Flexibility with high and low capability – what's fair?

Extended abstract 1-112-26

Some people have better means to shift and flex their energy use than others. Affluent, high consumers, with EVs, heat pumps, batteries and other costly technologies stand to benefit significantly more from time-varying tariffs, especially when paired with automation and AI. The EDOL Flexibility Lab 'Justice, Energy, Demand flexibility and AI for Sustainability' (JedAI) project assessed households from across the capability spectrum and compares their observed flexibility with their theoretical flexibility capability.

A cohort of 130 households is subjected to a 20-week period of interventions. In the first eight weeks they are asked to reduce electricity use between 4 p.m. and 7 p.m each day. For the next six weeks they are additionally given periods predicted to be ‘low carbon’, when they could use the avoided electricity instead. Finally, they are given ‘response’ events with only a few hours of warning. These three types of interventions seek to differentiate different abilities to respond, depending on a range of capabilities, such as technical, financial, digital, social and dwelling characteristics.

The UK sample is contrasted with a German sample, where we particularly compare low-capability and fuel poor homes with those who own home battery systems and other low carbon technologies. We ask how their responses to interventions differ and how future flexibility measures could be better targeted and communicated, such that the potential is realised while not causing detriment and loss of energy service for households already struggling.

Should low consumption households be left alone, or encouraged to use more at times of low-cost energy? The empirical findings of this study will be used to inform policy and make implementation recommendations. We also hope to stimulate a discussion of what fairness means in the context of a changing energy system.

Read the full abstract.

Download presentation.