Optimal scheduling of a power-hydrogen-methanol multi-energy coupling system considering cross-regional methanol transportation

Abstract

The power-hydrogen-methanol multi-energy coupling system enables flexible conversion of electricity, hydrogen, and liquid chemical energy, providing an effective pathway for renewable energy accommodation and low-carbon operation. However, spatial mismatch between renewable-energy-rich regions and load centers, together with wind and photovoltaic fluctuations, brings challenges to cross-regional energy coordination, flexible regulation, and economic operation. To address these issues, this paper proposed an optimal scheduling method for a power-hydrogen-methanol multi-energy coupling system considering cross-regional methanol transportation. First, a coupled operation framework was established for the sending-end and receiving-end regions, where transmission tie-lines and methanol transportation jointly form dual cross-regional energy transfer pathways. Second, a methanol storage and transportation model considering transportation delay was developed. By integrating electrolytic hydrogen production, methanol synthesis, methanol reforming, and methanol fuel cell power generation, the coordinated operation of the methanol production-storage-transportation-utilization chain and the power-hydrogen system is realized. Furthermore, a unified multi-timescale scheduling model was constructed to coordinate hourly power balance with daily methanol storage and transportation characteristics. On this basis, a reward-penalty differentiated stepped carbon trading scheme and a data-driven robust optimization (DDRO) approach are incorporated. Wind and photovoltaic uncertainty sets were built using historical forecasting errors, and the resulting two-stage robust scheduling model was solved by the column-and-constraint generation (C&CG) algorithm. Case studies on the IEEE 39-bus system showed that the proposed method achieves an annual operating cost of ¥381.275 billion, carbon emissions of 672,500 kt, and a worst-case load shedding rate of only 0.05%. These results confirm that the proposed approach can promote interregional renewable energy utilization, improve the hydrogen supply structure in the receiving-end region, and coordinate system economy, low-carbon performance, and supply reliability under renewable generation uncertainty.

Keywords

power-hydrogen-methanol coupling system / cross-regional methanol transportation / multi-timescale scheduling / ladder-type carbon trading / data-driven robust optimization / renewable energy accommodation

References

[1] Jiang H, Yao L, Qin J, et al. (2025) Globally interconnected solar-wind system addresses future electricity demands. Nat Commun 16: 4523. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59879-9

[2] Oyewo AS, Lopez G, ElSayed M, et al. (2024) Power-to-X economy: Green e-hydrogen, e-fuels, e-chemicals, and e-materials opportunities in Africa. Energy Rep 12: 2026-2048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2024.08.011

[3] Cui J, Aziz M (2023) Techno-economic analysis of hydrogen transportation infrastructure using ammonia and methanol. Int J Hydrogen Energy 48: 15737-15747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.01.096

[4] Sánchez A, Blanco EC, Martín M (2024) Comparative assessment of methanol and ammonia: Green fuels vs. hydrogen carriers in fuel cell power generation. Appl Energy 374: 124009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124009

[5] Fasihi M, Breyer C (2024) Global production potential of green methanol based on variable renewable electricity. Energy Environ Sci 17: 3503-3522. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3EE02951D

[6] Fulham GJ, Mendoza-Moreno PV, Marek EJ (2024) Managing intermittency of renewable power in sustainable production of methanol, coupled with direct air capture. Energy Environ Sci 17: 4594-4621. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4EE00933A

[7] Galimova T, Fasihi M, Bogdanov D, et al. (2025) Analysis of green e-methanol supply costs: Domestic production in Europe versus imports via pipeline and sea shipping. Renew Energy 241: 122336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2024.122336

[8] Alamia A, Partoon B, Rattigan E, et al. (2024) Optimizing hydrogen and e-methanol production through Power-to-X integration in biogas plants. Energy Convers Manag 322: 119175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2024.119175

[9] Pakdel A, Eslamloueyan R (2024) Techno-economic and sustainability assessment of the power to MeOH processes: The present and future perspective. Heliyon 10: e39860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39860

[10] Duan Z, Xu P, Xu C, et al. (2025) An integrated Power-to-X-to-Power system in green methanol carrier with gas turbine combined cycle and carbon capture: Energy-exergy-cost-carbon intensities. Energy Convers Manag 342: 120141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2025.120141

[11] Dautel JL, Thakur J, Elberry AM (2024) Enabling industrial decarbonization: A MILP optimization model for low-carbon hydrogen supply chains. Int J Hydrogen Energy 77: 863-891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.06.050

[12] Cheng Z, Jia D, Li Z, et al. (2022) Multi-time scale energy management of microgrid considering the uncertainties in both supply and demand. Energy Rep 8: 10372-10384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.08.179

[13] Wang M, Zhang B, Su B, et al. (2024) An multi-timescale optimization strategy for integrated energy system considering source-load uncertainties. Energy Rep 12: 5083-5095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2024.10.040

[14] Liu H, Lu R, Dou Z, et al. (2024) A distributed multi-timescale dispatch strategy for a city-integrated energy system with carbon capture power plants. Energies 17: 1395. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17061395

[15] Zhou Y, Zhai Q, Xu Z, et al. (2024) Multi-stage adaptive stochastic-robust scheduling method with affine decision policies for hydrogen-based multi-energy microgrid. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 15: 2738-2750. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2023.3340727

[16] Li Y, Han M, Shahidehpour M, et al. (2023) Data-driven distributionally robust scheduling of community integrated energy systems with uncertain renewable generations considering integrated demand response. Appl Energy 335: 120749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.120749

[17] Xu X, Shao Z, Chen F, et al. (2025) Stochastic robust optimization scheduling for integrated energy system cluster based on data-driven method. Appl Energy 400: 126512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.126512

[18] Gao J, Meng Q, Liu J, et al. (2024) Thermoelectric optimization of integrated energy system considering wind-photovoltaic uncertainty, two-stage power-to-gas and ladder-type carbon trading. Renew Energy 221: 119806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119806

[19] Yan N, Li X, Wu Z, et al. (2024) Low-carbon economic scheduling with demand-side response uncertainty in regional integrated energy system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 156: 109691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2023.109691

[20] Yi T, Ren W (2024) Low carbon economy scheduling of integrated energy system considering the mutual response of supply and demand. Sustain Energy Grids Netw 38: 101279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segan.2024.101279

[21] Ni Q, Xu C, Cai Z, et al. (2025) Optimal dispatch of integrated energy system with CCUS-P2G coupling and hydrogen-doped gas equipment based on ladder-type carbon trading mechanism. Energy 336: 138397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.138397

[22] Yousaf M, Mahmood A, Elkamel A, et al. (2022) Techno-economic analysis of integrated hydrogen and methanol production process by CO₂ hydrogenation . Int J Greenh Gas Control 115: 103615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103615

[23] Mohammed Abbas AH, Cheralathan KK, Porpatham E, et al. (2024) Hydrogen generation using methanol steam reforming-catalysts, reactors, and thermo-chemical recuperation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 191: 114147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.114147

[24] Wang Y, Lu Z, Li Y, et al. (2024) Performance analysis and multi-optimization of direct methanol fuel cell based on a novel numerical model considering mass transfer. Int J Hydrogen Energy 62: 362-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.03.015

[25] Wu Q, Li C (2023) Modeling and operation optimization of hydrogen-based integrated energy system with refined power-to-gas and carbon-capture-storage technologies under carbon trading. Energy 270: 126832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.126832

[26] Wang L, Dong W, Wang S, et al. (2025) Optimizing flexibility and low-carbon emissions in integrated energy systems: A two-stage robust optimization model incorporating hydrogen and carbon trading. Energy Rep 13: 1620-1631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2025.01.035

[27] Sun ZY, Wang YJ, Li D (2023) Carbon allowance allocation rules under emission intensity regulation: Grandfathering versus benchmarking. Manag Decis Econ 44: 3185-3198. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3870

[28] Mucci S, Mitsos A, Bongartz D (2023) Cost-optimal Power-to-Methanol: Flexible operation or intermediate storage? J Energy Storage 72: 108614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2023.108614

[29] Chang P, Li C, Zhu Q, et al. (2024) Optimal scheduling of electricity and hydrogen integrated energy system considering multiple uncertainties. iScience 27: 109654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.109654

[30] Yan L, Zhang X, Ullah Z, et al. (2025) Optimal scheduling of hydrogen storage in integrated energy system including multi-source and load uncertainties. Alex Eng J 114: 266-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2024.11.061

[31] Jiang J, Zhu Y, Wang Y, et al. (2025) Unit commitment with bidirectional ramping constraints of flexibility retrofit thermal power unit. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 168: 110709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2025.110709

[32] Zhao Y, Chen C, Teng M, et al. (2024) Refined modeling and approximated aggregation method for alkaline water electrolyzers in power system optimal scheduling. Int J Hydrogen Energy 52: 200-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.11.204

[33] Wang Y, Ma Z, Zhu Y, et al. (2024) 4E performance analysis and multi-optimization of a novel system integrating direct methanol fuel cell and ORC. Fuel 371: 132091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2024.132091

[34] Sollai S, Porcu A, Tola V, et al. (2023) Renewable methanol production from green hydrogen and captured CO₂: A techno-economic assessment . J CO₂ Util 68: 102345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2022.102345

[35] Song D, Lee J, Kim YH, et al. (2025) Integrated process modeling and optimization on methanol reforming-fuel cell systems via genetic algorithm with techno-economic analysis. Energy 335: 137856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.137856

[36] Han L, Wang S, Cheng Y, et al. (2024) Multi-timescale scheduling of an integrated electric-hydrogen energy system with multiple types of electrolysis cells operating in concert with fuel cells. Energy 307: 132707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.132707

[37] Yang M, Liu Y (2024) A two-stage robust configuration optimization framework for integrated energy system considering multiple uncertainties. Sustain Cities Soc 101: 105120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.105120

[38] Li F, Wang D, Guo H, et al. (2024) Distributionally robust optimization for integrated energy system accounting for refinement utilization of hydrogen and ladder-type carbon trading mechanism. Appl Energy 367: 123391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.123391

[39] Zong X, Yuan Y (2023) Two-stage robust optimization of regional integrated energy systems considering uncertainties of distributed energy stations. Front Energy Res 11: 1135056. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2023.1135056

[40] Chatzos M, Tanneau M, Van Hentenryck P (2022) Data-driven time series reconstruction for modern power systems research. Elec Power Syst Res 212: 108589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2022.108589

[41] Arrigoni A, D’Agostini T, Dolci F, et al. (2025) Techno-economic and life-cycle assessment comparisons of hydrogen delivery options. Front Energy 19: 1129-1142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-025-1041-1