Techno-Economic Assessment of Net Metering and Energy Sharing in a Mixed-Use Renewable Energy Community in Montreal: A Simulation-Based Approach Using Tool4Cities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study presents a scalable decision-support framework to assess energy-sharing strategies within mixed-use urban districts, with a focus on planning, sustainability, and policy relevance. Two renewable energy-sharing mechanisms—energy sharing (ES) and net metering (NM)—are compared through a techno-economic analysis applied to a real neighborhood in Montréal, Canada. The workflow integrates irradiance-aware PV simulation, archetype-based urban building modeling, and financial sensitivity analysis adaptable to local regulatory conditions. Key performance indicators (KPIs)—including Self-Consumption Ratio (SCR), Self-Sufficiency Ratio (SSR), and peak load reduction—are used to evaluate technical performance. Results show that ES outperforms NM, achieving higher SCR (77% vs. 66%) and SSR (40% vs. 35%), and seasonal analysis reveals that peak shaving reaches 30.3% during summer afternoons, while PV impact is limited to 15.6% in winter mornings and negligible during winter evenings. Although both mechanisms are currently unprofitable under existing Québec tariffs, scenario analysis reveals that a 50% CAPEX subsidy or a 0.12 CAD/kWh feed-in tariff could make the system viable. The novelty of this study lies in the development of a replicable, archetype-driven, and policy-oriented simulation framework that enables the evaluation of renewable energy communities in mixed-use and data-scarce urban environments, contributing new insights into the Canadian energy transition context.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".