Impact of distribution locational marginal pricing and cost-sharing pricing mechanisms on fairness, efficiency, and voltage quality in transactive energy systems

IF 4.4 3区 经济学 Q3 ENERGY & FUELS
Daniel Galeano-Suárez , David Toquica , Nilson Henao , Kodjo Agbossou , JC Oviedo-Cepeda
{"title":"Impact of distribution locational marginal pricing and cost-sharing pricing mechanisms on fairness, efficiency, and voltage quality in transactive energy systems","authors":"Daniel Galeano-Suárez ,&nbsp;David Toquica ,&nbsp;Nilson Henao ,&nbsp;Kodjo Agbossou ,&nbsp;JC Oviedo-Cepeda","doi":"10.1016/j.jup.2025.101890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The increasing integration of distributed energy resources and the evolution of smart grids pave the way to Transactive Energy Systems (TES). Numerous initiatives have been made to craft pricing mechanisms on TES as incentives to leverage resource flexibility and contribute to improving technical and economic indexes. Nevertheless, comparing these pricing mechanisms is challenging due to the fluctuating market conditions and diverse TES configurations. This research compares the impact of the Distribution Locational Marginal Pricing (DLMP) and Cost-Sharing (CS) pricing mechanisms on TES fairness, economic efficiency, and voltage quality under identical market conditions. In addition, a unified index is proposed to compile market metrics and facilitate Distribution System Operator (DSO) decisions on pricing according to weighted objectives. Accordingly, this research contributes valuable insights that promote TES expansion and better management for DSOs and market regulators. This paper uses a transactive forward market on the IEEE-33 bus test system as a case study. The results show that CS pricing yields complete price fairness. In contrast, the DLMP forgo fairness for the sake of economic efficiency. Here, the unified index reveals that CS pricing is preferable when the DSO weights equally fairness and efficiency, even though DLMP demonstrates a superior voltage quality index in the case study. The developed comparison framework is general to all pricing mechanisms as it simplifies the interactions between the DSO and the consumers through price and energy demand signals.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23554,"journal":{"name":"Utilities Policy","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 101890"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utilities Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957178725000050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The increasing integration of distributed energy resources and the evolution of smart grids pave the way to Transactive Energy Systems (TES). Numerous initiatives have been made to craft pricing mechanisms on TES as incentives to leverage resource flexibility and contribute to improving technical and economic indexes. Nevertheless, comparing these pricing mechanisms is challenging due to the fluctuating market conditions and diverse TES configurations. This research compares the impact of the Distribution Locational Marginal Pricing (DLMP) and Cost-Sharing (CS) pricing mechanisms on TES fairness, economic efficiency, and voltage quality under identical market conditions. In addition, a unified index is proposed to compile market metrics and facilitate Distribution System Operator (DSO) decisions on pricing according to weighted objectives. Accordingly, this research contributes valuable insights that promote TES expansion and better management for DSOs and market regulators. This paper uses a transactive forward market on the IEEE-33 bus test system as a case study. The results show that CS pricing yields complete price fairness. In contrast, the DLMP forgo fairness for the sake of economic efficiency. Here, the unified index reveals that CS pricing is preferable when the DSO weights equally fairness and efficiency, even though DLMP demonstrates a superior voltage quality index in the case study. The developed comparison framework is general to all pricing mechanisms as it simplifies the interactions between the DSO and the consumers through price and energy demand signals.
分配区位边际定价和成本分担定价机制对交易能源系统公平、效率和电压质量的影响
分布式能源的日益整合和智能电网的发展为交互能源系统(TES)铺平了道路。已经采取了许多举措来制定工商业污水附加费的定价机制,作为利用资源灵活性和促进改善技术和经济指标的激励措施。然而,由于波动的市场条件和不同的TES配置,比较这些定价机制是具有挑战性的。本研究比较了相同市场条件下配电区位边际定价(DLMP)和成本分担(CS)定价机制对TES公平、经济效率和电压质量的影响。此外,还提出了一个统一的指标来编制市场指标,并根据加权目标方便配电系统运营商(DSO)进行定价决策。因此,本研究为促进TES扩展和更好地管理dso和市场监管机构提供了有价值的见解。本文以IEEE-33总线测试系统的交易远期市场为例进行了研究。结果表明,CS定价产生完全的价格公平。相比之下,DLMP为了经济效率而放弃了公平。这里,统一的指标表明,当DSO公平和效率同等重要时,CS定价更可取,尽管DLMP在案例研究中展示了更好的电压质量指标。开发的比较框架适用于所有定价机制,因为它通过价格和能源需求信号简化了DSO与消费者之间的相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Utilities Policy
Utilities Policy ENERGY & FUELS-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: Utilities Policy is deliberately international, interdisciplinary, and intersectoral. Articles address utility trends and issues in both developed and developing economies. Authors and reviewers come from various disciplines, including economics, political science, sociology, law, finance, accounting, management, and engineering. Areas of focus include the utility and network industries providing essential electricity, natural gas, water and wastewater, solid waste, communications, broadband, postal, and public transportation services. Utilities Policy invites submissions that apply various quantitative and qualitative methods. Contributions are welcome from both established and emerging scholars as well as accomplished practitioners. Interdisciplinary, comparative, and applied works are encouraged. Submissions to the journal should have a clear focus on governance, performance, and/or analysis of public utilities with an aim toward informing the policymaking process and providing recommendations as appropriate. Relevant topics and issues include but are not limited to industry structures and ownership, market design and dynamics, economic development, resource planning, system modeling, accounting and finance, infrastructure investment, supply and demand efficiency, strategic management and productivity, network operations and integration, supply chains, adaptation and flexibility, service-quality standards, benchmarking and metrics, benefit-cost analysis, behavior and incentives, pricing and demand response, economic and environmental regulation, regulatory performance and impact, restructuring and deregulation, and policy institutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信