小组还是检查?评估将能源贫困家庭纳入能源社区的益处

IF 7.1 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS
I. Aparisi-Cerdá , Á. Manso-Burgos , D. Ribó-Pérez , N. Sommerfeldt , T. Gómez-Navarro
{"title":"小组还是检查?评估将能源贫困家庭纳入能源社区的益处","authors":"I. Aparisi-Cerdá ,&nbsp;Á. Manso-Burgos ,&nbsp;D. Ribó-Pérez ,&nbsp;N. Sommerfeldt ,&nbsp;T. Gómez-Navarro","doi":"10.1016/j.seta.2024.103970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This research raises the possibility for households in energy poverty to participate in shared photovoltaic systems in renewable energy communities (REC) to reduce their energy costs, with investment costs covered by public institutions. It begins by evaluating the current solution for vulnerable households, which relies on public subsidies to lower energy costs without addressing root causes or improving environmental impacts. The study compares traditional subsidies with REC participation for vulnerable households. By simulating a REC composed of such households, the results indicate that REC participation is more cost-effective for public institutions than energy subsidies. At the economically optimal size of 31 kWp, the cost of subsidies decreases by 58,000 €, a 50% reduction, with household savings increasing by 6%. At 58 kWp, the need for additional support checks is eliminated, increasing household savings by 65% but with a lower NPV of 22,500 €. The largest viable system, 75 kWp, increases average household savings by 82%. This approach also leads to a net reduction in GHG emissions, engaging previously excluded households in the energy transition.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56019,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 103970"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213138824003667/pdfft?md5=1e43b9b0b838d84740ebc77af24468ca&pid=1-s2.0-S2213138824003667-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Panel or check? Assessing the benefits of integrating households in energy poverty into energy communities\",\"authors\":\"I. Aparisi-Cerdá ,&nbsp;Á. Manso-Burgos ,&nbsp;D. Ribó-Pérez ,&nbsp;N. Sommerfeldt ,&nbsp;T. Gómez-Navarro\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.seta.2024.103970\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This research raises the possibility for households in energy poverty to participate in shared photovoltaic systems in renewable energy communities (REC) to reduce their energy costs, with investment costs covered by public institutions. It begins by evaluating the current solution for vulnerable households, which relies on public subsidies to lower energy costs without addressing root causes or improving environmental impacts. The study compares traditional subsidies with REC participation for vulnerable households. By simulating a REC composed of such households, the results indicate that REC participation is more cost-effective for public institutions than energy subsidies. At the economically optimal size of 31 kWp, the cost of subsidies decreases by 58,000 €, a 50% reduction, with household savings increasing by 6%. At 58 kWp, the need for additional support checks is eliminated, increasing household savings by 65% but with a lower NPV of 22,500 €. The largest viable system, 75 kWp, increases average household savings by 82%. This approach also leads to a net reduction in GHG emissions, engaging previously excluded households in the energy transition.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments\",\"volume\":\"71 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103970\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213138824003667/pdfft?md5=1e43b9b0b838d84740ebc77af24468ca&pid=1-s2.0-S2213138824003667-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213138824003667\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213138824003667","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究提出了能源贫困家庭参与可再生能源社区(REC)共享光伏系统以降低能源成本的可能性,投资成本由公共机构承担。研究首先评估了目前针对弱势家庭的解决方案,即依靠公共补贴来降低能源成本,而不从根本上解决问题或改善对环境的影响。该研究比较了传统补贴和弱势家庭参与可再生能源委员会的情况。通过模拟由此类家庭组成的可再生能源委员会,结果表明,对公共机构而言,参与可再生能源委员会比能源补贴更具成本效益。在经济效益最佳的 31 kWp 规模下,补贴成本减少了 58,000 欧元,即减少了 50%,而家庭储蓄增加了 6%。达到 58 kWp 时,不再需要额外的支持检查,家庭节省的费用增加了 65%,但净现值降低了 22 500 欧元。最大的可行系统(75 kWp)可使家庭平均节余增加 82%。这种方法还能净减少温室气体排放,让以前被排除在外的家庭参与到能源转型中来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Panel or check? Assessing the benefits of integrating households in energy poverty into energy communities

This research raises the possibility for households in energy poverty to participate in shared photovoltaic systems in renewable energy communities (REC) to reduce their energy costs, with investment costs covered by public institutions. It begins by evaluating the current solution for vulnerable households, which relies on public subsidies to lower energy costs without addressing root causes or improving environmental impacts. The study compares traditional subsidies with REC participation for vulnerable households. By simulating a REC composed of such households, the results indicate that REC participation is more cost-effective for public institutions than energy subsidies. At the economically optimal size of 31 kWp, the cost of subsidies decreases by 58,000 €, a 50% reduction, with household savings increasing by 6%. At 58 kWp, the need for additional support checks is eliminated, increasing household savings by 65% but with a lower NPV of 22,500 €. The largest viable system, 75 kWp, increases average household savings by 82%. This approach also leads to a net reduction in GHG emissions, engaging previously excluded households in the energy transition.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments Energy-Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
1091
期刊介绍: Encouraging a transition to a sustainable energy future is imperative for our world. Technologies that enable this shift in various sectors like transportation, heating, and power systems are of utmost importance. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments welcomes papers focusing on a range of aspects and levels of technological advancements in energy generation and utilization. The aim is to reduce the negative environmental impact associated with energy production and consumption, spanning from laboratory experiments to real-world applications in the commercial sector.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信