The flexible prosumer: Measuring the willingness to co-create distributed flexibility
Introduction
Matching supply and demand over time is a key challenge in power markets. In traditional electricity markets, demand has largely been taken for granted, while the necessary flexibility has been built into the supply side through peak power plants and centralized storage. Increasing shares of fluctuating renewable energies have enhanced the need for flexibility to avoid imbalances in the power system. Established and new companies develop novel business models to provide flexibility (Helms et al., 2016). Decentralization trends in the energy market offer new opportunities for matching supply and demand in a distributed manner. Distributed flexibility provision can take different forms: Shifting demand and supply over time and/or building up local storage capacity. Successfully mobilizing flexibility in distribution grids can help to delay or avoid investments in extending centralized grid infrastructure (Gordijn and Akkermans, 2007, Veldman et al., 2013), resulting in cost efficient energy systems and allowing smooth integration of renewables (Denholm and Hand, 2011). While centralized sources of flexibility (e.g. gas-fired power plants or hydropower reservoirs) are well understood, the tendency of decentralized electricity consumers becoming prosumers (producers and consumers at the same time, cf. (Bergman and Eyre, 2011, Kotler, 1986, Toffler, 1980)) provides a potentially valuable source of – so far underutilized – flexibility (Gordijn and Akkermans, 2007, Kubli, 2018, Veldman et al., 2013). Decentral prosumers can provide flexibility by optimizing the timing of their electricity production and consumption, and by making decentralized storage available (e.g. through investing in batteries or providing heat reserves through a more flexible heating behavior). A better understanding of whether and under which conditions prosumers are actually ready to contribute to flexibility provision is important if these resources are to be mobilized.
This paper empirically investigates prosumers’ willingness to co-create flexibility with a series of studies across three main domains of energy use: (a) solar PV plus storage, (b) electric vehicles, (c) heat pumps. By conducting three choice experiments with a unique sample of actual and potential flexible prosumers in Switzerland (N = 902), we aim to answer the following two research questions:
- 1.
To what extent are prosumers willing to co-create flexibility?
- 2.
Are there differences between the three technology domains?
Our paper makes three main contributions to the extant literature on smart grids and flexibility in the power market. First, we answer the call for “putting people in the loop” (e.g. Sowe et al., 2016) and for revealing determinants of social acceptance of smart grids (Wolsink, 2012), by investigating the preferences of end users as important agents in the diffusion of distributed flexibility. Second, we develop an innovative way of operationalizing and measuring the willingness to co-create flexibility. Third, we provide a pilot application of this measurement instrument that can serve as a role model for policymakers and energy companies who seek to effectively engage prosumers.
This paper is structured as follows. In the second section, we discuss existing literature on distributed generation, energy consumer preferences, and the role of prosumers in co-creating flexibility. In the third section, we introduce our methodological approach. Section 4 presents the results of the three studies and a discussion, while Section 5 concludes the paper with implications for energy policy and flexibility business model design, as well as a section on limitations and further research.
Section snippets
Energy system flexibility and smart grids
As Lund et al. (2015) point out, energy system flexibility is “definitely a ‘hot topic’”. Their review of close to 400 academic publications presents a comprehensive overview of all the available options to integrate increasing shares of renewables in the grid, from large-scale centralized to small-scale decentralized, from supply-side to demand-side, and across a range of different time horizons. As another indication of the “hot” nature of this topic, the European Commission under its Horizon
Methodology and data
Borrowing from previous studies investigating preferences related to consumers’ electricity choice, demand response and becoming a prosumer, we investigate prosumers's willingness to co-create flexibility with choice experiments. Choice experiments have been widely applied in energy economics and related fields (Aravena et al., 2016, Chau et al., 2010, Heinzle and Wüstenhagen, 2012, Kaenzig et al., 2013, Lüdeke-Freund and Loock, 2011, Lüthi and Wüstenhagen, 2012, Park et al., 2013, Salm, 2017,
Results and discussion
In the following, we report the results of the three studies along two main factors: the relative importances of the attributes and the part-worth utilities for attribute levels. Subsequently, we conduct a qualitative comparison of the three studies based on the willingness to co-create flexibility.
Conclusion and implications for energy policy
Increasing shares of renewable energies create new challenges for balancing supply and demand, but in combination with the rise of the prosumer, they also offer opportunities for providing distributed flexibility. In this paper, we have emphasized the important role of the prosumer in co-creating flexibility. By conducting a series of choice experiments with 902 actual and potential flexible prosumers across three domains of energy use, we confirm that there is actually a positive willingness
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the nano-tera project HeatReserves, the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 646476 (EMPOWER) and from SCCER CREST and SCCER Mobility, which are financially supported by the Swiss Commission for Technology and Innovation (CTI). We thank Gianni Operto and Thomas Kubli for their expert advice on the technical assessment of flexibility options included in the choice experiments, as well as Stefanie
References (62)
- et al.
Business models for distributed energy resources: a review and empirical analysis
Energy Policy
(2017) - et al.
Demand response in US electricity markets: empirical evidence
Energy
(2010) - et al.
A choice experiment to estimate the effect of green experience on preferences and willingness-to-pay for green building attributes
Build. Environ.
(2010) - et al.
Grid flexibility and storage required to achieve very high penetration of variable renewable electricity
Energy Policy
(2011) Household dynamics of technology adoption: a spatial econometric analysis of residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems in Germany
Energy Res. Soc. Sci.
(2017)- et al.
Dynamic electricity pricing—which programs do consumers prefer?
Energy Policy
(2013) - et al.
Business models for distributed generation in a liberalized market environment
Electr. Power Syst. Res.
(2007) - et al.
Timing-based business models for flexibility creation in the electric power sector
Energy Policy
(2016) - et al.
Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany
Energy Policy
(2013) - et al.
Customer value of smart metering: explorative evidence from a choice-based conjoint study in Switzerland
Energy Policy
(2013)
Flexibility requirements of renewable energy based electricity systems – a review of research results and methodologies
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Squaring the sunny circle? On balancing distributive justice of power grid costs and incentives for solar prosumers
Energy Policy
Decentralisation dynamics in energy systems: a generic simulation of network effects
Energy Res. Soc. Sci.
Discrete choice experiments are not conjoint analysis
J. Choice Model.
Debt for brands: tracking down a bias in financing photovoltaic projects in Germany
J. Clean. Prod.
Review of energy system flexibility measures to enable high levels of variable renewable electricity
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
The price of policy risk — empirical insights from choice experiments with European photovoltaic project developers
Energy Econ.
A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models
Int. J. Res. Mark.
Willingness to pay for improvements in environmental performance of residential buildings
Build. Environ.
An overview of demand response: key-elements and international experience
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Does localized imitation drive technology adoption? A case study on rooftop photovoltaic systems in Germany
J. Environ. Econ. Manag.
US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity
Energy Policy
Technical and economic impact of residential electricity storage at local and grid level for Portugal
Appl. Energy
What makes people seal the green power deal? — customer segmentation based on choice experiment in Germany
Ecol. Econ.
Keep it local and fish-friendly: social acceptance of hydropower projects in Switzerland
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Demand response experience in Europe: policies, programmes and implementation
Energy
Scenario-based modelling of future residential electricity demands and assessing their impact on distribution grids
Energy Policy
Sizing of residential PV battery systems
Energy Procedia
The research agenda on social acceptance of distributed generation in smart grids: renewable as common pool resources
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Effect of residential solar and storage on centralized electricity supply systems
Nat. Clim. Change
Households' Willingness to Engage in Demand Response in the Finnish Retail Electricity Market: An Empirical Study
Cited by (141)
Misalignments of theory and practice: Exploring Swedish energy utilities' understandings of energy justice, flexibility capital, and just energy transitions
2024, Energy Research and Social ScienceCan you lower the thermostat? Perceptions of demand response programs in a sample from Quebec
2024, Energy and BuildingsSocial license to automate batteries? Australian householder conditions for participation in Virtual Power Plants
2023, Energy Research and Social ScienceShifts in the smart research agenda? 100 priority questions to accelerate sustainable energy futures
2023, Journal of Cleaner Production