The Economic Impact of Demand-Response Programs on Power Systems. A Survey of the State of the Art

  • Adela Conchado
  • Pedro Linares
Part of the Energy Systems book series (ENERGY)


Demand Response (DR) programs, which aim to reduce electricity consumption in times of high energy cost or network constraints by allowing customers to respond to price or quantity signals, are becoming very popular in many electricity systems, frequently associated to smart-grid developments. These programs could entail significant benefits for power systems and the society as a whole. Assessing the magnitude of these benefits is crucial to determine their convenience, especially when there are non negligible costs associated to their implementation (if advanced metering infrastructure or control technologies are needed). Quantifying DR benefits requires first to estimate the changes in demand patterns that can potentially be achieved and then to evaluate the effects of those changes on the complex behavior of power systems, neither of these analyses being trivial. This paper presents a survey of the state of the art of these assessments.


Benefits Cost-benefit analysis Demand response Power systems Survey 



This research has been funded by the GAD Project ( and by the ADDRESS project (funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 207643).

The GAD (Active Demand Management) project, which is financed by the Center for Industrial Technological Development (CDTI), Spanish Ministry of Industry, Trade and Tourism, has as objective the research and development of solutions for the optimization of electricity consumption in low and middle voltage consumers. The project consortium is led by Iberdrola Distribución Eléctrica S.A, and features other 14 firms: Red Eléctrica de España, Unión Fenosa Distribución, Unión Fenosa Metra, Iberdrola, Orbis Tecnología Eléctrica, ZIV Media, DIMAT, Siemens, Fagor Electrodomésticos, BSH Electrodomésticos España, Ericsson España, GTD Sistemas de Información, Acceda Mundo Digital and Airzone. There are also other 14 research centers collaborating in the project.

Some parts of the text draw extensively from reports issued within the ADDRESS project.


  1. 1.
    IEA (2008) World energy outlook. International Energy Agency, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    EC (2005) Green paper on energy efficiency or doing more with less. COM (2005) 265 final. Commission of the European Communities, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faruqui A, Sergici S (2009) Household response to dynamic pricing of electricity – a survey of the experimental evidence. Working paper series, Jan 10 2009Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    RRI (2008) The status of U.S. demand response. Research Reports International, 7th ednGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goldfine D, Haldenstein M, Moniz A, Traverso D (2008) Demand response review – a survey of major developments in demand response programs and initiatives. Edison Electric Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    FERC (2006) Assessment of demand response and advanced metering. Staff report, AD-06-2-000, Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    NERA (2008) Cost benefit analysis of smart metering and direct load control. Overview report for consultation. Report for the Ministerial Council on Energy Smart Meter Working Group, NERA Economic ConsultingGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vasconcelos J (2008) Survey of regulatory and technological developments concerning smart metering in the European Union electricity market. RSCAS Policy Papers 2008/01. Florence School of RegulationGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Navigant Consulting (2005) Benefits of smart metering for Ontario. Discussion draft, April 5. Presented to Ontario Ministry of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Faruqui A, Harris D, Hledik R (2009) Unlocking the €53 billion savings from smart meters in the EU. Discussion paper. The Brattle GroupGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    US DOE (2006) Benefits of demand response in electricity markets and recommendations for achieving them. United States Department of Energy, Feb 2006Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    RMI (2006) Demand response: an introduction - Overview of lessons, technologies, and lessons learned. Rocky Mountain Institute, 2006Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Faruqui A, Hledik R (2007) The state of demand response in California. Prepared for California Energy Commission, final consultant report, CEC-200-2007-003-F, September 2007Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    IEA (2003) The power to choose – demand response in liberalised electricity markets. OECD/International Energy Agency, Paris. ISBN 92-64-10503-4Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    DTE Energy (2007) Demand response overview and pilot concepts, 26 July 2007Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haney AB, Jamasb T, Pollit M (2009) Smart metering and electricity demand. Technology economics and international experience. Cambridge working paper in economics 0905, EPRG working paper 0903. Electricity Policy Research Group, University of CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Borenstein S, Jaske M, Rosenfeld A (2002) Dynamic pricing, advanced metering and demand response in electricity markets. CSEM WP 105, University of California Energy InstituteGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spees K, Lave LB (2007) Demand response and electricity market efficiency. Electricity J 20:69–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Holland SP, Mansur ET (2007) Is real-time pricing green? The environmental impacts of electricity demand variance. Working paper 1350, October, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  20. 20.
    Conchado A, Linares P (2009b) Gestión activa de la demanda eléctrica doméstica: beneficios y costes. IIT Working Paper, Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid, 2009Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zibelman A, Krapels EN (2008) Deployment of demand response as a real-time resource in organized markets. Electricity J 21(5):51–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kärkkäinen S, Ikäheimo J (2009) Integration of demand side management with variable output DG. In: 10th IAEE European conference, Vienna, 7–10 Sep 2009Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Earle R, Kahn EP, Macan E (2009) Measuring the capacity impacts of demand response. Electricity J 22(6):47–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Affonso CM, da Silva LCP, Freitas W (2006) Demand-side management to improve power security. In: Transmission and distribution conference and exhibition, 2005/2006 IEEE PES, Dallas, May 2006Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shaw R, Attree M, Jackson T, Kay M (2009) The value of reducing distribution losses by domestic load-shifting: a network perspective. Energ Policy 37:3159–3167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Crossley D (2008) Assessment and development of network-driven demand-side management measures. IEA Demand Side Management Programme, Task XV, Research report No 2. Energy Futures Australia Pty Ltd, Hornsby Heights, NSWGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Braithwait SD, Hansen DG, Kirsch LD (2006) Incentives and rate designs for efficiency and demand response. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL-60132Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    EEI (2006) Responding to EPAct 2005: looking at smart meters for electricity, time-based rate structures, and net metering. Edison Electricity Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kirschen D (2003) Demand-side view of electricity markets. IEEE T Power Syst 18(2):520–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    PLMA (2002) Demand response: principles for regulatory guidance. Peak Load Management Alliance, Feb 2002Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Violette D, Freeman R, Neil C (2006a) Valuation and market analyses. Volume I: overview. Prepared for: International Energy Agency, Demand Side Programme, Jan 2006Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    ERGEG (2007) Smart metering with a focus on electricity regulation. European Regulators’ Group for Electricity and Gas. E07-RMF-04-03Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    CapGemini (2007) Comparatif international des systèmes de télé-relève ou de télégestion et étude technico-économique visant à évaluer les conditions d’une migration du parc actuel de compteurs. MarchGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ofgem (2006) Domestic metering innovation, 1 Feb 2006Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Frontier Economics (2006) Current prices, anybody? The costs and benefits of “smart” electricity meters, Feb 2006Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Neenan B, Hemphill R (2008) Societal benefits of smart metering investments. Electricity J 21(8):32–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    KEMA-XENERGY (2003) Smart thermostat program impact evaluation, Madison, 24 Feb 2004Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Batlle C, Rodilla P (2008) Electricity demand response tools: current status and outstanding issues. Working Paper IIT-08-006A. Prepared for: Special Issue on Incentives for a low-carbon energy future, European Review of Energy MarketsGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lockheed Martin Aspen (2006) Demand response enabling technologies for small-medium businesses. Technical report prepared in conjunction with the 2005 California Statewide Pricing Pilot, R.02.06.001Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    SCE (2006) Inventory of emerging demand response technologies. Southern California EdisonGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kohler DF, Mitchell BM (1984) Response to residential time-of-use electricity rates - How transferable are the findings? J Econometrics 26:141–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Faruqui A, George SS (2005) Quantifying customer response to dynamic pricing. Electricity J 18:53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Herter K (2007) Residential implementation of critical-peak pricing of electricity. Energ Policy 35:2121–2130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    EEE (2006) A survey of Time-Of-Use (TOU) pricing and Demand-Response (DR) programs, Energy and Environmental Economics, San Francisco, July 2006Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Summit Blue Consulting (2006) Evaluation of the 2005 energy-smart pricing plan. Summit final report, Jan 2006Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Darby S (2006) The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption: a review for DEFRA of the literature on metering, billing and direct displays. Environmental Change Institute, University of OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Woo CK, Herter K (2006) Residential demand response evaluation: a scoping study. LBNL-61090, collaborative report. Demand Response Research Center (DRCC), Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    King CS, Chatterjee S (2003) Predicting California demand response. Public Utilities Fortnightly, July 2003, pp 27–32Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Berg SV, Capehart BL, Feldman J, LaTour S, Sullivan RL (1983) An interdisciplinary approach to cost/benefit analysis of innovative electric rates. Resour Energ 5:313–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lawrence A, Braithwait S (1979) The residential demand for electricity with time-of-day pricing. J Econometrics 9:59–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hausman JA, Kinnuca M, McFadden D (1979) A two-level electricity demand model. Evaluation of the Connecticut time-of-day pricing test. J Econometrics 10:263–289CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Caves DW, Christensen LR, Schoech PE (1984) A comparison of different methodologies in a case study of residential time-of-use electricity pricing – cost-benefit analysis. J Econometrics 26:17–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Parks RW, Weitzel D (1984) Measuring the consumer welfare effects of time-differentiated electricity prices. J Econometrics 26:35–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hill LJ (1991) Residential time-of-use pricing as a load management strategy. Effectiveness and applicability. Utilities Policy 1:308–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Reiss PC, White MW (2005) Household electricity demand, revisited. Rev Econ Stud 72:853–883CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Allcott H (2008) Real time pricing and imperfect competition in electricity markets. Working paper.
  57. 57.
    Capasso A, Grattieri W, Lamedica R, Prudenzi A (1994) A bottom-up approach to residential load modeling. IEEE T Power Syst 9(2):957–964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Boonekamp PGM (2007) Price elasticities, policy measures and actual developments in household energy consumption – a bottom up analysis for the Netherlands. Energ Econ 29:133–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Paatero JV, Lund PD (2006) A model for generating household electricity load profiles. Preprint version.
  60. 60.
    Conchado A, Linares P (2009a) Gestión activa de la demanda eléctrica: simulación de la respuesta de los consumidores domésticos a señales horarias de precio. IV Congress AEEE, Sevilla, 2009Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Lu N, Chassin DP, Widergren SE (2004) Simulating price responsive distributed resource. In: Power systems conference and exposition, IEE PES, New York,, 2004Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Heffner G (2007) A framework for demand response valuation, Demand Response Research CenterGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Baer W, Fulton D, Mahnowski S (2004) Estimating the benefits of the GridWise initiative. Phase I report, May. Rand Science and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Siderius HP, Dijkstra A (2006) Smart metering for households: cost and benefits for the Netherlands. SenterNovemGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Faruqui A, George SS (2002) The value of dynamic pricing in mass markets. Electricity J 15:45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    ESC (2004) Mandatory rollout of interval meters for electricity consumers. Final decision, July 2004. Essential Services Commission, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Borenstein S (2005) The long-run efficiency of real-time electricity pricing. Energy J 26(3):93–116Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Andersen FM, Jensen SG, Larsen HV, Meibom P, Ravn H, Skytte K, Togeby M (2006) Analyses of demand response in Denmark. Risø National Laboratory, Risø-R-1565(EN), OctoberGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Brattle Group (2007) Quantifying demand response benefits in PJM. Prepared for PJM Interconnection, LLC and the Mid-Atlantic Distributed Resources Initiative (MADRI) Jan 2007Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Linares P, Conchado A (2009) Gestión activa de la demanda eléctrica: Evaluación de su impacto en el sistema de generación. IV Congress AEEE, SevillaGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Neenan B, Cappers P, Pratt D, Anderson J (2005) Improving linkages between wholesale and retail markets through dynamic retail pricing. Prepared for New England ISO.
  72. 72.
    Silva V (2009) Value of smart appliances in systems balancing. Prepared for EIE project “Smart domestic appliances in sustainable energy systems” (SMART-A), WP 4Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Sioshansi R, Short W (2009) Evaluating the impacts of real-time pricing on the usage of wind generation. IEEE T Power Syst 24(2):516–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Stanojević V, Strbac G, Silva V, Lang P, Pudjianto D, Macleman D (2009) Application of storage and demand side management to optimise existing network capacity. In: CIRED, 20th international conference on electricity distribution, Prague, 8–11 June 2009Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Stanojević V, Silva V (2009) Role of demand side management to reduce system constraints and investment. Prepared for EIE project “Smart domestic appliances in sustainable energy systems” (SMART-A), WP 4Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Su C, Kirschen D (2009) Quantify the effect of demand response on electricity markets. IEEE T Power Syst 24(3):1199–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Violette D, Freeman R, Neil C (2006b) Valuation and market analyses. Volume II: Assessing the DRR benefits and costs. Prepared for: International Energy Agency, Demand Side Programme, Jan 2006Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Walawalkar R, Blumsack S, Apt J, Fernands S (2008) An economic welfare analysis of demand response in the PJM electricity market. Energ Policy 36:3692–3702CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adela Conchado
    • 1
  • Pedro Linares
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto de Investigación TecnológicaUniversidad Pontificia ComillasMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations