IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v239y2022ipcs0360544221025019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is total system cost minimization fair to all the actors of an energy system? Not according to game theory

Author

Listed:
  • Fischer, Robert
  • Toffolo, Andrea

Abstract

A common approach to energy system optimization is to minimize overall costs at system level, regardless of the actors actually bearing those costs. This paper presents an approach inspired by Nash game theory concepts, in which the actors involved in an energy system determine their optimal strategies according to their own economic interests (profit functions) in a non-cooperative or in a cooperative way. A simple case study, considering an electric utility and individual heating consumers in the municipal energy system of a small town in northern Sweden, shows the differences between the two approaches. The game theory approach is able to represent more realistic interactions among the actors of an energy system, fair in fulfilling their conflicting economic interests, and, therefore, a more suitable tool for decision makers evaluating the impacts of policy instruments.

Suggested Citation

  • Fischer, Robert & Toffolo, Andrea, 2022. "Is total system cost minimization fair to all the actors of an energy system? Not according to game theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PC).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:239:y:2022:i:pc:s0360544221025019
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.122253
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544221025019
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2021.122253?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. Janne Hirvonen & Juha Jokisalo & Juhani Heljo & Risto Kosonen, 2019. "Towards the EU Emission Targets of 2050: Cost-Effective Emission Reduction in Finnish Detached Houses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-29, November.
    2. Copiello, Sergio & Gabrielli, Laura & Bonifaci, Pietro, 2017. "Evaluation of energy retrofit in buildings under conditions of uncertainty: The prominence of the discount rate," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 104-117.
    3. Raymond S. Hartman & Michael J. Doane, 1986. "Household Discount Rates Revisited," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 139-148.
    4. Robert Fischer & Erik Elfgren & Andrea Toffolo, 2020. "Towards Optimal Sustainable Energy Systems in Nordic Municipalities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Wang, Haiyang & Zhang, Chenghui & Li, Ke & Ma, Xin, 2021. "Game theory-based multi-agent capacity optimization for integrated energy systems with compressed air energy storage," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    6. Pettersson, Karin & Wetterlund, Elisabeth & Athanassiadis, Dimitris & Lundmark, Robert & Ehn, Christian & Lundgren, Joakim & Berglin, Niklas, 2015. "Integration of next-generation biofuel production in the Swedish forest industry – A geographically explicit approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 317-332.
    7. García-Gusano, Diego & Espegren, Kari & Lind, Arne & Kirkengen, Martin, 2016. "The role of the discount rates in energy systems optimisation models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 56-72.
    8. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2016. "Making the implicit explicit: A look inside the implicit discount rate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 321-331.
    9. Jonas Zetterholm & Elina Bryngemark & Johan Ahlström & Patrik Söderholm & Simon Harvey & Elisabeth Wetterlund, 2020. "Economic Evaluation of Large-Scale Biorefinery Deployment: A Framework Integrating Dynamic Biomass Market and Techno-Economic Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-28, September.
    10. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    11. Shadram, Farshid & Bhattacharjee, Shimantika & Lidelöw, Sofia & Mukkavaara, Jani & Olofsson, Thomas, 2020. "Exploring the trade-off in life cycle energy of building retrofit through optimization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    12. Sarjiya, & Budi, Rizki Firmansyah Setya & Hadi, Sasongko Pramono, 2019. "Game theory for multi-objective and multi-period framework generation expansion planning in deregulated markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 323-330.
    13. Hasankhani, Arezoo & Hakimi, Seyed Mehdi, 2021. "Stochastic energy management of smart microgrid with intermittent renewable energy resources in electricity market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    14. Wu, Qiong & Ren, Hongbo & Gao, Weijun & Ren, Jianxing, 2017. "Benefit allocation for distributed energy network participants applying game theory based solutions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 384-391.
    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. Østergaard, P.A. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Sorknæs, P. & Mathiesen, B.V., 2022. "Review and validation of EnergyPLAN," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Gabriele Volpato & Gianluca Carraro & Enrico Dal Cin & Sergio Rech, 2024. "On the Different Fair Allocations of Economic Benefits for Energy Communities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-26, September.
    3. Luh, Sandro & Kannan, Ramachandran & McKenna, Russell & Schmidt, Thomas J. & Kober, Tom, 2024. "Quantifying the impact of travel time duration and valuation on modal shift in Swiss passenger transportation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 356(C).

    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. Jafari, Hamed & Safarzadeh, Soroush & Azad-Farsani, Ehsan, 2022. "Effects of governmental policies on energy-efficiency improvement of hydrogen fuel cell cars: A game-theoretic approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    2. Dong, Zihang & Zhang, Xi & Strbac, Goran, 2021. "Evaluation of benefits through coordinated control of numerous thermal energy storage in highly electrified heat systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    3. Petkov, Ivalin & Mavromatidis, Georgios & Knoeri, Christof & Allan, James & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "MANGOret: An optimization framework for the long-term investment planning of building multi-energy system and envelope retrofits," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    4. Nwachukwu, Chinedu Maureen & Olofsson, Elias & Lundmark, Robert & Wetterlund, Elisabeth, 2022. "Evaluating fuel switching options in the Swedish iron and steel industry under increased competition for forest biomass," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    5. Pagnini, Luisa & Bracco, Stefano & Delfino, Federico & de-Simón-Martín, Miguel, 2024. "Levelized cost of electricity in renewable energy communities: Uncertainty propagation analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 366(C).
    6. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 95-122, February.
    7. Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2009. "Splitting up value: A critical review of residual income theories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(1), pages 1-22, October.
    8. Michael Carter & Julian Wright, 1999. "Interconnection in Network Industries," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 14(1), pages 1-25, February.
    9. Shoaib Azizi & Gireesh Nair & Thomas Olofsson, 2020. "Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Renovation of Single-Family Houses: A Comparative Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Laruelle, Annick & Valenciano, Federico, 2008. "Noncooperative foundations of bargaining power in committees and the Shapley-Shubik index," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 341-353, May.
    11. Omer F. Baris, 2018. "Timing effect in bargaining and ex ante efficiency of the relative utilitarian solution," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 547-556, June.
    12. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2022. "Monotonicity in sharing the revenues from broadcasting sports leagues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 338-346.
    13. Yan, Ruiliang & Wang, John & Zhou, Bin, 2010. "Channel integration and profit sharing in the dynamics of multi-channel firms," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 430-440.
    14. Marc Fleurbaey, 2000. "Choix social : une difficulté et de multiples possibilités," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 51(5), pages 1215-1232.
    15. Guth, Werner & Ritzberger, Klaus & van Damme, Eric, 2004. "On the Nash bargaining solution with noise," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 697-713, June.
    16. Ichiishi, Tatsuro, 1985. "Management versus ownership, II," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 115-138, March.
    17. Jiaxing Wang & Shigeru Matsumoto, 2022. "An economic model of home appliance replacement: application to refrigerator replacement among Japanese households," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 24(1), pages 29-48, January.
    18. Pinkley, Robin L. & Conlon, Donald E. & Sawyer, John E. & Sleesman, Dustin J. & Vandewalle, Don & Kuenzi, Maribeth, 2019. "The power of phantom alternatives in negotiation: How what could be haunts what is," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 34-48.
    19. Wen Li Cheng & Jeffrey Sachs & Xiaokai Yang, 2005. "An Inframarginal Analysis Of The Ricardian Model," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: An Inframarginal Approach To Trade Theory, chapter 6, pages 87-107, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Lea Melnikovová, 2017. "Can Game Theory Help to Mitigate Water Conflicts in the Syrdarya Basin?," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 65(4), pages 1393-1401.

    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:energy:v:239:y:2022:i:pc:s0360544221025019. 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.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.