Phil Grünewald
Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford
Demand side flexibility has moved from a niche interest towards the mainstream. National Grid ESO spent over £5m as part of the Demand Flexibility Scheme to trial incentives of £3,000 per MWh of reduced demand between 5pm and 6pm on critical days during the winter 2023/24. Was this value for money for all involved?
Households can participate through their suppliers or third party providers. Privacy and commercial sensitivity mean that many of the insights are only available in aggregate. We therefore compare the aggregated results with detailed findings from eight years of research on demand response trials and observations. These include electricity recordings with up to one second resolution, electronic activity diaries, surveys and focus groups. Participants respond either to price signal or social incentives, such as collectively competing with neighbouring streets for the best load response.
The electronic activity diaries give a unique insight into not just how much demand was reduced, but also how this reduction was achieved or why certain groups may be less able to contribute to such schemes. The distributions are wide. Approximately one third of a randomly selected cohort participate each time. Of these about two thirds successfully reduce demand when requested. These findings are consistent with the Demand Flexibility Service trials.
We review baselining methods to validate successful reductions and incentives that result in successful responses. Among the most successful measures are avoidance of hot meals. But many less effective responses have also been noted, such as switching off mobile phone chargers or unplugging kettles and toasters. Information and learning can complement price signals for effective responses. We also explore the costs of short-term and long-term measures and the role of active behavioural change versus automation and autonomous solutions.
Post your comments and questions for the speakers here