The decarbonisation of electricity systems and the associated increase in variable generation sources requires an increase in power system flexibility. Demand side response (DSR) is widely viewed as a cost-effective source of flexibility, with considerable market potential. To date, the main DSR providers have been energy intensive firms. However, the expectation is that non-energy intensive consumers such as commercial firms and public sector organisations, will also help to provide system flexibility. Despite its DSR potential, the commercial and public sector has received little attention in the literature. This paper helps address this gap by identifying and exploring barriers to the participation of large commercial firms and public sector organisations in DSR through a review of the academic and grey literature on DSR. Drawing on the literature on barriers to energy efficiency, we use concepts from orthodox and behavioural economics, organisational studies and social practice theory to frame our analysis. The article argues that barriers to participation in DSR exist at the level of the organisation and not only the site. For large commercial firms and public sector organisations, the combination of having small individual electricity loads and complex internal decision-making processes can hinder their uptake of DSR. The hidden costs of participation, issues of bounded rationality and what the energy is used for within different organisations also limit the firms' ability to participate in DSR. literature is the 'energy-efficiency gap', which examines the reasons for organisations' underinvestment in apparently profitable EE initiatives [22][23][24].The literature on the EE gap can be useful to examine barriers to DSR participation for three reasons. First, studies on the EE gap tend to use a multi-disciplinary approach in their analysis, which can enable the identification of a more comprehensive set of barriers as the problems under examination are considered from different perspectives. For example, while some theories will focus on the barriers that originate at the level of the individual others will emphasise the role of organisational factors in restricting the uptake of EE projects. Second, from the perspective of firms and public sector organisations, there are several similarities between EE and DSR. Both DSR and EE are energy management innovations [21]. Both are relatively optional. The benefits of increased energy efficiency and more demand side flexibility in the system are generally agreed, and both measures are often advocated as being cost-effective for businesses. However, a gap remains between estimates of EE and DSR potentials and businesses' uptake of these initiatives. Within firms, both DSR and EE are the responsibility of energy departments but require support from other parties of the organisation and are both likely to be evaluated by the same criteria [15,21,25]. Third, the EE literature includes barriers that focus on the features of the organisation [26,27] rather than solely o...

No abstract

In order to have the best possible chance of achieving ‘decent work’ and ‘climate action’ as laid forth in the UN Sustainable Development Goals, government and policy makers must pay close attention to current time-use patterns, as well as the way these might change in the near future. Here we contribute to the existing literature on time-use behaviour through a systematic exploration of the relationship between working patterns and energy consumption from the perspective of time-use. Our starting point is the premise that different work arrangements impact the timing of energy demand not only in workplaces, but also at home. Using the data from the 2014–2015 UK time-use survey, we were able to capture patterns of time-use behaviours and to assess their relationship with daily energy consumption. We propose a systematic time-use-based approach for estimating residential energy consumption with regards to activity timing, activity location, activity coordination, and appliance type. We use this method to discover patterns in residential activities and energy consumption, as well as the causal relationship between residential energy consumption and work patterns. In this study, we unpack the heterogeneity in the work–energy relationship, particularly when comparing full-time and part-time workers. Our results suggest that full-time employees have a higher potential to reduce their energy use compared to part-time employees. We also discover a non-linear change in total energy consumption for respondents with varying levels of work time. Energy consumption reductions associated with differences in work schedules are greatest during the first few hours of the workday, but then level off. Our findings suggests that time-use data can provide useful insights for evaluating and possibly designing energy and labour-market policies.

No abstract

No abstract