It’s still not earning you money to spend electricity because you still have to pay the transfer fee which is around 6 cents / kWh but it’s pretty damn cheap nevertheless, mostly because of the excess in wind energy.

Last winter because of a mistake it dropped down to negative 50 cents / kWh for few hours, averaging negative 20 cents for the entire day. People were literally earning money by spending electricity. Some were running electric heaters outside in the middle of the winter.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
17 points

Negative pricing IS a demand shaping method, you need to have a certain % of the electricity produced that is consumed at the same time, otherwise you risk having an unstable electricity grid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Variable pricing is a demand shaping method. Negative rates are an indication of insufficient flexibility to adequately shape demand. If we were able to adequately shape demand to match available supply, rates would fluctuate, but they would never go negative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If we were able to adequately shape demand to match available supply, rates would fluctuate, but they would never go negative.

I don’t see why that would follow.

If supply is higher than demand, then getting rid of that excess supply costs money, and the producer might have to pay someone to take it away. It applies to grocery stores that over order inventory of perishable goods, to oil companies that run out of space to store oil, and electricity grids that need to get rid of damaging/dangerous excess power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If supply is higher than demand, then getting rid of that excess supply costs money, and the producer might have to pay someone to take it away

That is all absolutely correct, and that is all completely irrelevant. That scenario only exists after shaping efforts have failed to match supply and demand.

The purpose and intent is to sell power at a profit. Where demand cannot be increased enough for rates to remain profitable, demand shaping has not achieved its intended purpose. Negative rates are not an example of demand shaping. Negative rates are an indication that demand shaping has failed.

It applies to grocery stores that over order inventory of perishable goods

The dumpster behind the grocery store is “disposal”, not “demand”. The solution to negative rates is not for the power companies to find a dumpster in which to dispose of their excess power.

The supply shaping solution to this problem is reduced solar and wind production, augmented by flexible peaker plants, and drawing on previously stored grid power.

The demand shaping solution to this problem is flexible loads that can be added or removed from the grid as needed, and storing grid power for future use.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Mildly Interesting

!mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world

Create post

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it’s too interesting, it doesn’t belong. If it’s not interesting, it doesn’t belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh… what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don’t spam.

Community stats

  • 3.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 328

    Posts

  • 3.7K

    Comments