## 5 Numerical Studies
### Analysis of Results in Scenario 4  
Furthermore, the numerical studies with uncertainty in scenario 4 are conducted, and the dispatch result of heat power is shown in Figure 8. It can be observed that the heat load in summer is significantly lower than that in winter, and the lower level in the former occurs between 11:00 and 14:00, while the lower level in the latter occurs between 13:00 and 16:00. Regardless of the time period, CHP bears most of the heat load, and the rest is supplemented by P2G. It is worth noting that, due to the consideration of occupant heat comfort zones, the heat generated by CHP and P2G does not exactly match the heat load curve. A reasonable assumption is that when the heat load exceeds the heat supply, it corresponds to occupants reducing their heat consumption in order to reduce energy costs. On the other hand, when the heat load is less than the heat supply, the aim is to meet the energy balance requirements of the system. The dispatch results for electricity on the two typical days are shown in Figure 9. Unlike the heat load, the electricity load remains relatively stable in both summer and winter. In addition to meeting the occupants' demand, part of the electricity is consumed by P2G and CCS. The electricity supply is mainly met by the power generation of PV&WPP, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Typical Day** & **Scenario 1** & **Scenario 2** & **Scenario 3** & **Scenario 4** \\ \hline Summer & 2383.73 & 2362.64 & 2498.70 & 2422.55 \\ Winter & 4497.36 & 4462.20 & 4559.32 & 4538.46 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Objective values for different scenarios in summer and winter (CNY). Figure 7: Comparison of actual heat load with different scenarios. CHP, and GT, and ES performs a small amount of charging and discharging to achieve electricity balance. Between 11:00 and 14:00 in summer, the heat load is reduced, resulting in a decrease in CHP power generation, and the resulting electricity gap is supplemented by the discharge of ES. Between 10:00 and 15:00 in winter, the output of PV&WPP increases significantly, resulting in a surplus of electricity, which is mainly used to charge ES to consume. In the entire electricity dispatch process, there was no wind or photovoltaic power curtailment, which ensures the full utilization of renewable energy. At the same time, the use of ES reduces the purchase of electricity from external power grids, thereby effectively reducing energy costs. We have also provided a detailed description of the carbon flow within the system, as shown in Table 4 and Figure 10. It can be observed from Table 4 that both the CO2 production and emissions are higher in winter compared to summer. In detail, winter carbon emissions are approximately 1.85 times those in summer, and CO2 produced by GT is about 90% of the total amount. In Figure 10, from top to bottom, the CO2 generated by CHP and GT, as well as the CO2 emitted from the system into the atmosphere, are depicted. We can observe that carbon flow changes more frequently in winter and is generally at a lower level between 10:00 and 15:00 during the day, which happens to be the period when the heat load is lower in winter. Additionally, the carbon emission trail closely follows the pattern of CO2 production from GT; the reason is that GT is the primary source of CO2 in both summer and winter. Figure 8: Dispatch of heat power in summer and winter. Figure 9: Dispatch of electricity power in summer and winter. In the model construction process, the occupants' tolerance for heat is represented by a comfort zone, which effectively relaxes the constraint on the heat balance equation. To investigate the specific impact of this relaxation on total energy costs, we describe how the costs change with variations in \(\Delta P^{H}/P^{H}_{load}\) across different seasons. The graphical representation is shown in Figure 11.  
We can observe that the total cost decreases as \(\Delta P^{H}/P^{H}_{load}\) increases both in summer and winter.