4.5 Article

Towards the Design of P2P Energy Trading Scheme Based on Optimal Energy Scheduling for Prosumers

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 13, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en13195177

关键词

peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading; optimal energy scheduling; energy prosumer; distributed energy resource; consumer surplus

资金

  1. Human Resources Program in Energy Technology of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) from the Ministry of Trade, Industry, & Energy, Republic of Korea [20194010201830]
  2. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [20194010201830] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading is anchored in more efficient usage of electric power by allowing excess electric power from energy prosumers to be harnessed by other end-users. To boost the P2P energy trading, it is of pivotal significance to call on energy prosumers and end-users to actively participate in the trading while sharing information with a greater degree of freedom. In this perspective, this paper purports to implement the P2P energy trading scheme with an optimization model to assist in energy prosumers' decisions by reckoning on hourly electric power available in the trading via the optimal energy scheduling of the energy trading and sharing system (ETS). On a purely practical level, it is assumed that all trading participants neither join the separate bidding processes nor are forced to comply with the predetermined optimal schedules for a trading period. Furthermore, this paper will be logically elaborated with reference to not only the determination of transaction price for maximizing the benefits of consumers under the different electricity rates but the establishment of additional settlement standards for bridging an imperative gap between optimally planned and actually transacted quantities of the P2P energy trading.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据