## 4 Results and Discussions
### The Results Obtained by WOA in Case 4
By converting into percentages, the results achieved by Scenarios 2 are 95.98% better than Scenarios 1. Having said that, the optimization of both the power supplied from WTs and their power factors has resulted in a huge improvement in energy loss values compared to the implementation of Scenario 1. Figure 19 describes the total energy supplied from the main transformer to the grid in twelve months of a year. Except for May and August, the power supplied to the grid in the remaining months of both scenarios are all negative. This means that the power injected into the grid by WTs in the two scenarios is large enough to fulfill load demand and to fulfill even more than required. Hence, the extra power supplied from the main transformer is not needed. Figures 20-23 show the amount of energy supplied from the main transformer to the grid in the four quarters of the year. The observation of Figure 20 indicates that the energy supplied from the transformer to the grid in the first three months of the year are all negative, which means the total amount of energy supplied to load by WTs is greater than enough for both scenarios. However, things have changed when evaluating the next three months of the second quarter, as described in Figure 21. Specifically, there are many hours  
Figure 17: The energy loss of twelve months obtained by WSO. Figure 18: The comparison of energy loss of a year in three scenarios. within a day of the three months that the energy supplied from the main transformer are greater than zero for two scenarios. This means that the amount of energy supplied by WTs is lower than the amount needed by load demand. Similar results are also described while analyzing the data shown in Figure 22. In the figure, it is easy to realize that the amount of energy supplied to the grid by the main transformer in July, August, and September is noticeably larger than that of the second quarter. Nevertheless, while observing the last three months of the year in the fourth quarter, presented in Figure 23, the shape of the graph is almost similar to what happened in the first quarter, where the energy supplied by WTs was greater than the load demand needed. Figure 19: The total energy supplied from the transformer in the two scenarios. Figure 20: Power supplied by the main transformer to the grid at each hour of each month in the first quarter of the year. Figure 22: Power supplied by the main transformer to the grid at each hour of each month in the third quarter of the year. Figures 24-27 show the total power supplied by WTs in one day of each month of the four quarters for two scenarios. While looking at Figure 24, the energy supplied by WTs in Scenario 1 in the first three months of the year is noticeably larger than that in Scenario 2. The reason for this phenomenon can be explained by looking at the main objective function considered in this research, which is to minimize power loss, not maximize penetration of wind power. Hence, the use of less energy supplied by WTs in Scenario 2 for reaching the best power loss values is a better implementation than what resulted in Scenario 1. Figure 16:0 Power supplied by the main transformer to the grid at each hour of each month in the fourth quarter of the year. Figure 16:1 Total power supplied by two WTs at each hour of each month in the first quarter. The power supplied by WTs in Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 in the second and third quarters is presented in Figures 25 and 26, respectively. In these figures, although the power supplied by WTs in Scenario 2 is still less than in Scenario 1, the difference can be observed mostly from the 3 rd hour to the 13 th hour for the second quarter. For the third quarter, the difference between the mount power supplied by WTs in Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 can be observed clearly from the 1 st hour to the 13 th hour of July and from the 6 th hour to the 14 th hour of September. Figure 28 shows the total power supplied by WTs obtained in the two scenarios.