Microgrids can be used for securing the supply of power during network outages. Underground cabling of distribution networks is another effective but conventional and expensive alternative to enhance the reliability of the power supply. This paper first presents an analysis method for the determination of microgrid power supply adequacy during islanded operation and, second, presents a comparison method for the overall cost calculation of microgrids versus underground cabling. The microgrid power adequacy during a rather long network outage is required in order to indicate high level of reliability of the supply. The overall cost calculation considers the economic benefits and costs incurred, combined for both the distribution network company and the consumer. Whereas the microgrid setup determines the islanded-operation power adequacy and thus the reliability of the supply, the economic feasibility results from the normal operations and services. The methods are illustrated by two typical, and even critical, case studies in rural distribution networks: an electric-heated detached house and a dairy farm. These case studies show that even in the case of a single consumer, a microgrid option could be more economical than network renovation by underground cabling of a branch in order to increase the reliability.

Microgrids could be utilized to improve the distribution network resiliency against weather-related network outages and increase the security of power supply of rural electricity consumers. Whereas underground cabling is expensive for the distribution system operator (DSO), an alternative microgrid investment could benefit the DSO and consumer, provided the necessary changes were made in the network regulation. A rural detached house customer microgrid is analysed in comparison to underground cabling, considering the uncertainties in the calculation parameters through a sensitivity analysis. Adequacy of the microgrid power supply during unexpected network outage for a reasonably long duration is assessed, as well as the economics of the feasible microgrid setup consisting of variable generation, controllable generation, and electric storage. The total costs and benefits for the DSO and consumer/prosumer are considered. A microgrid would likely be a more cost-efficient option overall, but not as-is for the consumer. The battery energy storage system (BESS)-related cost-sharing strategies are suggested in this paper in order to assess possible break-even investment solutions for the related parties. The sensitivities of the microgrid and cabling investments were considered in particular. Cost-sharing strategies under network regulatory framework would need to be developed further in order for both the consumer and DSO to benefit from the solution as a whole.

Microgrids can be used for securing power supply during network outages. Underground cabling of distribution networks is another effective, but conventional and expensive alternative to enhance reliability of power supply. This paper presents firstly an analysis method for the determination of microgrid power supply adequacy during islanded operation, and secondly, a comparison method for overall cost calculation of microgrids vs. underground cabling. The microgrid power adequacy during a rather long network outage is required in order to indicate high level of reliability of supply. The overall cost calculations consider the economic benefits and costs incurred combined for both the distribution network company and the consumer. Whereas the microgrid setup determines the islanded operation power adequacy and thus the reliability of supply, the economic feasibility results from the normal operations and services. The methods are illustrated by two typical, and even critical, case studies in rural distribution networks: an electric-heated detached house and a dairy farm. These case studies show that even in case of a single consumer, a microgrid option could be more economical than network renovation by underground cabling of a branch in order to increase reliability.