Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The role of perceived control over appliances in the acceptance of electricity load-shifting programmes

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Energy Efficiency Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many countries, Switzerland included, envisage an energy transition characterised by the increased production of renewables. One challenge faced by these nations is that peak household electricity demand often does not correspond with the peak production of renewables such as photovoltaics (PV) and wind. Load-shifting via the use of smart appliances provides one option to better match renewable electricity production with household electricity demand. However, load-shifting requires the adoption of smart grid and smart metering technologies, which the public often views as a form of surrender to a lack of control and data security issues. Thus, load-shifting might encounter social disapproval. This paper analyses how control over the use of appliances and data security perceptions influence the social acceptance of load-shifting programmes via a social psychological online experiment (N = 250) by taking the example of the dishwasher. Results suggest a significant causal influence of the level of control over appliance on the acceptance of a load-shifting programme. In situations where participants perceived a lack of control over their appliance, acceptance levels dropped significantly. Regarding data security, experimental manipulation has been unsuccessful; therefore, no valid conclusions can be drawn regarding this factor. These results indicate the presence of serious concerns regarding the control of appliances when people are asked to consider a load-shifting programme. The development of a deeper understanding of these concerns may help utilities to create more successful, socially accepted load-shifting programmes and communication strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. To account for the influences of the independent variables in the experiment, the following analysis was first carried out for the different experimental conditions separately. Patterns in all experimental groups were comparable (except for the condition ‘high control, low data security’ where perceived lack of control was not a significant factor). Thus, it was decided to include the whole sample in the analysis reported below.

References

  • Bearth, A., Cousin, M. E., & Siegrist, M. (2014). The consumer’s perception of artificial food additives: influences on acceptance, risk and benefit perceptions. Food Quality and Preference, 38, 14–23. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BFS (2013). Lebenslanges Lernen in der Schweiz: Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus Aus- und Weiterbildung 2011 [Lifelong learning in Switzerland: Results from the education census 2011]. Neuchâtel: Swiss Federal Statistical Office.

  • BFS (2016). Population: Key Figures 2014. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/en/index/themen/01/01/key.html

  • Blumer, Y., Mühlebach, M., & Moser, C. (2014). Why some electricity utilities actively promote energy efficiency and others do not: a Swiss case study. Energy Efficiency, 7(4), 697–710. doi:10.1007/s12053-013-9249-z.

  • Darby, S., & McKenna, E. (2012). Social implications of residential demand response in cool temperate climates. Energy Policy, 49, 759–769. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.07.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S. (2010). Internet of energy. Engineering & Technology, 5, 42–45. doi:10.1049/et.2010.1608.

  • Davis, A. L., Krishnamurti, T., Fischhoff, B., & Bruine de Bruin, W. (2013). Setting a standard for electricity pilot studies. Energy Policy, 62, 401–409. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Haan, P., Kissling, I., & Wolfensberger, M. (2012). Effizienz und Elektrifizierung Haushalte: Schlussbericht zuhanden VSE - Verband Schweizerischer Elektrizitätsunternehmen. Zollikon: Ernst Basler + Partner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Döbelt, S., Jung, M., Busch, M., & Tscheligi, M. (2015). Consumers’ privacy concerns and implications for a privacy preserving smart grid architecture—results of an Austrian study. Energy Research and Social Science, 9, 137–145. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2015.08.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eid, C., Koliou, E., Valles, M., Reneses, J., & Hakvoort, R. (2015). Time-based pricing and electricity demand response: existing barriers and next steps. Utilities Policy, 40, 15–25. doi:10.1016/j.jup.2016.04.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fell, M. J., Shipworth, D., Huebner, G. M., & Elwell, C. A. (2015). Public acceptability of domestic demand-side response in Great Britain: the role of automation and direct load control. Energy Research and Social Science, 9, 72–84. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2015.08.023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9(2), 127–152. doi:10.1007/BF00143739.

  • Gamma, K., Loock, M., & Cometta, C. (2014). Paying for flexibility: increasing customer participation in demand response programs through rewards and punishments. In Behave Energy Conference. Oxford: Behave Energy Conference.

  • Godoy-Shimizu, D., Palmer, J., & Terry, N. (2014). What can we learn from the household electricity survey? Buildings, 4(4), 737–761. doi:10.3390/buildings4040737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, T., Nye, M., & Burgess, J. (2010). Making energy visible: a qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy, 38(10), 6111–6119. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higginson, S., Thomson, M., & Bhamra, T. (2014). “For the times they are a-changin”: the impact of shifting energy-use practices in time and space. Local Environment, 19(5), 520–538. doi:10.1080/13549839.2013.802459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurti, T., Schwartz, D., Davis, A., Fischhoff, B., Bruine de Bruin, W., Lave, L., & Wang, J. (2012). Preparing for smart grid technologies: a behavioral decision research approach to understanding consumer expectations about smart meters. Energy Policy, 41, 790–797. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Künzel, K., Loock, M., & Cometta, C. (2014). Who is afraid of environmental fines? How punishment and reward increase customer acceptance of demand response programs in the energy industry. 74th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. Philadelphia, PA.

  • Mah, D. N., Van der Vleuten, J. M., Hills, P., & Tao, J. (2012). Consumer perceptions of smart grid development: results of a Hong Kong survey and policy implications. Energy Policy, 49, 204–216. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mert, W., Suschek-Berger, J., & Tritthart, W. (2008). Consumer acceptance of smart appliances (D 5.5 of WP 5 report from Smart-A project). Graz: Inter-University Research Centre on Technology, Work and Culture.

  • Moser, C., Stauffacher, M., Blumer, Y. B., & Scholz, R. W. (2015). From risk to vulnerability: the role of perceived adaptive capacity for the acceptance of contested infrastructure. Journal of Risk Research, 18(5), 633–636. doi:10.1080/13669877.2014.910687.

  • Newsham, G. R., & Bowker, B. G. (2010). The effect of utility time-varying pricing and load control strategies on residential summer peak electricity use: a review. Energy Policy, 38(7), 3289–3296. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perret, L., Fahrni, J., Wyrsch, N., Riesen, Y., Puddu, S., Weber, S., & Pfacheco Barzallo, D. (2015). FLEXI Determining the flexibilization potential of the electricity demand. Ittigen: Swiss Federal Office of Energy.

  • Prognos (2012). Die Energieperspektiven für die Schweiz bis 2050: Energienachfrage und Elektrizitätsangebot in der Schweiz 2000–2050. Ittigen: Swiss Federal Office of Energy.

  • Sauter, R., & Watson, J. (2007). Strategies for the deployment of micro-generation: implications for social acceptance. Energy Policy, 35, 2770–2779. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.006.

  • Schweizer-Ries, P. (2008). Energy sustainable communities: environmental psychological investigations. Energy Policy, 36(11), 4126–4135. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, R., Moser, C., Krütli, P., & Stauffacher, M. (2013). Perceived risk and benefit of nuclear waste repositories: four opinion clusters. Risk Analysis, 33(6), 1038–1048. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01897.x.

  • Siegrist, M. (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risk and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 1220(2), 195–203. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.202020.

  • Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., & Roth, C. (2000). Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis, 20(3), 353–362. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.203034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegrist, M., Earle, T. C., Gutscher, H., & Keller, C. (2005). Perception of mobile phone and base station risks. Risk Analysis, 25(5), 1253–1264. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00672.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, E. (1996). A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 549–570. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soares, A., Gomes, A., & Antunes, C. H. (2014). Categorization of residential electricity consumption as a basis for the assessment of the impacts of demand response actions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 490–503. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A., Demski, C., Butler, C., Parkhill, K., & Pidgeon, N. (2015). Public perceptions of demand-side management and a smarter energy future. Nature Climate Change, 550–554. doi:10.1038/nclimate2610.

  • Swiss Federal Council (2013). Botschaft zum ersten Massnahmenpaket der Energiestrategie 2050 und zur Volksinitiative «Für den geordneten Ausstieg aus der Atomenergie (Atomausstiegsinitiative)». Bern: Swiss Federal Council.

  • Swiss Federal Office of Energy (2015a). Analyse des schweizerischen Energieverbrauchs 2000–2014 nach Verwendungszwecken. Ittigen: Swiss Federal Office of Energy.

  • Swiss Federal Office of Energy (2015b). Schweizerische Elektrizitätsstatistik 2014 [Swiss electricity statistics 2014]. Ittigen: Swiss Federal Office of Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbong, G. P. J., Beemsterboer, S., & Sengers, F. (2013). Smart grids or smart users? Involving users in developing a low carbon electricity economy. Energy Policy, 52, 117–125. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, C., Hargreaves, T., & Hauxwell-Baldwin, R. (2015). Smart homes and their users: a systematic analysis and key challenges. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 19(2), 463–476. doi:10.1007/s00779-014-0813-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, Y., Qian, Y., Sharif, H., & Tipper, D. (2012). A survey on cyber security for smart grid communications. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 14(4), 998–1010. doi:10.1109/SURV.2012.010912.00035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoeli, E., Hoffman, M., Rand, D. G., & Nowak, M. A. (2013). Powering up with indirect reciprocity in a large-scale field experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement_2), 10424–10429. doi:10.1073/pnas.1301210110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the ‘Smart Cities’ project and was funded by the (ZHAW School of Engineering). The author wishes to thank three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments which substantially improved the paper. The author wishes to thank (Diego Sanchez) for his support in designing the study. The author also wishes to thank the study participants, as well as (Dr Yann Blumer) and (Vivian Frick) for their valuable comments and feedback on previous versions of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Sustainable Development (INE), ZHAW School of Engineering, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Technoparkstr. 2, P.O. Box 8401, Winterthur, Switzerland

    Corinne Moser

Authors
  1. Corinne Moser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Corinne Moser.

Appendix: materials used in the experiment

Appendix: materials used in the experiment

Introduction (seen by all participants):

“Swiss households consume approximately one third of the nation’s energy. One method of more efficiently utilising electricity involves the matching of electricity production and households’ demand.

This could mean, for example, that households use electricity (e.g. operating dishwasher) when it is windy and wind turbines produce abundant electricity. If only little electricity is produced, households are encouraged to demand only little electricity.

Thanks to such a link, Switzerland may have to build fewer power plants to meet peak demand (e.g. gas-fired power plants). An important prerequisite for this is that energy users (e.g. households), energy producers and possibly services such as the weather forecast are linked and exchange data.”

Description of programme (experimental manipulation, brackets indicate the experimental groups):

[All groups incl. control group] “Please imagine the following situation: Your energy provider offers a new programme:

  • [all groups incl. control group] A smart meter will be installed in your household, this is an apparatus that measures your current electricity demand and directly communicates to your energy provider.

  • [all groups incl. control group] Your dishwasher will only be operated as usual if the local production of electricity exceeded local demand. If demand is not exceeded, the dishwasher will be placed on hold.

  • [control high] You can circumvent this mechanism by pushing a button at your smart meter and immediately activate the dishwasher.

  • [control low] There is no opportunity to circumvent this mechanism.

  • [data security high] Your electricity consumption data is strictly protected and can only be viewed by the electricity provider.

  • [data security low] Your electricity consumption data is not protected and the electricity provider is allowed to hand the data over to third parties.

[All groups incl. control group] By participating in this programme, you are making an important contribution to Switzerland’s energy transition. You will receive a discount of 10% on your next electricity bill.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moser, C. The role of perceived control over appliances in the acceptance of electricity load-shifting programmes. Energy Efficiency 10, 1115–1127 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9508-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9508-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation