Resource adequacy and capacity Procurement: Metrics and decision support analysis

The study of electricity resource adequacy (i.e. quantifying the risk of future resource shortfall) typically uses standard metrics such as Loss of Load Expectation and Expected Energy Unserved. A range of possible risk model outputs are critiqued in this paper as a basis for decision analysis on capacity procurement, starting with the current standard approach (in which risk is commonly monetised as EEU multiplied by VOLL), and moving on to alternatives such as risk averse metrics and wider visualisations of risk profile. There are concerns in principle from a decision analytic perspective with using expected money as a utility function. Also, while there is interest in use of risk-averse metrics such as Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR), these might not capture all aspects of risk profile that are of interest. To obtain a comprehensive picture of the risk profile of a system, it is necessary to visualise a range of distributions of outcome measures, rather than using single number metrics. Providing such visualisations is likely not to provide the basis for a transparent risk standard, and options are discussed such as setting a level for a single metric that is occasionally revised according to changing profile of resources. Any such metric-based approach should also be supplemented by assessment of wider aspects of risk profile, for instance through examining distributions of outcome metrics. The inherent uncertainty, due to data limitations and imperfect representation of the system in the model, should also be acknowledged appropriately in estimation of such metrics.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part A Journal of Power and Energy
Published
2024-11-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09576509241292100
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.03

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Resource adequacy and capacity Procurement: Metrics and decision support analysis

Amy L. Wilson, Néstor Sánchez, Chris Dent, Xuewen Yu et al.
9 citations
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part A Journal of Power and Energy
Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth
9.03
article

Resource adequacy and capacity Procurement: Metrics and decision support analysis

Amy L. Wilson, Néstor Sánchez, Chris Dent, Xuewen Yu, Aditi Shevni, Jim Q. Smith
article en
9 citations

Abstract

The study of electricity resource adequacy (i.e. quantifying the risk of future resource shortfall) typically uses standard metrics such as Loss of Load Expectation and Expected Energy Unserved. A range of possible risk model outputs are critiqued in this paper as a basis for decision analysis on capacity procurement, starting with the current standard approach (in which risk is commonly monetised as EEU multiplied by VOLL), and moving on to alternatives such as risk averse metrics and wider visualisations of risk profile. There are concerns in principle from a decision analytic perspective with using expected money as a utility function. Also, while there is interest in use of risk-averse metrics such as Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR), these might not capture all aspects of risk profile that are of interest. To obtain a comprehensive picture of the risk profile of a system, it is necessary to visualise a range of distributions of outcome measures, rather than using single number metrics. Providing such visualisations is likely not to provide the basis for a transparent risk standard, and options are discussed such as setting a level for a single metric that is occasionally revised according to changing profile of resources. Any such metric-based approach should also be supplemented by assessment of wider aspects of risk profile, for instance through examining distributions of outcome metrics. The inherent uncertainty, due to data limitations and imperfect representation of the system in the model, should also be acknowledged appropriately in estimation of such metrics.

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part A Journal of Power and EnergyVol. 239(1)
University of Cambridge (GB), University of Warwick (GB), MRC Biostatistics Unit (GB), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Simons Foundation, Alan Turing Institute, International Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth
9.03
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.