Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Load Shifting Versus Manual Frequency Reserve: Which One is More Appealing to Flexible Loads?

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

arxiv 2309.01987 v2 pith:OKI7PCX2 submitted 2023-09-05 eess.SY cs.SY

classification eess.SYcs.SY
keywords loadfreezermfrrshiftingactivationappealingflexibilityflexible
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper investigates how a thermostatically controlled load can deliver flexibility either in form of manual frequency restoration reserves (mFRR) or load shifting, and which one is financially more appealing to such a load. A supermarket freezer is considered as a representative flexible load, and a grey-box model describing its temperature dynamics is developed using real data from a supermarket in Denmark. Taking into account price and activation uncertainties, a two-stage stochastic mixed-integer linear program is formulated to maximize the flexibility value from the freezer. For practical reasons, we propose a linear policy to determine regulating power bids, and then linearize the mFRR activation conditions through the McCormick relaxation approach. For computational ease, we develop a decomposition technique, splitting the problem to a set of smaller subproblems, one per scenario. Examined on an out-of-sample simulation based on real Danish spot and balancing market prices in 2022, load shifting shows to be more profitable than mFRR provision, but is also more consequential for temperature deviations in the freezer.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools