MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175028590 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-7923

Implications of extreme temperatures and socio-economic development on power markets’ peak demand across the world

2021· article· en· W3175028590 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francesco Pietro Colelli, Enrica De Cian, Malcolm Mistry, Irene Mammi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeElectricityExtreme weatherPeak demandEconomicsEnvironmental sciencePower (physics)Natural resource economicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringEcologyBiologyThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><strong>Relevance:</strong> Extreme temperature events, both heatwaves and cold spells, can put pressure on power systems’ reliability by pushing power demand to record highs. Within the literature assessing the impacts of climate change on the energy sector,  gathering new evidence on the drivers of peak load is a pressing issue for multiple reasons. First, peaks in power load must be accommodated by exceptional ramp-up requirements of power generating units, so that in the future adapting to climate change may involve the construction of plentiful under-utilized peak generation plants, putting pressures on the decarbonization goals and increasing stranded assets risks. Furthermore, peak load shocks induced by extreme temperatures can coincide with reduced transmission and distribution capacity, further challenging the operation of electricity grids [1].</p><p>Both the empirical and modeling literature assessing the impacts of climate change on the energy sector have generally focused on aggregated electricity demand rather than on its peaks. Few available empirical studies  investigate how extreme events can affect peak demand focus on industrialized countries and estimate reduced-form models, that hold adaptation, economic growth, technology, and current infrastructure constant [2,3]. Our paper aims to fill this gap by identifying if and how climatic and socio-economic drivers can affect the magnitude of the peak load response to extreme weather events.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> We assess these interrelated dynamics by exploiting high-frequency power demand data collected from load balancing authorities. Specifically, we assemble a novel dataset spanning for the last two decades across more than 100 power markets, comprising both countries (European Member States, Asian and African countries) and large sub-national regions (power markets in Japan, Australia and Russia and Federal States or Provinces in the US, Canada, Brazil and India). The dataset includes: i) daily peak and total load; ii) daily population-weighted exposure to weather from 3 hourly near surface temperature data at 0.25 degrees gridded resolution; iii) quarterly and yearly regional statistics and indicators on demography, economy, education and innovation. We investigate how daily peak load responds to extreme temperatures by adopting a suite of time-series and panel econometric methods that fully exploit the high-frequency and sub-national disaggregation of our dataset.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Utilizing the innovative methodological framework proposed, we: i) identify how peak load responds to temperature extremes in different regions; ii) test if and how such response can be modulated by regional climatic and socio-economic characteristics; iii) derive cost implications due to the amplification of peak demand deriving from future increases in the intensity and frequency of extreme events.</p><p>References:</p><p>[1] Yalew, S. G., van Vliet, M. T., Gernaat, D. E., Ludwig, F., Miara, A., Park, C., ... & Van Vuuren, D. P. (2020). Nature Energy, 5(10), 794-802.</p><p>[2] Auffhammer, M., Baylis, P., & Hausman, C. H. (2017). PNAS, 114(8), 1886-1891.</p><p>[3] Wenz, L., Levermann, A., & Auffhammer, M. (2017). PNAS, 114(38), E7910-E7918.</p>

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207