission reduction benefits to carry out the collaborative optimization configuration of power storage system and heat storage system.”

Has beenChanged into:

“Based on the concept of sharing, this paper constructs a multi-energy and energy storage sharing operating model of an electricity-gas-cooling-heat integrated energy community containing solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC), and proposes a unified energy man-agement strategy for integrated energy communities that can be used The unified optimi-zation planning of energy in smart integrated energy communities achieves the purpose of improving energy utilization efficiency and reducing energy allocation costs. The main results and conclusions of this paper are as follows:

1) A dual-objective optimal energy allocation model considering economy and envi-ronment is established. In order to facilitate rapid solution, the ε-constraint method is used to simplify the multi-objective problem into a single-objective problem, and the non-linear constraints are linearized through the Big-M method and the McCormick relaxation method.

2) The analysis results of the examples under different scenarios show that as the ε value decreases, the maximum estimate of the annual total carbon emissions of the inte-grated energy community by decision makers decreases. Along with this, the annual total operating cost of the integrated energy community gradually decreases. Increase. There-fore, in this process, decision makers need to pay higher economic costs in exchange for environmental benefits. This reveals that decision makers can achieve a balance between carbon emission reduction and operating costs by adjusting the ε value and adjusting dif-ferent energy configurations.

3) The sharing of thermal storage systems and power storage systems can effectively reduce the configuration capacity and planning costs of comprehensive energy communi-ties, and improve energy utilization and energy equipment utilization. At the same time, the cost of thermal storage systems is lower than that of power storage systems, but the configuration is over-configured. Multiple heat storage systems are not conducive to car-bon emission reduction of comprehensive energy sources. Therefore, in terms of energy allocation, it is necessary to comprehensively consider economic costs and energy con-servation and emission reduction to coordinate and optimize the configuration of power storage systems and heat storage systems.”

Point 3: I want to know further why did the authors used SOFC-based multi-energy and energy storage  sharing operation model of integrated energy community of electricity-gas-cooling-heat I believe that this technique have been used before not only for electricity-gas cooling heat but for different types of microgrids.

Response 3:

SOFC has many advantages such as high energy utilization, good waste heat quality, and low carbon emissions. Compared with Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC), SOFC is more efficient and can achieve low operating costs. Therefore, it is currently widely used in electricity-gas-cooling-heating. System, of course, the system can be a microgrid, and the research object of this article is an electricity-gas-cooling-heating smart integrated energy community using SOFC equipment. Relevant literature research is as follows:
[1]    Ellamla,H,R; Staffell,I; Bujlo,P;et al. Current status of fuel cell based combined heat and power systems for residential sector. Journal of Power Sources. 2015, 293, 312-328.

The authors report that proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFC) and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) are the most suitable fuel cell technologies for cogeneration of heat and power.

[2]    Sorace,M;Gandiglio,M;Santarelli,M. Modeling and techno-economic analysis of the integration of a FC-based micro-CHP system for residential application with a heat pump. Energy. 2017, 120: 262-275.

The article shows that the SOFC solution can achieve the lowest operating costs because SOFC is more efficient compared to PEMFC

Point 4: Why did the authors used the annual total operating cost as the more important objective in optimization planning mode. There are other parameters like LCOE that can provide a better optimization analysis.

Response 4:

LCOE, Levelized Cost of Energy, is used to horizontally compare the costs of different types of power generation projects (such as photovoltaic, wind power, thermal power, etc.) as a reference for electricity prices. However, LCOE is only applicable to the power generation industry. If Looking at the LCOE data alone, it is impossible to judge the overall income of the project. In this study, the overall benefits of the entire integrated energy community are considered, so it is more appropriate to use the total operating cost as an economic indicator.

Point 5: I can see that the integrated energy system is connected to the power grid and there is no study on power system stability evaluation.

Response 5:

This article mainly analyzes the integrated energy community as an overall operating system. First, it is energy sharing and self-balancing within the community. However, this integrated energy community is not regarded as an isolated island. Therefore, it is connected to the power grid and has only a small amount of connections with the power grid. Electricity purchase and sale business.

We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors.

My main concern is wind power generation model, equation (1) which is wrong. In the reference (13) cubic dependency on wind speed is given, while you are using linear one. In addition please be careful when using sign "<=" - if wind speed is equal to cut-in-speed is the power zero or different from zero - your constraints in (1) are unclear. That also impacts the statement in line 176 that "...linear in range on conventional weather".

In your analysis your are using model (3), but please check correctness of all you other models and reference them as possible, for example (6) and (7).

Other comments:

define acronyms when first used, like CCHPin line 58, CHP in line 68

in section 2.1 lines 113-127 seem to be almost identical to lines 128-148 - your are explaining figure 1 two times

Big-M method and McCormick relaxation model are mentioned on multiple times but without any reference

line 333 - add a refernce for 30% limit

line 337 - add a reference for 50% limit

line 511 - add a reference for CPLEX and GUROBI

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Dear authors,

English is understandable, but there are some unusual phrases used and there are some typing errors, for example:

lines 97-98 should be "...is proposed" as "strategy" is singular

line 153 "until" would be a better word instead of "when" at the end of the line "...system when the"

line 489 "Model" instead of "model" (capitalize "M")

line 710 dot after "increased.," should be erased

Perhaps you could ask a native English speaker to go through the manuscript.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 4 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work. We are very grateful to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions on our paper, which are of great help to our paper improvement. We have modified our paper according to the reviewer's comments, and used word's revision mode in the revised manuscript to record our deletion. We have also carried out grammar checks and revisions to our papers to improve their readability and accuracy. We hope the revised paper would satisfy you. Below are our point-by-point responses to reviewer comments:

Point 1: My main concern is wind power generation model, equation (1) which is wrong. In the reference (13) cubic dependency on wind speed is given, while you are using linear one. In addition please be careful when using sign "<=" - if wind speed is equal to cut-in-speed is the power zero or different from zero - your constraints in (1) are unclear. That also impacts the statement in line 176 that "...linear in range on conventional weather".

Response:

Thank you for your correction. I'm very sorry. I made a mistake in editing the formula. I have corrected it now.

Point 2: In your analysis your are using model (3), but please check correctness of all you other models and reference them as possible, for example (6) and (7).

Response:

References for model (6) (7) have been added to the original text:

[24]Zhao,N;Gu,W.Low-carbon planning and optimization of the integrated energy system considering lifetime carbon emissions. Journal of Building Engineering.2024, 82,108178.

References for model (12) have been added to the original text：

[25]Rao,Y;Cui,X;Zou,X;et al. Research on Distributed Energy Storage Planning-Scheduling Strategy of Regional Power Grid Considering Demand Response. Sustainability. 2023, 15,14540.

 

Point 3: Other comments:

• define acronyms when first used, like CCHPin line 58, CHP in line 68

CCHP andCHP have been introduced in the original text

CCHP: combined cooling heating and power system

CHP: combined heat and power

• in section 2.1 lines 113-127 seem to be almost identical to lines 128-148 - your are explaining figure 1 two times

Response:

The first paragraph is an overview of the shared operating structure of the integrated energy community, which mainly introduces the energy supply and demand in the community, the configuration and operation of energy equipment, and the functions and goals of the energy management system.

The second paragraph is a detailed explanation of the energy conversion relationship between various devices in the integrated energy community. It mainly describes the ways to meet the electrical load demand in the building, the processing strategies for excess and insufficient electrical energy, and the role and status of the power storage system. . It details how a building interacts with other buildings and the grid when it has a surplus or deficit of power. This paragraph is more focused on explaining the energy flow and dispatch strategies within the integrated energy community, including power sharing between buildings, management of power storage systems, and interaction with the grid.

Overall, the first paragraph provides an overall framework and introduces the structure and basic principles of the system, while the second paragraph provides a more specific and detailed situation analysis on this basis, explaining the operation and decision-making methods of each link. .

• Big-M method and McCormick relaxation model are mentioned on multiple times but without any reference

Response:

References to the Big-M method have been added to the original text.:
[21]Jianchen,Liu;Shanlin,Liu. Optimal distributed generation allocation in distribution network based on second order conic relaxation and big-m method. Power System Technology.2018, 2604-2611.

References to the McCormick relaxation model have been added to the original text.:
[22]Chao,Zhang;Kang,Kai;Sheng,Lu;et al. Economic scheduling of renewable energy storage plants with integrated thermal management of energy storage systems and battery life. Energy Storage Science and Technology.2021, 10, 1353.

• line 333 - add a refernce for 30% limit

Response:

The following references have been added:
[23]Jing,R;Wang,M;Liang,H;et al.Multi-objective optimization of a neighborhood-level urban energy network: Considering Game-theory inspired multi-benefit allocation constraints. Applied energy. 2018, 231,534-548.

• line 337 - add a reference for 50% limit

Response:

The following references have been added:
[23]Jing,R;Wang,M;Liang,H;et al.Multi-objective optimization of a neighborhood-level urban energy network: Considering Game-theory inspired multi-benefit allocation constraints. Applied energy. 2018, 231,534-548.

• line 511 - add a reference for CPLEX and GUROBI

Response:

I quoted the CPLEX solver in the reference, but I'm not sure if I'm using the correct format. If you find any errors, please point them out in time and I will make corrections as soon as possible. Thank you for your understanding and help.

CPLEX:
[26]CPLEX: IBM. (2023). IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio V12.10

GUROBI:
[27]GUROBI: Gurobi Optimization, LLC. (2023). Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual (Version 9.5)

Point 4: English is understandable, but there are some unusual phrases used and there are some typing errors, for example:

• lines 97-98 should be "...is proposed" as "strategy" is singular

Response:

The original text has been modified as required

• line 153 "until" would be a better word instead of "when" at the end of the line "...system when the"

Response:

The original text has been modified as required

• line 489 "Model" instead of "model" (capitalize "M")

Response:

The original text has been modified as required

• line 710 dot after "increased.," should be erased

Response:

The original text has been modified as required

• Perhaps you could ask a native English speaker to go through the manuscript.

Response:

The entire text has once again been polished and edited for the English language.

We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Based on the authors’ responses and the revised manuscript, I propose a comment as follows:

1.      It seems that the authors only answered my previous questions in the “author_response”, but did not state them in the revised manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Many thanks to the authors for taking my recommendations into account, the article has gained scientific quality.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work.

I am very happy to receive your latest review report, which affirmed my paper and did not raise any new comments or suggestions. This is very good news for me and my co-authors, and also a recognition of our efforts and achievements.

I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you for your valuable opinions and suggestions on my paper, which made me have a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of my research topic, and also significantly improved the quality and level of my paper. Your review process was very rigorous and professional, as well as timely and effective. Your work benefited me a lot.

Thank you again for your attention and support for my paper, and wish you a smooth work and good health.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No further comments

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work.

I am very happy to receive your latest review report, which affirmed my paper and did not raise any new comments or suggestions. This is very good news for me and my co-authors, and also a recognition of our efforts and achievements.

I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you for your valuable opinions and suggestions on my paper, which made me have a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of my research topic, and also significantly improved the quality and level of my paper. Your review process was very rigorous and professional, as well as timely and effective. Your work benefited me a lot.

Thank you again for your attention and support for my paper, and wish you a smooth work and good health.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

You addressed all of my comments from the first review. Thank you.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 4 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review our paper " Optimal energy configuration of integrated energy community considering carbon emission " and your recognition of our work.

I am very happy to receive your latest review report, which affirmed my paper and did not raise any new comments or suggestions. This is very good news for me and my co-authors, and also a recognition of our efforts and achievements.

I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you for your valuable opinions and suggestions on my paper, which made me have a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of my research topic, and also significantly improved the quality and level of my paper. Your review process was very rigorous and professional, as well as timely and effective. Your work benefited me a lot.

Thank you again for your attention and support for my paper, and wish you a smooth work and good health.

With best regards,

Sincerely Yours,

Corresponding author:

Name: Xue Cui

E-mail: [email protected]