|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
125730
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In-home displays, dynamic pricing, and automated devices aim to reduce residential electricity use-overall and during peak hours. We present a meta-analysis of 32 studies of the impacts of these interventions, conducted in the US or Canada. We find that methodological problems are common in the design of these studies, leading to artificially inflated results relative to what one would expect if the interventions were implemented in the general population. Particular problems include having volunteer participants who may have been especially motivated to reduce their electricity use, letting participants choose their preferred intervention, and having high attrition rates. Using estimates of bias from medical clinical trials as a guide, we recalculate impact estimates to adjust for bias, resulting in values that are often less than half of those reported in the reviewed studies. We estimate that in-home displays were the most effective intervention for reducing overall electricity use (~4% using reported data; ~3% after adjusting for bias), while dynamic pricing significantly reduced peak demand (~11% reported; ~6% adjusted), especially when used in conjunction with home automation (~25% reported; ~14% adjusted). We conclude with recommendations that can improve pilot studies and the soundness of decisions based on their results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
115703
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Residential electrical demand response (DR) offers the prospect of reducing the environmental impact of electricity use, and also the supply costs. However, the relatively small loads and numerous actors imply a large effort: response ratio. Residential DR may be an essential part of future smart grids, but how viable is it in the short to medium term? This paper reviews some DR concepts, then evaluates the propositions that households in cool temperate climates will be in a position to contribute to grid flexibility within the next decade, and that that they will allow some automated load control. Examples of demand response from around the world are discussed in order to assess the main considerations for cool climates. Different tariff types and forms of control are assessed in terms of what is being asked of electricity users, with a focus on real-time pricing and direct load control in energy systems with increasingly distributed resources. The literature points to the significance of thermal loads, supply mix, demand-side infrastructure, market regulation, and the framing of risks and opportunities associated with DR. In concentrating on social aspects of residential demand response, the paper complements the body of work on technical and economic potential.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
132608
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using an agent-based modeling approach we study the temporal dynamics of consumer opinions regarding switching to dynamic electricity tariffs and the actual decisions to switch. We assume that the decision to switch is based on the unanimity of ? past opinions. The resulting model offers a hypothetical, yet plausible explanation of why there is such a big discrepancy between consumer opinions, as measured by market surveys, and the actual participation in pilot programs and the adoption of dynamic tariffs. We argue that due to the high indifference level in today×s retail electricity markets, customer opinions are very unstable and change frequently. The conducted simulation study shows that reducing the indifference level can result in narrowing the intention-behavior gap. A similar effect can be achieved by decreasing the decision time that a consumer takes to make a decision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
098696
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
We estimate the cost of installing smart meters in the EU to be €51 billion, and that operational savings will be worth between €26 and 41 billion, leaving a gap of €10-25 billion between benefits and costs. Smart meters can fill this gap because they enable the provision of dynamic pricing, which reduces peak demand and lowers the need for building and running expensive peaking power plants. The present value of savings in peaking infrastructure could be as high as €67 billion for the EU if policy-makers can overcome barriers to consumers adopting dynamic tariffs, but only €14 billion otherwise. We outline a number of ways to increase the adoption of dynamic tariffs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|