2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.054
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Further exploring the potential of residential demand response programs in electricity distribution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
30
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 110 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Project results show that there has been a consistent change of behavior after the power-based tariffs were introduced: the absolute shift from peak to off-peak and vice versa was distributed between the summer (8.7%) and the winter (1.6%) season [31]. A follow-up study found that during the six year period following the first study (2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014), households responded to the price signals by reducing individual peak demand by 9.3% (summer) and 7.5% (winter) as well as shifting electricity consumption from peak to off-peak hours by 2.4 and 0.2% respectively in the summer and winter seasons [32]. Although residential consumers are not used to being charged based on power instead of energy and most participants even indicated that they had not bothered to understand in detail the consequences of the power-based tariff, they were satisfied with noting that it is better for their private economy to use electricity in off-peak periods, supporting this first hypothesis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Project results show that there has been a consistent change of behavior after the power-based tariffs were introduced: the absolute shift from peak to off-peak and vice versa was distributed between the summer (8.7%) and the winter (1.6%) season [31]. A follow-up study found that during the six year period following the first study (2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014), households responded to the price signals by reducing individual peak demand by 9.3% (summer) and 7.5% (winter) as well as shifting electricity consumption from peak to off-peak hours by 2.4 and 0.2% respectively in the summer and winter seasons [32]. Although residential consumers are not used to being charged based on power instead of energy and most participants even indicated that they had not bothered to understand in detail the consequences of the power-based tariff, they were satisfied with noting that it is better for their private economy to use electricity in off-peak periods, supporting this first hypothesis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [16], the flexibility potential of residential A/C systems is extrapolated from hourly electricity consumption data. In [17][18][19][20] impacts and quantifications of residential flexibility are given. However, the flexibility measured in these works was specifically for users that participated to dynamic tariff schemes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The demand response is limited within thermal residential demands like heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning. Bartusch and Alvehag [10] investigate the potential of demand response with empirical data among Swedish single-family homes and apartment residence. They conclude that the consumers respond to price signals resulting in a reduction of the peak demand and a shift it to less demanding hours.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%