Results for “Demand flexibility, distribution system, HVAC, Transactive Energy Systems”

DOE OSTI2021

Transactive HVAC Agent - Design and Performance Evaluation

Transactive energy systems are playing an increasingly important role in the efficient and reliable marketbased operation of the power grid. Since a significant portion of the residential building energy consumption is from heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, HVAC is one of the most promising resources to provide load flexibility. However, utilizing HVAC flexibility to provide various grid services while simultaneously maintaining consumer comfort and cost-reductions is challenging. This paper presents a design of a transactive HVAC agent (T-HVAC) to be used as a supervisory control for the HVAC system that can simultaneously ensure comfort and cost-reduction. In particular, the T-HVAC a) estimates HVAC thermal dynamics, b) ensures optimal operations of the HVAC system, and c) participates into markets, and d) implements a market-based control via controlling the thermostat temperature set-point. The T-HVAC performance is demonstrated through multiple scenarios and illustrations.

Demand flexibility, distribution system, HVAC, Tra↗

DOE OSTI2022

The Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) Study

The Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) study investigates the engineering and economic performance of a transactive energy retail market coordinating a high penetration of customer-side flexible energy assets. The study seeks to answer whether such an implementation is cost effective for customers, recovers sufficient revenue for DSOs, and is equally applicable and beneficial to a range of flexible asset types, renewable generation scenarios, and market assumptions. Using a highly interdisciplinary co-simulation and valuation framework, this assessment encompasses the entire electrical delivery system from bulk system generation and transmission, through the distribution system, to the modeling of individual customer buildings and flexible assets (including heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] units, water heaters, batteries, and electric vehicles). The study exercises a transactive energy retail market coordination scheme designed to integrate with an existing day-ahead and real-time competitive wholesale electricity market. Software decision-making agents are designed for the retail market operator as well as various price-responsive flexible assets. The engineering and economic performance of the transactive energy scheme is studied for two separate flexible asset deployments: flexible loads (HVAC units and residential water heaters) and behind-the-meter batteries. The results of each transactive case are compared to a business-as-usual case. These cases are subject to two different renewable generation scenarios, a moderate renewable generation scenario, representative of current levels of renewable generation deployment, and a future high renewables scenario, including the increased deployment of rooftop solar photovoltaic and electric vehicles. The transactive coordination scheme is shown to produce effective and stable control and decrease peak loads 9–15%. The resulting annual demand flexibility provides net economic savings of $3.3–5.0B per year for a region the size of Texas. Detailed analysis shows that net benefits were seen for a range of distribution system operator, customer, and flexible asset types. Both participating customer (with transactive flexible assets) and nonparticipating customers (with nonflexible assets) see reductions in annual utility bills and net annual energy expenses in the range of 10–16%.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) Study: Volume 1 (Main Report)

The Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) study investigates the engineering and economic performance of a transactive energy retail market coordinating a high penetration of customer-side flexible energy assets. The study seeks to answer whether such an implementation is cost effective for customers, recovers sufficient revenue for DSOs, and is equally applicable and beneficial to a range of flexible asset types, renewable generation scenarios, and market assumptions. Using a highly interdisciplinary co-simulation and valuation framework, this assessment encompasses the entire electrical delivery system from bulk system generation and transmission, through the distribution system, to the modeling of individual customer buildings and flexible assets (including heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] units, water heaters, batteries, and electric vehicles). The study exercises a transactive energy retail market coordination scheme designed to integrate with an existing day-ahead and real-time competitive wholesale electricity market. Software decision-making agents are designed for the retail market operator as well as various price-responsive flexible assets. The engineering and economic performance of the transactive energy scheme is studied for two separate flexible asset deployments: flexible loads (HVAC units and residential water heaters) and behind-the-meter batteries. The results of each transactive case are compared to a business-as-usual case. These cases are subject to two different renewable generation scenarios, a moderate renewable generation scenario, representative of current levels of renewable generation deployment, and a future high renewables scenario, including the increased deployment of rooftop solar photovoltaic and electric vehicles. The transactive coordination scheme is shown to produce effective and stable control and decrease peak loads 9–15%. The resulting annual demand flexibility provides net economic savings of $3.3–5.0B per year for a region the size of Texas. Detailed analysis shows that net benefits were seen for a range of distribution system operator, customer, and flexible asset types. Both participating customer (with transactive flexible assets) and nonparticipating customers (with nonflexible assets) see reductions in annual utility bills and net annual energy expenses in the range of 10–16%.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

DSO+T: Expanded Study Results DSO+T Study: Volume 5

The Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) study investigates the engineering and economic performance of a transactive energy retail market coordinating a high penetration of customer-side flexible energy assets. The study seeks to answer whether such an implementation is cost effective for customers, recovers sufficient revenue for DSOs, and is equally applicable and beneficial to a range of flexible asset types, renewable generation scenarios, and market assumptions. This report volume provides a detailed set of results for the DSO+T study extending results presented in Volumes 1, 2, and 4. The engineering and economic performance of the transactive energy scheme is presented for two separate flexible asset deployments: flexible loads (HVAC units and residential water heaters) and behind-the-meter batteries. The results of each transactive case are compared to a business-as-usual case. These cases are subject to two different renewable generation scenarios, a moderate renewable generation scenario, representative of current levels of renewable generation deployment, and a future high renewables scenario, including the increased deployment of rooftop solar photovoltaic and electric vehicles. The transactive coordination scheme is shown to produce effective and stable control and decrease peak loads 9–15%. The resulting annual demand flexibility provides net economic savings of $3.3–5.0B per year for a region the size of Texas. Detailed analysis shows that net benefits were seen for a range of distribution system operator, customer, and flexible asset types. Both participating customer (with transactive flexible assets) and nonparticipating customers (with nonflexible assets) see reductions in annual utility bills and net annual energy expenses in the range of 10–16%.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2024

Dataset for: Price Controls for Scarcity Events in Real-Time and Transactive Energy Systems

Real time pricing (RTP) is often promoted as a mechanism to improve the economic efficiency of the electricity system. However, many regulators have been hesitant to adopt RTP due to concerns about exposing customers to extreme price swings. To balance these concerns, this paper proposes a methodology for establishing price controls, based on the supply of demand-side flexibility in the system. As an illustrative example, we measure price responsiveness using an agent-based simulation model that is representative of the ERCOT market. The model is composed of a distribution feeder that has 250 customers with active agents controlling their HVAC systems in response to the historical ERCOT RTP with an artificially added high-price event. These agents are subjected to increasing electricity prices during the event, which we then use to create a supply curve for demand-side resources in our modeled scarcity event. We set potential price caps at points on the supply curve where customers’ have exhausted their flexible capacity. Using historical prices, we examine the systemic costs of these price caps, and present regulatory options for recouping them. Utilities and regulators interested in limiting consumer risk from dynamic pricing can utilize these methods to develop rate structures and encourage conservation. The attached data upload allows for the duplication or modification of the analysis performed in this study.

Kerby, Jessica R↗

DOE OSTI2026

Progressing Analysis of Variable Electric Rates (PAVER) Study

The Progressing Analysis of Variable Electric Rates (PAVER) study analyzed the impact of a range of time-varying electric rates on the performance of a regional electric grid and the resulting costs for participating and non-participating customers. This analysis leveraged and extended the work of PNNL’s Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) study. Five different rate designs were included: a flat volumetric energy charge, a typical Time of Use (TOU) rate, a dynamic energy (DE) rate (based on wholesale locational marginal prices), a dynamic energy and capacity (DE+C) rate, and, finally, a Block and Swing (B&S) rate that billed customers based on their average load profile at constant pricing, but used the DE+C dynamic price for load deviations from their average profile. These rates were analyzed in a large-scale co-simulation of an entire regional grid with a customer population representative of the current state. A large fraction (80%) of residential and commercial customers were assumed to participate in these time-varying rates with automatically controlled HVAC, water heaters, electric vehicles, and batteries. This study assumed no industrial sector participation. The DE and DE+C rates saw system peak loads reduced by 6-7%, while the large participation in the TOU rate case saw a significant rebound effect and a resulting peak load increase of >5%. The impacts to the annual and peak system demand impacted system wholesale prices and the overall grid operating costs. This cost structure determined the revenue needed to be collected from customers by each rate design. Participating customers on the DE and DE+C rates (located in one of the modeled DSOs) saw reductions in average annual electricity bills of 11-17% with average increases in monthly bill variation of no more than 13%. At such high participation levels, TOU customers saw 10% higher average annual bills (due to system-wide rebound effects) and average increased monthly bill variation of 16%. Residential owners of large flexible loads (such as electric vehicles) saw larger bill savings (17-20%) when on a fully dynamic rate. The presence of on-site generation (such as rooftop solar) did not appear to appreciably change customer outcomes. Customers on the Block and Swing rate did see 6% lower monthly bill variation (as intended) than the flat rate case, but at the expense of appreciable bill savings, which were only 3%, comparable to the savings seen by non-participants. Given this finding we recommend that additional research be conducted into how best various bill protection mechanisms can balance minimizing customer bill variation with providing financial incentives commensurate with the flexibility customers provide. We also recommend that customer outcomes be explored across a range of regions using current actual customer and system cost data.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗