Synopsis

Achieved Results

• Results showed that EUMF, TOU pricing and DSB can all deliver valuable demand profile change benefits and achieve financial benefits. Relatively small amounts of demand flexibility can have large benefits in reducing peak capacity requirements (see Figure).
• EUMF results showed that face to face interviews with smaller customers and estimated disaggregation of demand are the preferred methodologies for delivering energy savings.
• TOU pricing together with remotely switched demand and limited customer override are the most cost effective methodologies for delivering reliable profile change.
• The study showed that there is a role for Energy Service and Demand Aggregator Companies to bid the demand of smaller customers and assist system operation, improve supply security and reduce supply costs.
• Profile and Demand Validation will not unduly constrain the development of Demand Response processes for smaller customers.

Participation

Denmark, Finland, Greece, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom

Task duration: 2003 – 2005