Abstract
The increasing adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) presents both opportunities and challenges for power networks. While EVs have the potential to reduce carbon emissions, accommodating their growing power demand requires careful planning to prevent overloading and mitigate environmental impacts. This paper introduces an integrated hosting capacity model to facilitate higher EV penetration while maintaining environmental standards. In addition to EV charging stations, the model incorporates transmission lines, reactive power compensators, energy storage systems, and thyristor-controlled series compensators to ensure a reliable power supply. The model aims to maximize EV charging station deployment, minimize greenhouse gas emissions, and optimize net present value through hosting capacity strategies. Three hosting capacity plans are proposed to analyze the impact of prioritizing one of these objectives over the others in network configurations. Accurate EV demand forecasting is critical for this model, and a swarm intelligence forecasting algorithm is proposed to explore various forecasting approaches. The model is complex and involves nonlinear multi-objective optimization. To solve it, a new hybrid optimization algorithm is introduced, combining the features of the Marine Predators Algorithm and the Honey Badger Algorithm. Three hybridization schemes-Series Hybrid Scheme, Population Division Scheme, and Switching Strategy Scheme-are developed to address the optimization challenges effectively. The results show that the first and second hybridization schemes are the most effective for solving the EV load forecasting models, with a robustness of at least 90%. In contrast, the robustness of the third scheme reaches only 30% in some models. Simulation studies on the IEEE 9-bus network and the IEEE 30-bus system validate the model's effectiveness in integrating EVs while achieving environmental sustainability objectives. The findings show the superiority of the proposed hybrid schemes in solving the hosting capacity model in terms of finding optimal solutions. However, the third scheme required less computing time than the others, with its convergence time being at least 33.3% shorter.