IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v122y2018icp214-228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Independence without control: Autarky outperforms autonomy benefits in the adoption of private energy storage systems

Author

Listed:
  • Ecker, Franz
  • Spada, Hans
  • Hahnel, Ulf J.J.

Abstract

Decentralized energy storage systems (ESS) are a promising means to more effectively match the supply and demand of fluctuating renewable energies. In most countries, however, ESS market share is small and whether or not the technology will attain a critical market share is subject to homeowners' investment decisions. For policy and industry alike, it is of particular interest to identify factors that drive ESS adoption. Empirically addressing this question, we hypothesized that the factors autarky and autonomy aspirations crucially determine ESS adoption decisions. In two studies (Ntotal = 489), sketching future decentralized energy scenarios, we found evidence for the importance of both factors for homeowners' evaluations of the technology. However, only autarky significantly affected homeowners' willingness to pay extra for ESS, in that homeowners invested more in the technology when autarky was higher (Study 1) or autarky benefits were emphasized (Study 2). In accordance with concepts aspiring to optimize energy flow on the low-voltage grid level (e.g. Smart Neighborhoods), we additionally examined the influence of autarky and autonomy aspirations on homeowners' willingness to exchange self-generated energy within a local energy network. Results showed that emphasis on autarky increased the subjective value of self-generated energy, decreasing the likelihood of peer-to-peer energy trading.

Suggested Citation

  • Ecker, Franz & Spada, Hans & Hahnel, Ulf J.J., 2018. "Independence without control: Autarky outperforms autonomy benefits in the adoption of private energy storage systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 214-228.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:122:y:2018:i:c:p:214-228
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421518304750
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christiane Rosen and Reinhard Madlener, 2016. "Regulatory Options for Local Reserve Energy Markets: Implications for Prosumers, Utilities, and other Stakeholders," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Bollino-M).
    2. Poullikkas, Andreas, 2013. "A comparative overview of large-scale battery systems for electricity storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 778-788.
    3. Wolf-Peter Schill & Alexander Zerrahn & Friedrich Kunz & Claudia Kemfert, 2017. "Dezentrale Eigenstromversorgung mit Solarenergie und Batteriespeichern: Systemorientierung erforderlich," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 84(12), pages 223-233.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Loßner, Martin & Böttger, Diana & Bruckner, Thomas, 2017. "Economic assessment of virtual power plants in the German energy market — A scenario-based and model-supported analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 125-138.
    6. Kakran, Sandeep & Chanana, Saurabh, 2018. "Smart operations of smart grids integrated with distributed generation: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 524-535.
    7. Engelken, Maximilian & Römer, Benedikt & Drescher, Marcus & Welpe, Isabell, 2016. "Transforming the energy system: Why municipalities strive for energy self-sufficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 365-377.
    8. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Financing renewable energy infrastructures via financial citizen participation – The case of Germany," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 677-685.
    9. Hansla, Andre & Gamble, Amelie & Juliusson, Asgeir & Garling, Tommy, 2008. "Psychological determinants of attitude towards and willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 768-774, February.
    10. Rae, Callum & Bradley, Fiona, 2012. "Energy autonomy in sustainable communities—A review of key issues," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6497-6506.
    11. Carmon, Ziv & Ariely, Dan, 2000. "Focusing on the Forgone: How Value Can Appear So Different to Buyers and Sellers," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(3), pages 360-370, December.
    12. Hall, Peter J. & Bain, Euan J., 2008. "Energy-storage technologies and electricity generation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4352-4355, December.
    13. Knez, Peter & Smith, Vernon L & Williams, Arlington W, 1985. "Individual Rationality, Market Rationality, and Value Estimation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 397-402, May.
    14. Mallett, Alexandra, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovations: The role of technology cooperation in urban Mexico," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2790-2798, May.
    15. Fanone, Enzo & Gamba, Andrea & Prokopczuk, Marcel, 2013. "The case of negative day-ahead electricity prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 22-34.
    16. Marine Le Gall-Ely, 2009. "Definition, Measurement and Determinants of the Consumer's Willingness to Pay: a Critical Synthesis and Directions for Further Research," Post-Print hal-00522828, HAL.
    17. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-1348, December.
    18. Tuballa, Maria Lorena & Abundo, Michael Lochinvar, 2016. "A review of the development of Smart Grid technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 710-725.
    19. Rogers, J.C. & Simmons, E.A. & Convery, I. & Weatherall, A., 2008. "Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4217-4226, November.
    20. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    21. Balcombe, Paul & Rigby, Dan & Azapagic, Adisa, 2013. "Motivations and barriers associated with adopting microgeneration energy technologies in the UK," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 655-666.
    22. Müller, Matthias Otto & Stämpfli, Adrian & Dold, Ursula & Hammer, Thomas, 2011. "Energy autarky: A conceptual framework for sustainable regional development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 5800-5810, October.
    23. Oberst, Christian & Madlener, Reinhard, 2015. "Prosumer Preferences Regarding the Adoption of Micro‐Generation Technologies: Empirical Evidence for German Homeowners," FCN Working Papers 22/2014, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    24. Walker, Gordon & Devine-Wright, Patrick & Hunter, Sue & High, Helen & Evans, Bob, 2010. "Trust and community: Exploring the meanings, contexts and dynamics of community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2655-2663, June.
    25. Parra, David & Swierczynski, Maciej & Stroe, Daniel I. & Norman, Stuart.A. & Abdon, Andreas & Worlitschek, Jörg & O’Doherty, Travis & Rodrigues, Lucelia & Gillott, Mark & Zhang, Xiaojin & Bauer, Chris, 2017. "An interdisciplinary review of energy storage for communities: Challenges and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 730-749.
    26. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, March.
    27. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    28. Römer, Benedikt & Reichhart, Philipp & Kranz, Johann & Picot, Arnold, 2012. "The role of smart metering and decentralized electricity storage for smart grids: The importance of positive externalities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 486-495.
    29. Wüstenhagen, Rolf & Menichetti, Emanuela, 2012. "Strategic choices for renewable energy investment: Conceptual framework and opportunities for further research," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-10.
    30. Kremic, Tibor, 2003. "Technology Transfer: A Contextual Approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 149-158, April.
    31. Rosario Miceli, 2013. "Energy Management and Smart Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-29, April.
    32. Korcaj, Liridon & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Spada, Hans, 2015. "Intentions to adopt photovoltaic systems depend on homeowners' expected personal gains and behavior of peers," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 407-415.
    33. Leenheer, Jorna & de Nooij, Michiel & Sheikh, Omer, 2011. "Own power: Motives of having electricity without the energy company," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5621-5629, September.
    34. Abdon, Andreas & Zhang, Xiaojin & Parra, David & Patel, Martin K. & Bauer, Christian & Worlitschek, Jörg, 2017. "Techno-economic and environmental assessment of stationary electricity storage technologies for different time scales," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1173-1187.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael J. Fell & Alexandra Schneiders & David Shipworth, 2019. "Consumer Demand for Blockchain-Enabled Peer-to-Peer Electricity Trading in the United Kingdom: An Online Survey Experiment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Ableitner, Liliane & Tiefenbeck, Verena & Meeuw, Arne & Wörner, Anselma & Fleisch, Elgar & Wortmann, Felix, 2020. "User behavior in a real-world peer-to-peer electricity market," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    3. Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Herberz, Mario & Pena-Bello, Alejandro & Parra, David & Brosch, Tobias, 2020. "Becoming prosumer: Revealing trading preferences and decision-making strategies in peer-to-peer energy communities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    4. Georgarakis, Elena & Bauwens, Thomas & Pronk, Anne-Marie & AlSkaif, Tarek, 2021. "Keep it green, simple and socially fair: A choice experiment on prosumers’ preferences for peer-to-peer electricity trading in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Anita De Franco & Elisabetta Venco & Roberto De Lotto & Caterina Pietra & Florian Kutzner & Mona Bielig & Melanie Vogel, 2023. "Drivers, Motivations, and Barriers in the Creation of Energy Communities: Insights from the City of Segrate, Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-13, August.
    6. Zhou, Yue & Wu, Jianzhong & Song, Guanyu & Long, Chao, 2020. "Framework design and optimal bidding strategy for ancillary service provision from a peer-to-peer energy trading community," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    7. Steven Beattie & Wai-Kin (Victor) Chan & Zixuan Wei & Zhibin Zhu, 2022. "Simulation Analysis of a Double Auction-Based Local Energy Market in Socio-Economic Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-25, June.
    8. Sophie Adams & Donal Brown & Juan Pablo Cárdenas Álvarez & Ruzanna Chitchyan & Michael J. Fell & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Kristina Hojckova & Charlotte Johnson & Lurian Klein & Mehdi Montakhabi & Kelvin Say, 2021. "Social and Economic Value in Emerging Decentralized Energy Business Models: A Critical Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-29, November.
    9. Bögel, Paula Maria & Upham, Paul & Shahrokni, Hossein & Kordas, Olga, 2021. "What is needed for citizen-centered urban energy transitions: Insights on attitudes towards decentralized energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    10. Hackbarth, André & Löbbe, Sabine, 2020. "Attitudes, preferences, and intentions of German households concerning participation in peer-to-peer electricity trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    11. Robin Smale & Sanneke Kloppenburg, 2020. "Platforms in Power: Householder Perspectives on the Social, Environmental and Economic Challenges of Energy Platforms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Maurizio Sibilla & Esra Kurul, 2023. "Towards Social Understanding of Energy Storage Systems—A Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-11, September.
    13. Meritxell Domènech Monfort & César De Jesús & Natapon Wanapinit & Niklas Hartmann, 2022. "A Review of Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading with Standard Terminology Proposal and a Techno-Economic Characterisation Matrix," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-29, November.
    14. Bruno Domenech & Gema Calleja & Jordi Olivella, 2021. "Residential Photovoltaic Profitability with Storage under the New Spanish Regulation: A Multi-Scenario Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Kühnbach, Matthias & Bekk, Anke & Weidlich, Anke, 2022. "Towards improved prosumer participation: Electricity trading in local markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PE).
    16. Petrovich, Beatrice & Kubli, Merla, 2023. "Energy communities for companies: Executives’ preferences for local and renewable energy procurement," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    17. Kühnbach, Matthias & Pisula, Stefan & Bekk, Anke & Weidlich, Anke, 2020. "How much energy autonomy can decentralised photovoltaic generation provide? A case study for Southern Germany," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    18. Franz Harke & Philipp Otto, 2023. "Solar Self-Sufficient Households as a Driving Factor for Sustainability Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, February.
    19. Mehdi Montakhabi & Fairouz Zobiri & Shenja van der Graaf & Geert Deconinck & Domenico Orlando & Pieter Ballon & Mustafa A. Mustafa, 2021. "An Ecosystem View of Peer-to-Peer Electricity Trading: Scenario Building by Business Model Matrix to Identify New Roles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, July.
    20. Seyedhossein, Seyed Saeed & Moeini-Aghtaie, Moein, 2022. "Risk management framework of peer-to-peer electricity markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    21. Adewole, Ayooluwa & Shipworth, Michelle & Lemaire, Xavier & Sanderson, Danielle, 2023. "Peer-to-Peer energy trading, independence aspirations and financial benefits among Nigerian households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    22. Olivella, Jordi & Domenech, Bruno & Calleja, Gema, 2021. "Potential of implementation of residential photovoltaics at city level: The case of London," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 577-585.
    23. Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Fell, Michael J., 2022. "Pricing decisions in peer-to-peer and prosumer-centred electricity markets: Experimental analysis in Germany and the United Kingdom," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    24. Juntunen, Jouni K. & Martiskainen, Mari, 2021. "Improving understanding of energy autonomy: A systematic review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    25. Roberto De Lotto & Calogero Micciché & Elisabetta M. Venco & Angelo Bonaiti & Riccardo De Napoli, 2022. "Energy Communities: Technical, Legislative, Organizational, and Planning Features," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hackbarth, André, 2018. "Attitudes, preferences, and intentions of German households concerning participation in peer-to-peer electricity trading," Reutlingen Working Papers on Marketing & Management 2019-2, Reutlingen University, ESB Business School.
    2. Conradie, Peter D. & De Ruyck, Olivia & Saldien, Jelle & Ponnet, Koen, 2021. "Who wants to join a renewable energy community in Flanders? Applying an extended model of Theory of Planned Behaviour to understand intent to participate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. McKenna, Russell, 2018. "The double-edged sword of decentralized energy autonomy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 747-750.
    4. Engelken, Maximilian & Römer, Benedikt & Drescher, Marcus & Welpe, Isabell, 2018. "Why homeowners strive for energy self-supply and how policy makers can influence them," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 423-433.
    5. Shahriyar Nasirov & Carlos Silva & Claudio A. Agostini, 2015. "Investors’ Perspectives on Barriers to the Deployment of Renewable Energy Sources in Chile," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.
    6. Thomas M. Zellweger & Franz W. Kellermanns & James J. Chrisman & Jess H. Chua, 2012. "Family Control and Family Firm Valuation by Family CEOs: The Importance of Intentions for Transgenerational Control," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 851-868, June.
    7. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    8. (Xiao-Tian) Wang, X.T. & Ong, Lay See & Tan, Jolene H., 2015. "Sense and sensibility of ownership: Type of ownership experience and valuation of goods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 171-177.
    9. Xu, Xiaobing & Chen, Rong & Zhang, Jin, 2019. "Effectiveness of trade-ins and price discounts: A moderating role of substitutability," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 80-89.
    10. Hochman, Guy & Ayal, Shahar & Ariely, Dan, 2014. "Keeping your gains close but your money closer: The prepayment effect in riskless choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 582-594.
    11. Engelken, Maximilian & Römer, Benedikt & Drescher, Marcus & Welpe, Isabell, 2016. "Transforming the energy system: Why municipalities strive for energy self-sufficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 365-377.
    12. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    13. Salm, Sarah & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2016. "What are retail investors' risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 310-320.
    14. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Baležentis & Artiom Volkov & Mangirdas Morkūnas & Agnė Žičkienė & Justas Streimikis, 2021. "Barriers and Drivers of Renewable Energy Penetration in Rural Areas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-28, October.
    15. Alexopoulos, Theodore & Šimleša, Milija & Francis, Mélanie, 2015. "Good self, bad self: Initial success and failure moderate the endowment effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 32-40.
    16. Schumacher, K. & Krones, F. & McKenna, R. & Schultmann, F., 2019. "Public acceptance of renewable energies and energy autonomy: A comparative study in the French, German and Swiss Upper Rhine region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 315-332.
    17. Sayman, Serdar & Onculer, Ayse, 2005. "Effects of study design characteristics on the WTA-WTP disparity: A meta analytical framework," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 289-312, April.
    18. Ashworth, Laurence & Darke, Peter R. & McShane, Lindsay & Vu, Tiffany, 2019. "The rules of exchange: The role of an exchange surplus in producing the endowment effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 11-24.
    19. Koirala, Binod Prasad & van Oost, Ellen & van der Windt, Henny, 2018. "Community energy storage: A responsible innovation towards a sustainable energy system?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 570-585.
    20. Hackbarth, André & Löbbe, Sabine, 2020. "Attitudes, preferences, and intentions of German households concerning participation in peer-to-peer electricity trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:122:y:2018:i:c:p:214-228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.