Advertisement

Energy Decision-Making 2: Demand Response Option Contract Decision Based on Stochastic Programming

  • Seog-Chan Oh
  • Alfred J. Hildreth
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing book series (SSAM)

Abstract

The need of energy decision making happens in smart grids. Smart grids enable a two-way energy demand response capability through which a utility company offers its industrial customers various call options for energy load curtailment. If a customer has the capability to accurately determine whether to accept an offer or not, then in the case of accepting an offer, the customer can earn both an option premium to participate, and a strike price for load curtailments if requested. However, today most manufacturing companies lack the capability to make the correct contract decisions for given offers. This chapter introduces a novel decision model based on activity-based costing (ABC) and stochastic programming, developed to accurately evaluate the impact of load curtailments and determine as to whether or not to accept an energy load curtailment offer. The introduced model specifically targets state-transition flexible and Quality-of-Service (QoS) flexible energy use activities to reduce the peak energy demand rate. An illustrative example with the proposed decision model under a call-option based energy demand response scenario is presented. As shown from the example results, the proposed decision model can be used with emerging smart grid opportunities to provide a competitive advantage to the manufacturing industry.

Keywords

Energy Demand Smart Grid Demand Response Strike Price Chance Constraint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Birge J, Louveaux F (1997) Introduction to stochastic programming. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Cazalet EG (2012) Transactional energy market information exchange (TeMIX). OASIS Energy Market Inf Exch Tech Committee White Paper. Available online: http://www.cazalet.com/images/Transactional_Energy_CW_2010_Cazalet.pdf. Assessed on 9 Aug 2012
  3. Charnes A, Cooper WW (1963) Deterministic equivalents for optimizing and satisficing under chance constraints. Operat Res 11:18–39MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Cokins G (2001) Activity-based cost management: an executive’s guide. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Cox WT, Considine T (2009) Price communication, product definition, and service-oriented energy, Grid-Interop, Denver, CO, USA, 17–19 Nov 2009Google Scholar
  6. Electric Power Research Institute (2009) Report to NIST on smart grid interoperability standards roadmap, contract no. SB1341-09-CN-0031-Deliverable 10. Available online: http://www.nist.gov/smartgrid/upload/Report_to_NIST_August10_2.pdf. Assessed on 9 Aug 2012
  7. Emblemsvag J, Bras B (2001) Activity-based cost and environmental management: a different approach to ISO 14000 compliance. Kluwer Academic, Boston, NY, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2010) A national assessment & action plan on demand response potential. Available online: http://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus-act/demand-response/dr-potential.asp. Assessed on 4 April 2016
  9. Ghatikar G, Piette MA, Fujita S, McKane A, Dudley JH, Radspieler A, Mares KC, Shroyer D (2010) Demand response and open automated demand response opportunities for data centers. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA. Available online: http://drrc.lbl.gov/publications/demand-response-and-open-automated-demand-response-opportunities-data-centers. Assessed on 9 Aug 2012
  10. Jurek P, Bras B, Guldberg T, D’Arcy JB, Oh S-C, Biller SR (2012) ABC applied to automotive manufacturing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE power & energy society general meeting. San Diego, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  11. Kolta T (1992) Selecting equipment to control air pollution from automotive painting operations, International congress & exposition, No 920189. SAE technical paper, Detroit, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  12. Leah C, Sun Z, Li L (2014) Simulation-based optimization of electricity demand response for sustainable manufacturing systems. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2014 international manufacturing science. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Luedtke J, Ahmed S, Nemhauser G (2007) An integer programming approach for linear programs with probabilistic constraints. In: Fischetti M, Williamson D (eds) Proceedings of the 12th conference on integer programming and combinatorial optimization (IPCO 2007). Springer, Berlin, Germany, 3:410–423Google Scholar
  14. Mayela F, Li L, Sun Z (2013) “Just-for-peak” buffer inventory for peak electricity demand reduction of manufacturing systems. Int J Prod Econ 146:178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Michael K-M, Schneider K, Pratt R (2007) Impacts assessment of plug-in hybrid vehicles on electric utilities and regional US power grids, Part 1: technical analysis, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. Moolman AJ, Koen K, Wethuizen J (2010) Activity-based costing for vehicle routing problems. S Afr J Ind Eng 21:161–171Google Scholar
  17. Oh S-C, D’Arcy JB, Arinez JF, Biller SR, Hidreth AJ (2011) Assessment of energy demand response options in smart grid utilizing the stochastic programming approach. In: Proceedings of the IEEE power & energy society general meeting. Detroit, MI, USA, 24–28 JulyGoogle Scholar
  18. Oh S-C, Hildreth AJ (2013a) Statistical method to obtain high accuracy in forecasting plant energy use, Patent US 8,606,421 B2, 10 December 2013Google Scholar
  19. Oh S-C, Hidreth AJ (2013b) Decisions on energy demand response option contracts in smart grids based on activity-based costing and stochastic programming. Energies 6:425–443Google Scholar
  20. Popesko B (2010) Activity-based costing application methodology for manufacturing industries, E + M Ekonomie Manag 13:103–113Google Scholar
  21. Romaniw Y, Bras B, Guldbert T (2009) An activity based approach to sustainability assessments. In: Proceedings of the American society of mechanical engineers (ASME) Int’l design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering Conference (IDETC/CIE 2009), San Diego, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Sen S, Higle JL (1999) An introductory tutorial on stochastic linear programming models. Interfaces 29:33–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sirikitputtisak T, Mirzaesmaeeli PL (2009) A multi-period optimization model for energy planning with CO2 emission considerations. Energy Proced 1:4339–4346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Soares J, Canizes B, Lobo C, Vale Z, Morais H (2012) Electric vehicle scenario simulator tool for smart grid operators. Energies 5:1881–1899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Streitberger H-J, Dössel K-F (2008) Automotive paints and coatings. Wiley, Weinheim, GermanyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sun Z, Li L, Fernandez M, Wang J (2014a) Inventory control for peak electricity demand reduction of manufacturing systems considering the tradeoff between production loss and energy savings. J. Clean Prod 82:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sun Z, Li L, Fernandez M, Wang J (2014b) Inventory control for peak electricity demand reduction of manufacturing systems considering the tradeoff between production loss and energy savings. J. Clean Prod 82:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vlasic B (2011) With sonic, GM stands automaking on its head. The New York Times, 12 July 2011. Available online: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/business/with-chevrolet-sonic-gm-and-uaw-reinvent-automaking.html. Assessed on 9 Aug 2012
  29. Weil RL, Maher MW (2005) Handbook of cost management. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Yoo J, Park B, An K, Al-Ammar EA, Khan Y, Hur K, Kim J-H (2012) Look-ahead energy management of a grid-connected residential PV system with energy storage under time-based rate programs. Energies 5:1116–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yong W, Li L (2013) Time-of-use based electricity demand response for sustainable manufacturing systems. Energy 63:233–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yong W, Li L (2014) Joint production and energy modeling of sustainable manufacturing systems: challenges and methods. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2014 international manufacturing science. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TroyUSA
  2. 2.RochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations