IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v130y2019icp294-303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The value of local electricity - A choice experiment among German residential customers

Author

Listed:
  • Mengelkamp, Esther
  • Schönland, Thomas
  • Huber, Julian
  • Weinhardt, Christof

Abstract

Renewable resources are often owned by residential customers who do not actively participate in electricity markets yet. To better integrate these decentralized resources into the energy system, market signals must reach the customers. Local energy markets (LEMs) are a promising concept to provide these market signals, and balance generation and demand at distribution network level. We examined the importance of design parameters for LEMs with an adaptive choice-based conjoint study from a customer perspective. Two surveys (a Germany-wide panel of 417 respondents and a regional survey of 239 respondents) show that economic design parameters (monthly cost and investments) are most important for German households to participate in LEMs. However, the sum of non-economic design parameters (interaction frequency, supplier, electricity source, and data privacy) levels with the importance of monthly cost without investment. Results show, that compared to the German average the regional customers are willing to pay a slight price premium on their monthly costs if regional electricity is offered on the LEM. Our results show suitable early adopters for LEMs to be large (>2 persons) residential households with young (≤60 years) inhabitants. Overall, regulatory niches and subsidies allowing LEMs to offer discount prices should be exploited.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengelkamp, Esther & Schönland, Thomas & Huber, Julian & Weinhardt, Christof, 2019. "The value of local electricity - A choice experiment among German residential customers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 294-303.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:130:y:2019:i:c:p:294-303
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519302447
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.04.008?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. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    2. Andor Mark A. & Frondel Manuel & Vance Colin, 2014. "Hypothetische Zahlungsbereitschaft für grünen Strom: Bekundete Präferenzen privater Haushalte für das Jahr 2013," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 355-366, December.
    3. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    4. Ritu Agarwal & Jayesh Prasad, 1998. "A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 204-215, June.
    5. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    6. Peter E. Rossi & Greg M. Allenby, 2003. "Bayesian Statistics and Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 304-328, July.
    7. Blanchet, Thomas, 2015. "Struggle over energy transition in Berlin: How do grassroots initiatives affect local energy policy-making?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 246-254.
    8. Whitehead, John C. & Cherry, Todd L., 2007. "Willingness to pay for a Green Energy program: A comparison of ex-ante and ex-post hypothetical bias mitigation approaches," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 247-261, November.
    9. Vithala R. Rao, 2014. "Applied Conjoint Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-540-87753-0, December.
    10. Broberg, Thomas & Persson, Lars, 2016. "Is our everyday comfort for sale? Preferences for demand management on the electricity market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 24-32.
    11. Ozbafli, Aygul & Jenkins, Glenn P., 2016. "Estimating the willingness to pay for reliable electricity supply: A choice experiment study," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 443-452.
    12. Paladino, Angela & Pandit, Ameet P., 2012. "Competing on service and branding in the renewable electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 378-388.
    13. Hitzeroth, Marion & Megerle, Andreas, 2013. "Renewable Energy Projects: Acceptance Risks and Their Management," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 576-584.
    14. Banfi, Silvia & Farsi, Mehdi & Filippini, Massimo & Jakob, Martin, 2008. "Willingness to pay for energy-saving measures in residential buildings," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 503-516, March.
    15. Long, Chao & Wu, Jianzhong & Zhou, Yue & Jenkins, Nick, 2018. "Peer-to-peer energy sharing through a two-stage aggregated battery control in a community Microgrid," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 261-276.
    16. Schleicher-Tappeser, Ruggero, 2012. "How renewables will change electricity markets in the next five years," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 64-75.
    17. 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.
    18. Loock, Moritz, 2012. "Going beyond best technology and lowest price: on renewable energy investors’ preference for service-driven business models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 21-27.
    19. Nordensvärd, Johan & Urban, Frauke, 2015. "The stuttering energy transition in Germany: Wind energy policy and feed-in tariff lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 156-165.
    20. Juho Hamari & Mimmi Sjöklint & Antti Ukkonen, 2016. "The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(9), pages 2047-2059, September.
    21. Cardella, Eric & Ewing, Bradley T. & Williams, Ryan B., 2017. "Price volatility and residential electricity decisions: Experimental evidence on the convergence of energy generating source," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 428-437.
    22. Tabi, Andrea & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2014. "What makes people seal the green power deal? — Customer segmentation based on choice experiment in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 206-215.
    23. Kaenzig, Josef & Heinzle, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2013. "Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 311-322.
    24. Charles Cunningham & Ken Deal & Yvonne Chen, 2010. "Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 3(4), pages 257-273, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lüthi, Sonja & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2012. "The price of policy risk — Empirical insights from choice experiments with European photovoltaic project developers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1001-1011.
    2. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2021. "The limited potential of regional electricity marketing – Results from two discrete choice experiments in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Mahmoodi, Jasmin & Prasanna, Ashreeta & Hille, Stefanie & Patel, Martin K. & Brosch, Tobias, 2018. "Combining “carrot and stick” to incentivize sustainability in households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 31-40.
    4. Salm, Sarah & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2018. "Dream team or strange bedfellows? Complementarities and differences between incumbent energy companies and institutional investors in Swiss hydropower," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 476-487.
    5. Mark Tocock & Dugald Tinch & Darla Hatton MacDonald & John M. Rose, 2023. "Managing the energy trilemma of reliability, affordability and renewables: Assessing consumer demands with discrete choice experiments," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(2), pages 155-175, April.
    6. Priessner, Alfons & Hampl, Nina, 2020. "Can product bundling increase the joint adoption of electric vehicles, solar panels and battery storage? Explorative evidence from a choice-based conjoint study in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2022. "Willingness to pay for regional electricity generation – A question of green values and regional product beliefs?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    8. Knauf, Jakob, 2022. "Can't buy me acceptance? Financial benefits for wind energy projects in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    9. Sagebiel, Julian & Müller, Jakob R. & Rommel, Jens, 2013. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Electricity from Cooperatives? Results from an Online Choice Experiment in Germany," MPRA Paper 52385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. 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.
    11. Knoefel, Jan & Sagebiel, Julian & Yildiz, Özgür & Müller, Jakob R. & Rommel, Jens, 2018. "A consumer perspective on corporate governance in the energy transition: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 440-448.
    12. Vuichard, Pascal & Stauch, Alexander & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2021. "Keep it local and low-key: Social acceptance of alpine solar power projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    13. Groh, Elke D., 2022. "Exposure to wind turbines, regional identity and the willingness to pay for regionally produced electricity," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    14. Petrovich, Beatrice & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2019. "Beauty and the budget: A segmentation of residential solar adopters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Kalkbrenner, Bernhard J. & Yonezawa, Koichi & Roosen, Jutta, 2017. "Consumer preferences for electricity tariffs: Does proximity matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 413-424.
    16. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    17. Pohlmann, Angela & Colell, Arwen, 2020. "Distributing power: Community energy movements claiming the grid in Berlin and Hamburg," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    18. Herbes, Carsten & Brummer, Vasco & Rognli, Judith & Blazejewski, Susanne & Gericke, Naomi, 2017. "Responding to policy change: New business models for renewable energy cooperatives – Barriers perceived by cooperatives’ members," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 82-95.
    19. van Heek, Julia & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina, 2017. "Reduce, reuse, recycle: Acceptance of CO2-utilization for plastic products," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 53-66.
    20. Bae, Jeong Hwan & Rishi, Meenakshi, 2018. "Increasing consumer participation rates for green pricing programs: A choice experiment for South Korea," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 490-502.

    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:130:y:2019:i:c:p:294-303. 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.