Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2009.03160

A graphical approach to carbon-efficient spot market scheduling for Power-to-X applications

Abstract

In the Paris agreement of 2015, it was decided to reduce the CO2 emissions of the energy sector to zero by 2050 and to restrict the global mean temperature increase to 1.5 degree Celcius above the pre-industrial level. Such commitments are possible only with practically CO2-free power generation based on variable renewable technologies. Historically, the main point of criticism regarding renewable power is the variability driven by weather dependence. Power-to-X systems, which convert excess power to other stores of energy for later use, can play an important role in offsetting the variability of renewable power production. In order to do so, however, these systems have to be scheduled properly to ensure they are being powered by low-carbon technologies. In this paper, we introduce a graphical approach for scheduling power-to-X plants in the day-ahead market by minimizing carbon emissions and electricity costs. This graphical approach is simple to implement and intuitively explain to stakeholders. In a simulation study using historical prices and CO2 intensity for four different countries, we find that the price and CO2 intensity tends to decrease with increasing scheduling horizon. The effect diminishes when requiring an increasing amount of full load hours per year. Additionally, investigating the trade-off between optimizing for price or CO2 intensity shows that it is indeed a trade-off: it is not possible to obtain the lowest price and CO2 intensity at the same time.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Neeraj Bokde, Bo Tranberg, Gorm Bruun Andresen. 2020-08-31. A graphical approach to carbon-efficient spot market scheduling for Power-to-X applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113461

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN