Risk-Aware Demand Management of Aggregators Participating in Energy Programs with Utilities

  • William D. Heavlin
  • Ana Radovanović
  • Varun Gupta
  • Seungil You
Part of the The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications book series (IMA, volume 162)


Electric utilities typically offer demand-side management (DSM) programs in order to reduce peak demand and to shift supply risks. These same programs engender a new business model, that of the energy aggregators. Energy aggregators seek to harvest the DSM incentives by strategically deferring the loads under their control. Examples of deferrable loads are electric vehicles (EVs) and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems. To choose appropriately from a utility’s menu of programs, the aggregator must forecast both temperature and load and should also estimate the uncertainties associated with these forecasts. Further, the aggregator can work to mitigate these uncertainties by managing flexible loads under their control.

We propose a formulation that unifies the various kinds of deferrable loads and explicitly balances the trade-off between user discomfort and monetary costs. Our main contribution comes from incorporating the uncertainty of temperature and load forecasts into the optimal choice of DSM program selection.


  1. 1.
    Albadi M, El-Saadany E (2008) A summary of demand response in electricity markets. Electr Power Syst Res 78(11):1989–1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bacher P, Madsen H (2011) Identifying suitable models for the heat dynamics of buildings. Energy Build 43(7):1511–1522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balijepalli VM, Pradhan V, Khaparde S, Shereef R (2011) Review of demand response under smart grid paradigm. In: Innovative Smart Grid Technologies-India (ISGT India), 2011 IEEE PES. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 236–243Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bienstock D, Chertkov M, Harnett S (2014) Chance constrained optimal power flow: risk-aware network control under uncertainty. Proc Natl Acad Sci 56:461–495Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    California Public Utilities Commission: Utility tariff information.
  6. 6.
    Caramanis M, Foster JM (2009) Management of electric vehicle charging to mitigate renewable generation intermittency and distribution network congestion. In: Decision and control, 2009 held jointly with the 2009 28th Chinese control conference. Proceedings of the 48th IEEE conference on CDC/CCC 2009. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 4717–4722Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen L, Li N, Jiang L, Low SH (2012) Optimal demand response: problem formulation and deterministic case. In: Control and optimization methods for electric smart grids. Springer, New York, pp 63–85Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen Z, Wu L, Fu Y (2012) Real-time price-based demand response management for residential appliances via stochastic optimization and robust optimization. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 3(4):1822–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen C, Wang J, Heo Y, Kishore S (2013) MPC-based appliance scheduling for residential building energy management controller. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 4(3):1401–1410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen X, Wei T, Hu S (2013) Uncertainty-aware household appliance scheduling considering dynamic electricity pricing in smart home. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 4(2):932–941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chiu WY, Sun H, Poor HV (2013) Energy imbalance management using a robust pricing scheme. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 4(2):896–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cho IK, Meyn, SP (2010) Efficiency and marginal cost pricing in dynamic competitive markets with friction. Theor Econ 5(2):215–239Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Erickson V, Lin Y, Kamthe A, Bramhe R, Surana A, Cerpa E, Sohn D, Narayanan S (2009) Energy efficient building environment control strategies using real-time occupancy measurements. In: Proceedings of the first ACM workshop on embedded sensing systems for energy-efficiency in buildings (BuildSys ‘09). ACM, New York, pp 19–24Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    FERC Staff Report (2006) Assessment of demand response and advanced metering. Technical Report, Docket AD06-2-00, Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Foster JM, Caramanis MC (2013) Optimal power market participation of plug-in electric vehicles pooled by distribution feeder. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(3):2065–2076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gan L, Topcu U, Low SH (2013) Optimal decentralized protocol for electric vehicle charging. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(2):940–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gonzalez Vaya M, Andersson G (2013) Optimal bidding strategy of a plug-in electric vehicle aggregator in day-ahead electricity markets. In: 2013 10th international conference on the European energy market (EEM). IEEE, Piscataway, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grahn P, Munkhammar J, Widén J, Alvehag K, Söder L (2013) Phev home-charging model based on residential activity patterns. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(3):2507–2515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Halvgaard R, Poulsen NK, Madsen H, Jørgensen JB (2012) Economic model predictive control for building climate control in a smart grid. In: Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT), 2012 IEEE PES. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hao H, Sanandaji BM, Poolla K, Vincent TL (2015) Aggregate flexibility of thermostatically controlled loads. IEEE Trans Power Syst 30(1):189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ilic MD, Xie L, Joo JY (2011) Efficient coordination of wind power and price-responsive demand part I: theoretical foundations. IEEE Trans Power Syst 26(4):1875–1884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kennel F, Gorges D, Liu S (2013) Energy management for smart grids with electric vehicles based on hierarchical MPC. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 9(3):1528–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kraning M, Chu E, Lavaei J, Boyd SP (2014) Dynamic network energy management via proximal message passing. Found Trends Optim 1(2):73–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    National Energy Technology Laboratory (2007) NETL Modern Grid Initiative – Powering Our 21st-Century EconomyGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lambert Q (2012) Business Models for an Aggregator-Is an aggregator economically sustainable on Gotland?. MsC thesis, XR – EE – ICS 2012:003, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li T, Shahidehpour M, Li Z (2007) Risk-constrained bidding strategy with stochastic unit commitment. IEEE Trans Power Syst 22(1):449–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Masters G (2013) Renewable and efficient power systems. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mathieu JL, Kamgarpour M, Lygeros J, Andersson G, Callaway DS (2015) Arbitraging intraday wholesale energy market prices with aggregations of thermostatic loads. IEEE Trans Power Syst 30(2):763–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mohsenian-Rad AH, Leon-Garcia A (2010) Optimal residential load control with price prediction in real-time electricity pricing environments. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 1(2):120–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Molina-Garcia A, Kessler M, Fuentes JA, Gomez-Lazaro E (2011) Probabilistic characterization of thermostatically controlled loads to model the impact of demand response programs. IEEE Trans Power Syst 26(1):241–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nguyen DT, Le LB (2014) Joint optimization of electric vehicle and home energy scheduling considering user comfort preference. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 5(1):188–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nguyen DT, Le LB (2015) Risk-constrained profit maximization for microgrid aggregators with demand response. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 6(1):135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Office of Energy, G.o.W.A. (2010) U.S. Energy Information Administration. Electric Utility Demand Side Management.
  34. 34.
    Pacific Gas and Electric Company: ELECTRIC SCHEDULE E-CBP.
  35. 35.
    Radovanović A, Heavlin D, Kiliccote S (2016) Optimized risk-aware nomination strategy in demand response markets. In: The 3rd ACM international conference on systems for energy-efficient built environments (BuildSys ‘16). ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rajagopal R, Bitar E, Wu F, Varaiya P(2012) Risk limiting dispatch of wind power. In: 2012 American control conference (ACC). IEEE, Piscataway, pp 4417–4422Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Roald L, Misra S, Chertkov M, Andersson G(2015) Optimal power flow with weighted chance constraints and general policies for generation control. In: Proceedings of 54th IEEE conference on decision and control. IEEE, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    St. John J (2013) Europe’s new models for demand response. Greentech MediaGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tashtoush B, Molhim M, Al-Rousan M (2005) Dynamic model of an HVAC system for control analysis. Energy 30(10):1729–1745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tsikalakis AG, Hatziargyriou ND (2011) Centralized control for optimizing microgrids operation. In: 2011 IEEE power and energy society general meeting. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vagropoulos SI, Bakirtzis AG (2013) Optimal bidding strategy for electric vehicle aggregators in electricity markets. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(4):4031–4041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Whitaker C, Newmiller J, Ropp M, Norris B (2008) Distributed photovoltaic system design and technology requirements. Technical Report, SAND2008-0946, Sandia National LaboratoriesGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wu Z, Gu W, Wang R, Yuan X, Liu W (2011) Economic optimal schedule of CHP microgrid system using chance constrained programming and particle swarm optimization. In: 2011 IEEE Power and Energy Society general meeting. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhang W, Lian J, Chang CY, Kalsi K (2013) Aggregated modeling and control of air conditioning loads for demand response. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(4):4655–4664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zhang Y, Gatsis N, Giannakis GB (2013) Robust energy management for microgrids with high-penetration renewables. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 4(4):944–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • William D. Heavlin
    • 1
  • Ana Radovanović
    • 1
  • Varun Gupta
    • 3
  • Seungil You
    • 2
  1. 1.Google, Inc.Mountain ViewUSA
  2. 2.Kakao MobilityBundang-gu, Seongnam-siRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations