Competition between simultaneous demand-side flexibility options: the case of community electricity storage systems

Fabian Scheller*, Robert Burkhardt, Robert Schwarzeit, Russell McKenna, Thomas Bruckner

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Citations (Scopus)


Community electricity storage systems for multiple applications promise benefits over household electricity storage systems. More economical flexibility options such as demand response and sector coupling might reduce the market size for storage facilities. This paper assesses the economic performance of community electricity storage systems by taking competitive flexibility options into account. For this purpose, an actor-related, scenario-based optimization framework is applied. The results are in line with the literature and show that community storage systems are economically more efficient than household storage systems. Relative storage capacity reductions of community storage systems over household storage systems are possible, as the demand and generation profiles are balanced out among end users. On average, storage capacity reductions of 9% per household are possible in the base scenario, resulting in lower specific investments. The simultaneous application of demand-side flexibility options such as sector coupling and demand response enable a further capacity reduction of the community storage size by up to 23%. At the same time, the competition between flexibility options leads to smaller benefits regarding the community storage flexibility potential, which reduces the market viability for these applications. In the worst case, the cannibalization effects reach up to 38% between the flexibility measures. The losses of the flexibility benefits outweigh the savings of the capacity reduction whereby sector coupling constitutes a far greater influencing factor than demand response. Overall, in consideration of the stated cost trends, the economies of scale, and the reduction possibilities, a profitable community storage model might be reached between 2025 and 2035. Future work should focus on the analysis of policy frameworks.

Original languageEnglish
Article number114969
JournalApplied Energy
Early online date19 May 2020
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2020

Bibliographical note

Fabian Scheller receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 713683 (COFUNDfellowsDTU). Russell McKenna kindly acknowledges the financial support support of the projects Smart City Accelerator and FlexSUS: Flexibility for Smart Urban Energy Systems (Project No. 91352), which has received funding in the framework of the joint programming initiative ERA-Net Smart Energy Systems’ focus initiative Integrated, Regional Energy Systems. The usual disclaimer applies.


  • Demand response
  • Demand-side flexibility
  • Energy transition
  • Optimization modelling
  • Sector coupling
  • Storage systems
  • COST


Dive into the research topics of 'Competition between simultaneous demand-side flexibility options: the case of community electricity storage systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this