Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

A Honey Bee Foraging approach for optimal location of a biomass power plant
David Vera a, Julio Carabias b, Francisco Jurado a,*, Nicols Ruiz-Reyes b
a
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, University of Jan, 23700 EPS Linares, Jan, Spain
b
Dept. of Telecommunication Engineering, University of Jan, 23700 EPS Linares, Jan, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Over eight million hectares of olive trees are cultivated worldwide, especially in Mediterranean countries,
Received 9 November 2009 where more than 97% of the worlds olive oil is produced. The three major olive oil producers worldwide
Received in revised form 18 January 2010 are Spain, Italy, and Greece. Olive tree pruning residues are an autochthonous and important renewable
Accepted 26 January 2010
source that, in most of cases, farmers burn through an uncontrolled manner. Besides, industrial uses have
Available online 13 February 2010
not yet been developed.
The aim of this paper consists of a new calculation tool based on particles swarm (Binary Honey Bee
Keywords:
Foraging, BHBF). Effectively, this approach will make possible to determine the optimal location, biomass
Biomass
Swarm intelligence
supply area and power plant size that offer the best protability for investor. Moreover, it prevents the
Protability index accurate method (not feasible from computational viewpoint). In this work, Protability Index (PI) is
set as the tness function for the BHBF approach. Results are compared with other evolutionary optimi-
zation algorithms such as Binary Particle Swarm Optimization (BPSO), and Genetic Algorithms (GA). All
the experiments have shown that the optimal plant size is 2 MW, PI = 3.3122, the best location corre-
sponds to coordinate: X = 49, Y = 97 and biomass supply area is 161.33 km2. The simulation times have
been reduced to the ninth of time than the greedy (accurate) solution. Matlab is used to run all
simulations.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2120
2. Optimization problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2121
2.1. Problem description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2121
2.2. Coding of the solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2121
3. Fitness function: Profitability Index (PI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
3.1. Initial investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
3.2. Cash inflows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
3.3. Cash outflows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
3.4. Net present value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
3.5. Profitability index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
4. Metaheuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
4.1. Genetic Algorithms (GA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
4.2. Binary Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2122
4.3. Binary Honey Bee Foraging (BHBF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2123
5. Simulations results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2123
6. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2126
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2126
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2126

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: fjurado@ujaen.es (F. Jurado).

0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.01.015
2120 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127

Nomenclature

Cc annual collection biomass cost (/yr) f number of scouts bees ()

Eg annual energy production (MWh/yr) h number of total bits ()
IR annual increase rate () P population size ()
rc annual increase rate of Cc () PV present Value ()
rmo annual increase rate of Cmo () PVIN present value of cash inows ()
rt annual increase rate of Ct () PVOUT present value of cash outows ()
Cmo annual M&O cost (/yr) PI protability Index ()
T annual plant running time (h/yr) pg selling price of the electric energy (/MWh)
Ct annual transport biomass cost (/yr) Is specic investment (/MWh)
Si area of parcel i (km2) C Cu
i unit collection biomass cost (in parcel i) (/t)
m average maintenance cost (/MWh) P unit parcel where the plant is installed ()
dist(p,i) distance between parcel i and p (km) C tu
i unit transport biomass cost (in parcel i) (/t km)
CL electric line cost (/km) Ui usability coefcient of parcel i ()
Cmof xed annual cost of M&O (/yr) Vu useful lifetime (yr)
INVf xed investment () LX, LY X- and Y-dimensions ()
g gasiergas turbine global efciency ()
INV initial investment () Abbreviation
Pe installed power (MW) BHBF Binary Honey Bee Foraging
Lp length of the electric line (km) BPSO Binary Particle Swarm Optimization
LHVi lower heating value in parcel i (MWh/t) CHP Combined Heat and Power
Di net density of dry biomass in parcel i (t/km2 yr) GA Genetic Algorithms
NPV net present value of the investment () GIS Geographic Information Systems
n number of best bees () HTTP Hyper Text Transfer Protocol
N number of bits () M&O maintenance and operation
c number of elite bees ()

1. Introduction Olive tree pruning residues are an autochthonous and impor-

tant renewable source that, in most of cases, farmers burn through
The consumption of olive oil is rapidly increasing worldwide, an uncontrolled manner. This energy resource involves the follow-
due to its high dietetic and nutritional value. According to the Food ing advantages: saving costs associated to collection biomass by
and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAOSTAT the farmers, job creation in logistic sector company, CHP applica-
2006), 2.7 millions of tons of olive oil are produced annually world- tions, capital goods manufactures (chipper, packer and shredder),
wide, 76% of which are produce in Europe, with Spain (35.2%), Italy reduction in CO2 emissions, development of rural areas and conse-
(23.1%) and Greece (16.1%), being the highest olive oil producers quently, the res reduction.
[1]. Although several applications have been reported for olive tree
There are approximately 750 million productive olive trees biomass valorisation (e.g. the use as raw material for fuel ethanol
worldwide, 98% of them located in the Mediterranean region, production [3] or feedstock for pulp and paper production [4]),
where more than 97% of the worlds olive oil is produced. The three industrial uses have not yet been developed.
major olive oil producers worldwide are Spain, Italy, and Greece, There are several options to produce electricity from biomass:
followed by Turkey, Tunisia, and to a lesser extent Portugal, Moroc- combustion, gasication and pyrolysis, gasication being the most
co, and Algeria. efcient one. Gasication of biomass is a thermal treatment, which
Spain is the world rst producer of olive oil in EU, followed by ensues in a high production of gaseous products and small
Italy, Greece and Portugal. Olive groves can be found nowadays amounts of char and ash. Steam reforming of hydrocarbons, partial
in 34 provinces (sub-divisions) of 13 regions. They occupy a oxidation of heavy oil residues, selected steam reforming of aro-
2,509,677 ha area, 96% of which are devoted to olives for oil pro- matic compounds, and gasication of coals and solid wastes to
duction (2,377,943 ha) and the rest 4% to table olives. The land yield a mixture of H2 and CO, accompanied by watergas shift con-
dedicated to olive groves in each region is detailed in Table 1 (it version to produce H2 and CO2, are well-proved processes [5]. Also,
has estimated that the biomass collected per olive hectare is the use of olive tree residues, like that of any other biomass, can
3000 kg, [2]). The distribution and number of olive trees in Spain contribute to sustainable development in rural areas [6].
in the most representative regions is also shown. In particular, beda is a Spanish town in the province of Jan, in
autonomous community of Andalusia. The agricultural economy
mainly works with olive cultivation and cattle ranching. beda
Table 1
Surface of olive growing exploitation and geographical distribution. Reference period
has become in one of the biggest olive oils producers and packers
20022003 (Spanish Agriculture and Fishering Ministry). of the Jan province [2]. This region is divided in 128  128 =
16384 square parcels of constant surface, Si = 0.09766 km2. The
Regions Hectares % Olive trees quantity
extension is 400 km2 approximately.
Andaluca 1,515,320 60.38 174,788,000 Authors as Kinoshita et al. [7] have applied the GIS method to
Extremadura 255,310 10.17 29,602,000
Castilla-La Mancha 397,173 15.83 36,263,000
solve specic optimization problems. However, when it works
Catalua 116,112 4.63 14,307,000 with a high number of cells and variables, the solution is unreach-
Comunidad Valenciana 91,701 3.65 10,963,000 able by using this method due to the high computation require-
Aragn 57,346 2.28 5,889,000 ments. Thereby, our approach allows to obtain an accurate
Others 76,715 3.06 10,884,000
solution, considerably reducing the elapsed time. However, GIS
Total 2,509,677 100 282,696,000
data are necessary to use this approach [8,9].
 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127 2121

The motivation of using HBF is due to its novelty approach, Therefore, given the total mean efciency of the electric gener-
which is based on the main features of GA and PSO algorithms. ation system (gasiergas turbine), g, the produced electricity, Eg
These algorithms have been widely used to nd exact or approxi- (MWh/yr), is equal to:
mate solutions in optimization and search problems. Moreover,
X
K
the Honey Bees algorithm has been recently used in some state- Eg g  Si  U i  Di  LHV i 1
of-the-art approaches related to optimization problems. Pham i1
[1012] is one of the most active authors in this eld proposing
Assuming a plant running time of T (h/yr), the electric power, Pe
several approaches in order to test the reliability of this method
(MW) is:
in optimization problems. Sundareswaran and Sreedevi [13] pro-
posed the use of a colony of honey bees to suit the controller de- Eg
Pe 2
sign of a boost converter. Melin-Batista et al. [14] proposed a T
heuristic approach based on the Honey Bees Mating Optimization The main requirements to build biomass power plants in these loca-
algorithm to solve the Uncapacitated Plant-Cycle Location Prob- tions are listed below. The perspective cost is listed in Table 2:
lem. In [15], Bees Algorithm were used to determine the optimal
allocation of Flexible Ac Transmission Systems (FACTS) devices Microturbines Capstone C200 (e.g. for 2 MW it would be
for maximizing the Available Transfer Capability (ATC) of power installed 10 stack of C200 model). Electrical performance, fuel/
transactions between source and sink areas in the deregulated engine and exhaust characteristics, dimensions and weight and
power system. Nakrani and Tovey [16] employed Honey Bee algo- sound levels are listed in [19].
rithm to dynamically allocate servers to satisfy the unpredictable Gasier and Feedstock Handling System. Other needs for a gas-
HTTP request loads. iermicroturbine system have been described in Table 2.
Nature-inspired methods as HBF are getting very popular in the Processes machines storage area: chipper, packer, shredder and
literature when dealing with optimization problems that requires trucks for biomass transport.
high computation requirements to provide an optimal solution. Biomass storage area.
This method is appropriated for the current problem because Building a transformer and electric line for grid connect mode.
HBF is based on BPSO and GA. Both methods have proven to be
very suitable in similar problems, as exposed in [17]. Therefore,
the idea of using a hybrid method that combines the main features 2.2. Coding of the solution
of PSO and GA should be further exploited. Actually, this is the
main purpose of our approach. Before using the proposed BHBF to determine location of bio-
Finally, the reliability of BHBF has been proved in our concrete mass power plant, the representation of a feasible solution must
problem of determining the optimum location of the biomass be dened. A solution consists of three parts: (1) X component of
power plant, obtaining satisfactory results in terms of protability location plant; (2) Y component of location plant; (3) Size of supply
and efciency. area for the power plant. These components are binary Gray coded
This paper is organised as follows. After introduction, the prob- in order to exploit some useful properties of Gray code related with
lem description and the tness function are presented in Sections 2 the Hamming distance.
and 3, respectively. In Section 4, it will describe the metaheuristics We have considered a rectangular search space with x 2 [1, LX]
techniques considered in this paper (GA, BPSO and BHBF). Simula- and y 2 [1, LY], LX and LY being sizes in X-dimension and Y-dimen-
tion results are shown is Section 5. Finally, conclusions are pre- sion, respectively. Supply area is a square shaped region which has
sented in Section 6. the plant at the centroid. In order to obtain not only the sitting of
the plant but also the sizing of the supply area, a prexed number
2. Optimization problem of supply region sizes have been assumed (i.e. size number 0 cor-
responds to a 1  1 region, size number 1 corresponds to a 3  3
2.1. Problem description region and maximum size number S corresponds to a (2S + 1) 
(2S + 1) region. Thus, the total number of bits used to code the
The problem to be solved consists on comparing three optimi- solution is:
zation algorithms (GA, BPSO and BHBF). We are interested in deter-
mining the optimal location, supply area and protability index (or N log2 LX log2 LY log2 S 3
net present value) of the electric generation plant for a biomass
fuelled system.
In this paper, the size of the electric generation system depends
on: Table 2
Capital and installation costs.
 Biomass quantity that can be collected from a given region Capital cost (Is) /kWe-net
mainly covered by olive tree by-products.
Gasier and feedstock handling system 400
 Technology to produce electricity from biomass, in our case, gas- Gas cleaning system 70
ier with gas turbine. Power generation/interconnect system 650
Emission control system 35
Heat recovery system 70
Location of the biomass-based power plant (parcel p) mainly
depends on the characteristics of the considered region to collect Total facility capital cost 1225
biomass. In this work, K parcels of constant area have been re- Installation cost (INVf)
garded, most of them characterized by a predominant biomass Building works and silencer 45,000
type (olive tree prunings in this paper). These parcels also present Electrical works 23,000
Gas and plumbing works 57,000
other relevant characteristics, such as accessibility [18]. Meters 16,000
The values of the variables involved in the problem are obtained Others 9000
from databases or Geographic Information Systems (GIS), [8,9]. Total installation cost 150,000
These are Si, Ui, Di, LHVi, Lp, dist(p,i), C Cu tu
i and C i .
2122 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127

3. Fitness function: Protability Index (PI) 3.5. Protability index

The objective function takes into consideration costs and bene- The Protability Index (PI) is chosen in this work as objective
ts. Specically, initial investment and collection, transportation, tness function. It is dened as follows:
maintenance and operation costs are considered, together with NPV PV
benets from the sale of electrical energy. Therefore, the protabil- PI 1 8
INV INV
ity index is chosen as the objective function.
In this section some interesting parameters to evaluate the We can also say that an investment is protable when PI > 0.
protability index of the project are reviewed. The initial invest-
ment, the present value of cash inows (benets) and cash out- 4. Metaheuristics
ows (costs) are dened and adapted to the particularities of this
work. In the following, we briey describe the metaheuristic tech-
niques considered in this work. As demonstrated in [17] popula-
tion methods utilized in this work (GA, BPSO and BHBF) are
3.1. Initial investment
more efcient than trajectory algorithms (SA, TB or fuzzy search).
The initial investment (INV) for the design, construction and
equipment of the generation plant is expressed as: 4.1. Genetic Algorithms (GA)

INV INV f Is  P e C L  Lp 4 GA are especially well-tted to difcult environments where

the space is usually large, discontinuous, complex and poorly
understood. The basic principles of GA were rst aid down by Hol-
3.2. Cash inows land [20], and are well described in many books, such as [21,22]. It
is generally accepted that application of GA must take into account
The present value of cash inows PVIN is obtained from the sold the following components:
electric energy during the useful lifetime, Vu (yr). It can be written
as:  A genetic representation of solutions to the problem.
 A way to create an initial population of solutions.
K g  1  K Vg u 1 rg
PV IN pg  Eg  ; where K g 5  An evaluation function, which gives the tness of each
1  Kg 1d chromosome.
 Genetic operators, which modify the genetic composition of off-
spring during reproduction.
3.3. Cash outows
 Values for the parameters of the GA (population size, probabili-
ties of applying genetic operators, etc.).
The present value of cash outows (PVOUT) is the sum of the fol-
lowing costs during the useful lifetime of the plant: annual collec-
tion cost, Cc, annual transport cost, Ct, and annual M&O costs,
4.2. Binary Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
Cmo.The annual cost of biomass collection is

X
K The classical version of the PSO algorithm [23,24] operates in a
Cc C cui  U i  Si  Di continuous search space. In order to solve optimization problems
i1
in discrete search spaces, several binary discrete PSO algorithms
The annual cost of biomass transport is have been proposed. In a binary discrete space the position of a
particle is represented by a N-length bit string and the movement
X
K
of the particle consists of ipping some of these bits. Kennedy and
Ct C tui  U i  Si  Di  distp; i
i1
Eberhart proposed in [25] the rst binary version of PSO.
In this paper, we have developed and applied a improved ver-
The annual M&O cost is sion of the binary PSO algorithm proposed in [26], which incorpo-
C mo C mof m  Eg rates a inertia weight factor, like the classical continuous approach
[23,24]. Now, particle position (xi) and particle velocity (vi) are N-
Finally, the present value of cash outows is: length binary vectors. The algorithm uses the Hamming distance,
and the logical AND (), OR ( + ) and XOR () operators. Particle
K c  1  K Vc u K t  1  K Vt u position is updated by using the XOR operator instead of the
PV OUT C c  Ct 
1  Kc 1  Kt sum-operator, as in [26].
K mo  1  K Vmou
i;j  v i;j ;
xti;j xt1 t
C mo  6 i 1; . . . ; P j 1; . . . ; Z 9
1  K mo
Z represents the number of variables of the function to be optimized
where K c 1r
1d
c
, K t 1r
1d
t
and K mo 1r
1d
mo
.
and P the number of particles in the swarm.In this algorithm, the
velocity vector can be interpreted as a change vector. Thus, if
3.4. Net present value v ti;j = 1, then xti;j xt1 t1 t1
i;j , xi;j being the logical negation of xi;j . How-
ever, if v i;j = 0, then xi;j xi;j (no change happens). The velocity
t t t1
The net present value (NPV) of an investment is dened as
follows: vector (change vector) is updated by applying the following equa-
tion [6]:
NPV PV  INV 7     
t1 t1
v ti;j xi;j xi;j  t1
c1i;j  pbesti;j  xi;j c2i;j  gbestj  xt1
i;j
PV PV IN  PV OUT being the present value. An investment is prot- 10
able when NPV > 0.
 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127
where:
 c1i c1i;1 ; . . . ; c1i;N  and c2i c2i;1 ; . . . ; c2i;N  are random N-
length binary strings, whose components have the same
probability.
t1 t1 t1 t1 t1
 pbesti pbesti;1 ; . . . ; pbest i;N , gbest gbest 1 ; . . . ; gbest N 
are also N-length binary strings.
 xi xi;1 ; . . . ; xi;N  is the inertial vector of the ith particle. It is a
random N-length binary vector, whose components are 0 with
probability Px.
 xi xi;1 ; . . . ; xi;N  is the ones complement of inertial vector xi.
In this BPSO approach [6], a very important parameter is prob-
ability Px, here called inertial probability. As just stated, bits in xi
are 0 with probability Px. Inertial probability decreases with the
number of iterations, in such a way that at the initial iterations
(high Px values) the algorithm explores the search space and at
the last iterations (low Px values) the algorithm exploits the search
space.It must be noted that if xi;j = 0, then v ti;j = 1, and so position
of the ith particle is changed. However, if xi;j = 1, the movement of
t1
the ith particle at the tth iteration is conducted by pbest i and
t1
gbest solutions, with a partially stochastic behavior due to the
random learning vectors c1i and c2i. The idea is to allow particle
swarm to perform a random exploration over the space search at
the initial iterations. Later, when the swarm has acquired enough
knowledge about the problem, the movement of each particle is
mainly conducted by pbesti and gbest solutions. In this paper, an
exponentially decreasing function is used for probability Px.
4.3. Binary Honey Bee Foraging (BHBF)
The Binary Honey Bee Foraging (BHBF) is an adaptation of the
Honey Bee Foraging (HBF) proposed by Baig and Rashid [27] to a
binary case. BHBF is an optimization algorithm inspired by the
swarm behavior of honey bees. We assume several swarms of bees
foraging for better tness values in a collective and coordinated
manner. We also have scouting bees searching randomly for re-
gions of better tness. Corresponding to the waggle dance of the
bees at the hive, a blackboard is maintained which may be updated
asynchronously whenever some useful information is available.
Bees returning after foraging or scouting update the blackboard
and reallocate themselves after analyzing the information on the
blackboard. Due to the formation of multiple swarms for foraging
in multiple regions combined with continuous scouting of the
landscape, BHBF algorithm is potentially suitable for multi-modal
problems where all the peaks above a certain height are to be dis-
covered and also for dynamically changing environments where
the position and height of peaks may shift. Many researchers have
attempted these two problems by swarm intelligence e.g.
[28,29,13].
This approach has been used for several reasons. First of all,
using an optimal solution (exhaustive search) to resolve the prob-
lem of the best location implies high computational requirements.
This means that the necessary analysis to choose the best location
when testing with several parameter settings and considering a
sufcient large map will be unfeasible by using optimal solutions.
Therefore, we have focused our approach on metaheuristic meth-
ods to provide an approximate solution, thus reducing the compu-
tational requirements. Among these methods, GA and PSO are
commonly used for this kind of problems, in which the maximiza-
tion of a tness function is intended. Although there are many ap-
proaches in the literature, HBF has been chosen due to its novelty
and because it is based on the main features of the most common
algorithms. Therefore, this hybrid method is able to explore the
search space as a GA (using techniques inspired by evolutionary
biology. i.e. mutation) and explode it as multiple swarm working
2123
in a coordinated and collective manner (using a social component
from the PSO). Finally, HBF has been adjusted to the binary case
(BHBF) to fulll the non-continuous problem of choosing the best
location on a grid map. Promising results has been reached by
using this approach in terms of protability and efciency.
t1
To complete algorithm developed by the authors is given in the
following steps.
Step 1: Initially deploy bees at random locations
One bee is one complete solution of the problem. A xed num-
ber of bees (h) are created and placed randomly in the tness land-
scape. For generality, let the bees be described as B1, B2,. . ., Bi,. . ., Bh ,
where h is the number of bees and can be termed as population
size.
Step 2: Initial evaluation of the objective function.
The objective function value PI(Bi), at each bee position is eval-
uated using Eq. (8).
Step 3: Initial generation of bee swarms.
The bees are sorted on the basis of their tness and bee swarms
(of n bees each) are created around each of the c best points (elite
bees). If any two or more of the best points are near one another
then they are considered as belonging to the same region and only
one swarm is created for them (overlapping of swarms is not al-
lowed). The f remaining bees (h cn) are used as scouts and placed
randomly.
Step 4: Explore the region.
The foraging and scouting bees search for a small xed number
of iterations in the following manner. The n foraging bees search
for a peak as a swarm in a coordinated and collective manner using
a binary PSO as proposed in [6].
Meanwhile each of the f scout bees searches around its lieu of
placement alone by applying a GA binary mutation operator [30].
Step 5: Evolution analysis.
After a few iterations of simultaneous foraging and scouting a
global analysis takes place. The best tness reported from each of
the swarms and the best tness of each of the scout bees are all
sorted and the swarms for the next iteration are determined on
the basis of this information. An old swarm is allowed to survive
only if its best tness comes within the rst c best points. If one
of these best points has been newly discovered by a scout bee, then
a new swarm is created around it. No overlapping is allowed dur-
ing creation of swarms. Also a swarm which has converged is dis-
banded and the region around its best tness is considered as
completely foraged.
Step 6: Stopping criterion.
If the termination criterion is reached (e.g. specic number of
iterations), end the algorithm, else go to Step 4 and continue with
scouting/foraging analysis.
5. Simulations results
The region considered to apply the proposed method consists of
128  128 = 16384 parcels of constant surface, Si = 0.09766 km2.
2124 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127

The region is covered by olive tree prunings; therefore it consti-

200
tutes the biomass type. The available information for each parcel
comprises Si, Ui, Di, LHVi, Lp, dist(p, i), C Cu tu
i , C i . The unit costs for bio- 20 180
mass collection and transport in parcel i (C Cu tu
i , C i ) are also called 160
work processes [7], and these are divided into six stages: felling,
40
bucking, forwarding, transport and chipping. The remaining 140
parameters values to compute the perspective cost and the prot- 120
ability index are listed in Table 3. 60

Y
The region under study and the single line diagram illustrating 100
the topology of the test distribution network are shown in Fig. 1. 80 80
Fig. 2 presents the theoretical biomass potential, which is de-
ned from the net density of dry biomass that can be obtained at 60
100
any parcel, Di (t/(km2 yr)), and provides a measure of the primary 40
biomass resource.
20
Fig. 3 shows the available biomass potential. It has been created 120
taking the following parameters into account: Di (t/(km2 yr)), Ui, Si 0
20 40 60 80 100 120
(km2) and LHVi (MWh/t). Multiplying the four variables for all par-
cels that comprise the entire region, it results the available biomass X
potential, expressed in (MWh/yr).
Fig. 2. Theoretical biomass potential (t/(km2 yr)).
Simulation results for BHBF approach (optimal location, supply
area, location coordinates, installed power and protability index)
will be contrasted with BPSO algorithm results. Moreover, compar-
ison between the average protability index obtained in BHBF, 40
BPSO and GA performances for all tests will be attached.
In all tests, BHBF and BPSO have the same simulation parame- 20 35
ters. These parameters are shown in Table 4:
30
40
Population size (P): it is associated to the search space. If this
parameter is too low, the algorithm will probably converge to 25
a local optimum. Otherwise, a high value of this parameter will 60
Y

20
require a high computation cost. For the three algorithms, P = 30
80
15

Table 3 100 10
Standard values for parameters.
5
Parameter Value Ref. Parameter Value Ref.
120
C tu
i (/t km)
0.3 [7] rc 0.06 [6,17] 0
cu (/t) 40 [7] rt 0.08 [6,17] 20 40 60 80 100 120
CL (/km) 3-104 [6] r
mo 0.04 [6,17] X
T (h/yr) 7500 [6,17] Cmof () 1.5  105 [17]
INVf () 1.5-106 [19] m (/MWh) 4.0 [17] Fig. 3. Available biomass potential (MWh/yr)).
ps (/MWh) 128100 [33] g 0.28 [19]
DR 0.08 [6,17] Is, (/MW) 1.225  106 [19]
IR 0.04 [6,17] Vu (yr) 15 Estimated
Table 4
Simulation parameters.

Algorithm P N Number of iterations Number of tests

BHBF, BPSO, GA 30 20 70 30

20

has been established. Concretely, in our BHBF approach: 4 elite

40
bees, 5 foraging bees for each elite bee and nally, for optimal
grid exploration, 10 scout bees are used (see Section 4.3).
60 Code solution (N): the total number of bits used to code the solu-
Y

tion is 20 Eq. (1).

Number of iterations: commonly, PSO calculation process ceases
80
at a maximum number of iterations [31,32]. Experience is
needed in this parameter choosing. It will consume a lot of cal-
100 culation time if the parameter is set too big, while no optimized
result could be got if it is set too small.
120
The technical constraints to be considered in the rst simula-
20 40 60 80 100 120 tion are:
X
1. The electric power generated by the plant is limited to 0.5 MW.
Fig. 1. Region under study and location of electrical lines. 2. The generation system must be located inside the supply area.
 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127 2125

In Spain, electric energy price for a biomass power plant (max-
imum 2 MW) is 128 /MWh, on the other hand, for plants over
2 MW of generated power the price is 100 /MWh (pg), [33].
Fig. 4 shows the optimal location and supply area (km2) of the
biomass power plant for the best found solution (the best PI of
all tests). Output values for the proposed BHBF and BPSO algo-
rithms are displayed in Table 5:
As shown in Fig. 5, the proposed BHBF algorithm converges to
accurate solutions in a few iterations. In this gure the average
PI distribution for all tests is represented and compared with BPSO
and GA results.
As lower limit it has been established the minimum generated
power to be 0.5 MW, under this power generation level, the prot-
ability index will be negative (Fig. 5 shows protability index evo-
lution, the mean of all tests are near to zero). Consequently, under
0.5 MW, a biomass power plant would not be protable.
In the second simulation, the technical constraints to be consid-
ered are:
1. The electric power generated by the plant is limited to 4.5 MW
2. The generation system must be located inside the supply area.
Figs. 6 and 7 present optimal location and PI evolution. Table 6
describes simulations results for a 4.5 MW power constraint, it can
see the supply area is about 365 km2.
On the other hand, Fig. 6 shows that the maximum generated
power would be around 44.5 MW. This top limit is not established
for the protability index, but it would be a geographic constraint.

PI = 0.0468 PI = 2.5335
Pe = 0.4975 MW 20 Pe = 4.4982 MW
20
Area = 39.4546 km2 Area = 364.9554 km2

40 40

60 60
Y
Y

80 80

100 100

120 120

20 40 60 80 100 120 20 40 60 80 100 120

X X

Fig. 4. Optimal location of biomass power plant for BHBF algorithm (P 6 0.5 MW). Fig. 6. Optimal location of biomass power plant for BHBF algorithm (P 6 4.5 MW).

Table 5 2.6
BHBF vs. BPSO simulation results.

Algorithm Pe (MW) PI Location coordinates Supply area (km2) 2.5

BHNF 0.495 0.0468 X = 49, Y = 93 39.4546 HBF
BPSO 0.4911 0.0147 X = 49, Y = 89 38.5757 BPSO
2.4
GA

2.3
0.2
PI

2.2
0

0.2 2.1
BHBF
BPSO
0.4
GA 2
0.6
PI

1.9
0.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Iterations
1
Fig. 7. Average protability index evolution for BHBF, BPSO and GA.
1.2

1.4
Table 6
BHBF vs. BPSO simulation results.
1.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Algorithm Pe (MW) PI Location coordinates Supply area (km2)
Iterations BHBF 4.4982 2.5335 X = 53, Y = 57 364.9554
BPSO 4.4918 2.5320 X = 53, Y = 64 361.4397
Fig. 5. Average protability index evolution for BHBF, BPSO and GA.
2126 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127

In other words, the supply area for a power plant over 4.5 MW, will Table 8
be greater than beda extension (approximately 400 km2). Mean and standard deviation for BHBF, BPSO and GA.

Algorithm Mean Standard deviation

BHBF 3.2921 0.0112
6. Conclusions BPSO 3.2347 0.0353
GA 3.1880 0.2043
The aim of this paper consists of a new calculation tool based on
particles swarm (BHBF algorithm). This approach makes it possible
to efciently determine the optimal location of a biomass power
plant, avoiding the greedy exhaustive search (not feasible from Table 9
computational viewpoint). Using GIS data (location and number 2 MW simulation time.

of olive trees per km2, roads, topographical features, electric lines Method Optimal location PI Simulation time (h)
location, etc.) and determining the economic variables and techno- Greedy X = 49, Y = 97 3.3122 50.47
logical parameters (gasier and microturbine characteristics) in- BHBF X = 49, Y = 97 3.3122 5.60
volved in the mathematical model, the proposed approach allows BPSO X = 50, Y = 95 3.2890 3.84
to get the location, plant size and supply area that offer the best GA X = 49, Y = 98 3.2944 8.12
protability from the investor viewpoint.
All the experiments have shown that the optimal plant size
according to the protability for the investor is 2 MW picts (for a 2 MW power constraint) the mean and standard devia-
(PI = 3.3122). The best location corresponds to coordinate: X = 49, tion values for three algorithms. As can seen, the average
Y = 97. Fig. 8 presents the best location for a 2 MW generated protability index for BHBF algorithm is higher than BPSO and
power (red point). As could be seen in this gure, the highest avail- GA. Otherwise, the lower standard deviation in BHBF algorithm
able biomass potential area coincides with the optimal predicted suggest that our approach converges to the optimal solution with
location of the plant. The rest of best locations are depicted in Table more probability than BPSO and GA.
7. Otherwise, a plant size with an installed power below 0.5 MW Table 9 presents a comparison between our approach and the
(PI = 0.0468) will not be protable for the investment. classical ones has been performed in terms of protability of the
On the other hand, according to [34], the combustion of biomass solution and elapsed time for a 2 MW installed power.
has been considered as a CO2 non-emitting source. Further, accord- As can be seen in the Table 9, BHBF obtain the optimal prot-
ing to Ref. [35], Table 7 shows the CO2 emissions that will be pro- ability with the ninth of time than the greedy (accurate) solution.
duced for a power generation plant based in fossil fuel. Also, the required computation cost is slightly higher than BPSO,
Figs. 5 and 7 show that our algorithm (BHBF) converges in less but lower than GA. However, metaheuristic classical approaches
iterations than other studied algorithms. Furthermore, Table 8 de- did not reach the optimal location. In conclusion, our method has
proven its reliability for this concrete problem, reaching the opti-
mal location for the biomass plant, reducing in a factor of 89
the elapsed time respect to the greedy solution and with similar
PI = 3.3122 computation requirements than the lowest elapsed time method.
20 Pe = 1.9965 MW
Finally, for promoting the olive-based biomass power plants,
Area = 161.3343 km2
investors are nancially supported by the Spanish government
40 (according to the Andalusian Plan of Energetic Sustainability,
20092014 [33]) in some economical issues such as: machinery
for biomass collection and transport, logistic and initial invest-
60
ment. The BHBF approach allows to fast and efciently obtain
Y

the protability and payback of the investment, together with

80 other important information (location, biomass supply area and
the corresponding CO2 emissions reduction).
100
Acknowledgements
120
This work was supported in part by Project entitled Adaptation
20 40 60 80 100 120 of renewable energy solutions for the olive oil industry (RESO-
X LIVE), Grant Agreement Number: 218453. This Project is funded
by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Pro-
Fig. 8. Optimal location of the biomass power plant for the BHBF algorithm gramme (20072013).
(P 6 2 MW).

References
Table 7
Simulation results and CO2 emissions reduction. [1] Morillo JA, Antizar-Ladislao B, Monteoliva-Snchez M, Ramos-Cormenzana A,
Russell NJ. Bioremediation and biovalorisation of olive-mill wastes. Appl
Pe Biomass supply Best location PI CO2 emissions Microbiol Biotechnol 2009;82:2539.
(MW) area (km2) coordinates reduction (tCO2/yr) [2] Adaptation of renewable energy solutions for the olive oil industry. RESOLIVE;
2009. <http://www.resolive.com>.
0.5 39.4546 (49, 93) 0.0468 2100 [3] Cara C, Ruiz E, Ballesteros M, Manzanares P, Negro MJ, Castro E. Production of
1 78.5186 (49, 89) 1.9104 4200 fuel ethanol from steam-explosion pretreated olive tree pruning. Fuel
2 161.3343 (49, 97) 3.3122 8400 2008;87:692700.
3 247.0798 (79, 70) 2.1710 12,600 [4] Jimnez L, Prez I, Garca JC, Rodrguez A. Inuence of process variables in the
4 325.3055 (53, 50) 2.4403 16,800 ethanol pulping of olive tree trimmings. Bioresour Technol 2001;78:639.
4.5 364.9554 (53, 57) 2.5335 18,900 [5] Jurado F, Ortega M, Cano A, Carpio J. Biomass gasication, gas turbine, and
diesel engine. Energy Sources 2001;23:897905.
 D. Vera et al. / Applied Energy 87 (2010) 21192127
[6] Reche Lpez P, Gmez Gonzlez M, Ruiz-Reyes N, Jurado F. Optimization of
biomass fuelled systems for distributed power generation using particle
swarm optimization. Electr Power Syst Res 2008;78:144855.
[7] Kinoshita Tsuguki, Inoue Keisuke, Iwao Koki, Kagemoto Hiroshi, Yamagata
Yoshiki. A spatial evaluation of forest biomass usage using GIS. Appl Energy
2009;86(1):18.
[8] Geographic Information Systems of farming plots (SIGPAC); 2009. <http://
www.mapa.es/es/sig/pags/sig/intro2.htm> [in Spanish].
[9] Geographic Information Systems of Andalusia (SIGPAC); 2009. <http://
www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/sigpacandalucia/> [in Spanish].
[10] Pham DT, Castellani M. The Bees algorithm: modelling foraging behaviour to
solve continuous optimization problems. Proc Inst Mech Eng, C: J Mech Eng Sci
2009;223(12):291938.
[11] Pham DT, Kalyoncu M. Optimisation of a fuzzy logic controller for a exible
single-link robot arm using the Bees algorithm. In: IEEE international conference
on industrial informatics (INDIN); 2009. p. 47580 [art. no. 5195850].
[12] Pham DT, Ghanbarzadeh A, Otri S, Ko E. Optimal design of mechanical
components using the Bees algorithm. Proc Inst Mech Eng, C: J Mech Eng Sci
2009;223(5):10516.
[13] Sundareswaran K, Sreedevi VT. Design and development of feed-back
controller for a boost converter using a colony of foraging bees. Electr Power
Componen Syst 2009;37:46577.
[14] Melin-Batista B, Moreno-Vega JM, Vaswani N, Yumar R. A nature inspired
approach for the uncapacitated plant cycle location problem. Stud Comput
Intell 2009;236:4960.
[15] Mohamad Idris R, Khairuddin A, Mustafa MW. Optimal allocation of FACTS
devices for ATC enhancement using Bees algorithm. World Acad Sci, Eng
Technol 2009;54:2070372.
[16] Nakrani S, Tovey C. On honey bees and dynamic server allocation in internet
hosting centers. Adapt Behav 2004;12(34):22340.
[17] Reche Lpez P, Ruiz-Reyes N, Garca Galn S, Jurado F. Comparison of
metaheuristic techniques to determine optimal placement of biomass power
plants. 1st ed. Nova Publishers; 2008.
[18] Freppaz D, Minciardi R, Robba R, Rovatti M, Sacile M, Taramasso A. Optimizing
forest biomass exploitation for energy supply at a regional level. Biomass
Bioenergy 2004;26:1526.
[19] Capstone Turbine Corporation. CR200 MicroTurbine Renewable Fuels; 2009.
<http://www.capstoneturbine.com/_docs/CR200%20Renewable.pdf>.
[20] Holland JH. Adaptation in natural and articial systems. 1st ed. Ann Arbor: The
University of Michigan Press; 1975 [London: The MIT Press; 1992].
2127
[21] Goldberg DE. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine
learning. 1st ed. Addison Wesley; 1989.
[22] Michalewicz Z. Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs.
2nd ed. Springer Verlag; 1996.
[23] Kennedy J, Eberhart RC. Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of IEEE
international conference on neural networks, vol. 4. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE;
1995. p. 19428.
[24] Eberhart RC, Kennedy J. A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. In:
Proceedings of the IEEE sixth international symposium on micro machine and
human science; 1995. p. 3943.
[25] Kennedy J, Eberhart RC. A discrete binary version of the particle swarm
algorithm. In: Proceedings of IEEE conference on systems, man and
cybernetics; 1997. p. 410408.
[26] Afshinmanesh F, Marandi A, Rahimi-Kian A. A novel binary particle swarm
optimization method using articial immune system. In: Proceedings of IEEE
international conference on computer as a tool (EUROCON 2005); 2005. p.
21720.
[27] Baig AR, Rashid M. Foraging for tness: a honey bee behavior based
algorithm for function optimization. Technical report, NUCES, Pakistan;
November 2006.
[28] Li-Pei Wong, Malcolm Yoke Hean Low, Chin Soon Chong. A bee colony
optimization algorithm for traveling salesman problem. In: IEEE international
conference on modelling and simulation; 2008.
[29] Blackwell T, Branke J. Multiswarms, exclusion, and anti-convergence in
dynamic environments. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2006;10 (4).
[30] Boone G, Chiang HD. Optimal capacitor placement in distribution systems by
genetic algorithm. Electr Power Energy Syst 1993;15:15562.
[31] Eberhart RC, Shi Y. Particle swarm optimization: developments, applications
and recourses. Proc Evol Comput Congr 2001;1:816.
[32] Naka S, Genji T, Yura T, Fukuyama Y. A hybrid particle swarm optimization for
distribution state estimation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2003;18:608.
[33] Agencia Andaluza de la Energa. Andalusian plan of energetic sustainability,
20092014; 2009. <http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agenciadelaenergia/nav/
com/contenido.jsp?pag=/contenidos/incentivos/incentivos_09> [in Spanish].
[34] International Energy Agency. IEA statistics: CO2 emissions from fuel
combustion; 2009.
[35] Johannes Schmidt, Sylvain Leduc, Erik Dotzauer, Georg Kindermann, Erwin
Schmid. Cost-effective CO2 emission reduction through heat, power and
biofuel production from woody biomass: a spatially explicit comparison of
conversion technologies. Appl Energy 2009.