Scholarlink

<p>Electricity markets increasingly rely on residential demand-side flexibility to integrate renewables and stabilize the grid. While dynamic tariffs can unlock short-term flexibility, they expose households to a risk–reward trade-off. This paper quantifies how home battery storage reshapes the trade-off across residential energy services modeled with three different load types (elastic, interruptible and non-interruptible). Using load profiles from a German utility and an optimal-control scheduling framework under mixed dynamic tariffs, we evaluate cost and risk impacts over a range of storage sizes. Three results stand out. First, small batteries deliver most of the value: a capacity of about 20% of average daily demand captures roughly two-thirds of attainable savings while already lowering bill risk. Second, cost reduction potential is heterogeneous across devices: <i>Elastic loads profit the most from additional storage capacities</i>; Non-interruptible and Interruptible loads profit less. Third, overall returns diminish and effectively plateau near a capacity of 60% of average daily demand. These findings offer actionable guidance: pair dynamic tariffs with modest storage to achieve substantial savings and risk reduction—especially in low-flexibility or strongly market-aligned households—and avoid over-investment in regards to diminishing returns.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Risk and reward: evaluating household energy storage for optimizing demand-side flexibility under dynamic tariffs

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月31日

查看全文
  • Justus Ameling,
  • Robin Thomas Derzbach,
  • Gunther Gust,
  • Christoph Michael Flath

摘要

Electricity markets increasingly rely on residential demand-side flexibility to integrate renewables and stabilize the grid. While dynamic tariffs can unlock short-term flexibility, they expose households to a risk–reward trade-off. This paper quantifies how home battery storage reshapes the trade-off across residential energy services modeled with three different load types (elastic, interruptible and non-interruptible). Using load profiles from a German utility and an optimal-control scheduling framework under mixed dynamic tariffs, we evaluate cost and risk impacts over a range of storage sizes. Three results stand out. First, small batteries deliver most of the value: a capacity of about 20% of average daily demand captures roughly two-thirds of attainable savings while already lowering bill risk. Second, cost reduction potential is heterogeneous across devices: Elastic loads profit the most from additional storage capacities; Non-interruptible and Interruptible loads profit less. Third, overall returns diminish and effectively plateau near a capacity of 60% of average daily demand. These findings offer actionable guidance: pair dynamic tariffs with modest storage to achieve substantial savings and risk reduction—especially in low-flexibility or strongly market-aligned households—and avoid over-investment in regards to diminishing returns.