Optimal Participation of DR Aggregators in Day-Ahead Energy and Demand Response Exchange Markets

  • Ehsan Heydarian-Forushani
  • Miadreza Shafie-khah
  • Maziar Yazdani Damavandi
  • João P. S. Catalão
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 423)

Abstract

Aggregating the Demand Response (DR) is approved as an effective solution to improve the participation of consumers to wholesale electricity markets. DR aggregator can negotiate the amount of collected DR of their customers with transmission system operator, distributors, and retailers in Demand Response eXchange (DRX) market, in addition to participate in the energy market. In this paper, a framework has been proposed to optimize the participation of a DR aggregator in day-ahead energy and intraday DRX markets. In this regard, the DR aggregator optimizes its participation schedule and offering/bidding strategy in the mentioned markets according to behavior of its customers. For this purpose, the customers’ participation is modeled using a Supply Function Equilibrium (SFE) model. In addition, due to uncertainties of market prices and the behavior of consumers, an appropriate risk measurement, CVaR, is incorporated to the optimization problem. The numerical results show the effectiveness of the proposed framework.

Keywords

CVaR day-ahead market demand response exchange DR aggregator energy market intraday market 

References

  1. 1.
    Shao, S., Pipattanasomporn, M., Rahman, S.: Demand response as a load shaping tool in an intelligent grid with electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid. 2, 624–631 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siano, P.: Demand response and smart grids—A survey, Renewable and Sustainable. Energy Reviews 30, 461–478 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nguyen, D.T., Negnevitsky, M., Groot, D.: Walrasian Market Clearing for Demand Response Exchange. IEEE Trans. Power Sys. 27, 535–544 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yousefi, S., Moghaddam, M.P., Majd, V.J.: Optimal real time pricing in an agent-based retail market using a comprehensive demand response model. Energy 36, 5716–5727 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Palensky, P., Dietrich, D.: Demand side management: demand response, intelligent energy systems, and smart loads. IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat. 7, 381–388 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goel, L., Aparna, V.P., Wang, P.: A framework to implement supply and demand side contingency management in reliability assessment of restructured power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Sys. 22, 205–212 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aalami, H.A., Moghaddam, M.P., Yousefi, G.R.: Demand response modeling considering interruptible/curtailable loads and capacity market programs. Applied Energy 87, 243–250 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nguyen, D.T., Negnevitsky, M., de Groot, M.: Pool-based demand response exchange—concept and modeling. IEEE Trans. Power Sys., Power Systems 26, 1677–1685 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moghaddam, M.P., Abdollahi, A., Rashidinejad, M.: Flexible demand response programs modeling in competitive electricity markets. Applied Energy 88, 3257–3269 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hajati, M., Seifi, H., Sheikh-El-Eslami, M.K.: Optimal retailer bidding in a DA market e a new method considering risk and demand elasticity. Energy 36, 1332–1339 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aazami, R., Aflaki, K., Haghifam, M.R.: A demand response based solution for LMP management in power markets. Elec. Power & Energy Sys. 33, 1125–1132 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Megawatts vs. negawatts: how a little can do a lot. Electricity Journal 21, 5–5, (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kirschen, D.S.: Demand-side view of electricity markets. IEEE Trans. Power Sys. 18, 520–527 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yusta, J.M., Khodr, H.M., Urdaneta, A.J.: Optimal pricing of default customers in electrical distribution systems: Effect behavior performance of demand response models. Electr. Power Sys. Res. 548, 58–77 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li, T., Shahidehpour, M.: Strategic bidding of transmission-constrained GENCOs with incomplete information. IEEE Trans. Power Sys. 20, 437–447 (2005)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Conejo, A.J., Nogales, F.J., Arroyo, J.M.: Price-takerbiddingstrategyunderprice uncertainty. IEEE Trans. Power Sys. 17, 1081–1088 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shayesteh, E., Yousefi, A., Moghaddam, M.P.: A probabilistic risk-based approach for spinning reserve provision using day-ahead demand response program. Energy 35, 1908–1915 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ehsan Heydarian-Forushani
    • 1
  • Miadreza Shafie-khah
    • 2
  • Maziar Yazdani Damavandi
    • 2
  • João P. S. Catalão
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Iran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.University of Beira InteriorCovilhãPortugal
  3. 3.INESC-IDLisbonPortugal
  4. 4.ISTUniv. LisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations