Increasing load demand and localized constraints are driving the need for cost-effective alternatives to traditional network reinforcement. However, existing Non-Wires Alternative (NWA) planning approaches often rely on simplified assumptions or computationally intensive full-year optimization, limiting their practical applicability. This study proposes a planning-oriented method integrating 8760-h Direct Load Flow (DLF) -based assessment, worst-case screening, and Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) -based resource sizing for the coordinated deployment of Energy Storage Systems (ESSs), Demand Response (DR), and Photovoltaic (PV) resources, along with building-scale microgrid candidates. The proposed microgrid candidates are modeled as grid-connected, building-scale configurations in which PV, ESSs, and DR are co-located at a single node, representing integrated resource units within the distribution system. The results show that voltage constraints are the dominant limiting factor and that NWAs primarily function as an investment deferral strategy rather than a full replacement for traditional reinforcement, delaying constraint violations by approximately 2 to 14 years. An ESS provides the most direct contribution to constraint mitigation, while DR and PV offer complementary support. The results also highlight the importance of locational deployment. In particular, a co-located microgrid configuration (MG₁11) is selected as the optimal portfolio under moderate load growth conditions (Case B, 2%), demonstrating the practical feasibility of integrated DER deployment at a single node. Economic feasibility is found to be highly sensitive to incentive design, with profitability achieved only under favorable compensation conditions. These results demonstrate that coordinated DER portfolios can effectively extend deferral periods and provide practical insights into cost-effective NWA planning under realistic operating conditions.
Park et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: