Schedule-Based Operation Method Using Market Data for an Energy Storage System of a Customer in the Ontario Electricity Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new operation method for an energy storage system (ESS) was proposed to reduce the electricity charges of a customer paying the wholesale price and participating in the industrial conservation initiative (ICI) in the Ontario electricity market of Canada. Electricity charges were overviewed and classified into four components: fixed cost, electricity usage cost, peak demand cost, and Ontario peak contribution cost (OPCC). Additionally, the online market data provided by the independent electricity system operator (IESO), which operates the Ontario electricity market, were reviewed. From the reviews, it was identified that (1) the portion of the OPCC in the electricity charges increased continuously, and (2) large errors can sometimes exist in the forecasted data given by the IESO. In order to reflect these, a new schedule-based operation method for the ESS was proposed in this paper. In the proposed method, the operation schedule for the ESS is determined by solving an optimization problem to minimize the electricity charges, where the OPCC is considered and the online market data provided by the IESO is used. The active power reference for the ESS is then calculated from the scheduled output for the current time interval. To reflect the most recent market data, the operation schedule and the active power reference for the ESS are iteratively determined for every five minutes. In addition, in order to cope with the prediction errors, methods to correct the forecasted data for the current time interval and secure the energy reserve are presented. The results obtained from the case study and actual operation at the Penetanguishene microgrid test bed in Ontario are presented to validate the proposed method.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".