A simple way to integrate distributed storage into a wholesale electricity market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Current plans to decarbonize the electric supply system imply that the generation from wind and solar sources will grow substantially. This growth will increase the uncertainty of system operations due to the inherent variability of these renewable sources, and as a result, more reserve capacity will be required to provide the ramping (flexibility) needed for reliable operations. This paper assumes that all of the increased uncertainty comes from wind farms on the grid, and it shows how distributed storage managed locally by aggregators can provide the ramping needed without introducing a separate market for flexibility. This can be accomplished when the aggregators minimize the expected daily cost of the energy purchased from the grid for their customers by submitting optimal bids into the wholesale market with high and low price thresholds for discharging and charging the storage. This model is illustrated using a stochastic multi-period security constrained optimal power flow together with realistic data for a reduction of the network in the Northeast Power Coordinating Council region of the United States. The results show that the bidding strategy for distributed storage provides ramping to the grid just as effectively as storage managed by a system operator.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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".