REVIEW 5 cited by
ElectricityEmissions.jl: A Framework for the Comparison of Carbon Intensity Signals
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
ElectricityEmissions.jl: A Framework for the Comparison of Carbon Intensity Signals
read the original abstract
An increasing number of individuals, companies and organizations are interested in computing and minimizing the carbon emissions associated with their real-time electricity consumption. To achieve this, they require a carbon signal, i.e. a metric that defines the real-time carbon intensity of their electricity supply. Unfortunately, in a grid with multiple generation sources and multiple consumers, the physics of the system do not provide an unambiguous way to trace electricity from source to sink. As a result, there are a multitude of proposed carbon signals, each of which has a distinct set of properties and method of calculation. It remains unclear which signal best quantifies the carbon footprint of electricity. This paper seeks to inform the discussion about which carbon signal is better or more suitable for two important use cases, namely carbon-informed load shifting and carbon accounting. We do this by developing a new software package ElectricityEmissions$.$jl, that computes several established and newly proposed carbon emission metrics for standard electric grid test cases. We also demonstrate how the package can be used to investigate the effects of using these metrics to guide load shifting. Our results affirm previous research, which showed that the choice of carbon emission metric has significant impact on shifting results and associated carbon emission reductions. In addition, we demonstrate the impact of load shifting on both the consumers that perform the shifting and consumers that do not. Disconcertingly, we observe that shifting according to common metrics such as average carbon emissions can reduce the amount of emissions allocated to the consumer doing the shifting, while increasing the total emissions of the power system.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Strategic Spatial Load Shifting and Market Efficiency
Strategic spatial load shifting by a price-anticipatory consumer in DC-OPF markets reduces procurement costs for consumers but produces misalignment with system cost minimization at operating regime boundaries.
-
Strategic Spatial Load Shifting and Market Efficiency
Price-anticipatory spatial load shifting by a large consumer can raise system operating cost at DC-OPF regime boundaries even when it cuts the consumer’s own procurement cost.
-
Coordinating GPU Data Centers and Power Grid Regulation Service for Exogenous Carbon Benefits
GPU data centers participating in power grid frequency regulation via the EcoCenter framework can achieve exogenous carbon savings exceeding their operational emissions.
-
Coordinating GPU Data Centers and Power Grid Regulation Service for Exogenous Carbon Benefits
GPU data centers that track grid frequency-regulation signals can avoid enough fossil-fuel reserve emissions to outweigh the operational carbon of the workloads they modulate, at low-to-medium utilization.
-
Health-Informed Computing: Estimating and Addressing the Public Health Impact of Data Centers
Methodology estimates U.S. data center air pollution health burden exceeding $20B annually by 2028 with county-level disparities up to 7x average, plus a health-informed resource management framework.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.