IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v12y2021i3p61-d606076.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mechanism Design for Demand Management in Energy Communities

Author

Listed:
  • Xupeng Wei

    (Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2122, USA)

  • Achilleas Anastasopoulos

    (Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2122, USA)

Abstract

We consider a demand management problem in an energy community, in which several users obtain energy from an external organization such as an energy company and pay for the energy according to pre-specified prices that consist of a time-dependent price per unit of energy as well as a separate price for peak demand. Since users’ utilities are their private information, which they may not be willing to share, a mediator, known as the planner, is introduced to help optimize the overall satisfaction of the community (total utility minus total payments) by mechanism design. A mechanism consists of a message space, a tax/subsidy, and an allocation function for each user. Each user reports a message chosen from her own message space, then receives some amount of energy determined by the allocation function, and pays the tax specified by the tax function. A desirable mechanism induces a game, the Nash equilibria (NE), of which results in an allocation that coincides with the optimal allocation for the community. As a starting point, we design a mechanism for the energy community with desirable properties such as full implementation, strong budget balance and individual rationality for both users and the planner. We then modify this baseline mechanism for communities where message exchanges are allowed only within neighborhoods, and consequently, the tax/subsidy and allocation functions of each user are only determined by the messages from their neighbors. All of the desirable properties of the baseline mechanism are preserved in the distributed mechanism. Finally, we present a learning algorithm for the baseline mechanism, based on projected gradient descent, that is guaranteed to converge to the NE of the induced game.

Suggested Citation

  • Xupeng Wei & Achilleas Anastasopoulos, 2021. "Mechanism Design for Demand Management in Energy Communities," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-34, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:12:y:2021:i:3:p:61-:d:606076
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/12/3/61/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/12/3/61/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Groves, Theodore & Ledyard, John O, 1977. "Optimal Allocation of Public Goods: A Solution to the "Free Rider" Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(4), pages 783-809, May.
    2. Hurwicz,Leonid & Reiter,Stanley, 2008. "Designing Economic Mechanisms," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521724104.
    3. Maojiao Ye & Guoqiang Hu, 2015. "Game Design and Analysis for Price based Demand Response: An Aggregate Game Approach," Papers 1508.02636, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2016.
    4. Kurdistan Wns HamaAli & Subhi R. M. Zeebaree, 2021. "Resources Allocation for Distributed Systems: A Review," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 5(2), pages 76-88.
    5. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    6. L. Hurwicz, 1979. "Outcome Functions Yielding Walrasian and Lindahl Allocations at Nash Equilibrium Points," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(2), pages 217-225.
    7. Kostas Bimpikis & Shayan Ehsani & Rahmi İlkılıç, 2019. "Cournot Competition in Networked Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2467-2481, June.
    8. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    9. Ramesh Johari & John N. Tsitsiklis, 2004. "Efficiency Loss in a Network Resource Allocation Game," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 407-435, August.
    10. Ramesh Johari & John N. Tsitsiklis, 2009. "Efficiency of Scalar-Parameterized Mechanisms," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 823-839, August.
    11. Monderer, Dov & Shapley, Lloyd S., 1996. "Fictitious Play Property for Games with Identical Interests," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 258-265, January.
    12. Francis Bloch & Matthew Olckers, 2021. "Friend-Based Ranking in Practice," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 567-571, May.
    13. Josef Hofbauer & William H. Sandholm, 2002. "On the Global Convergence of Stochastic Fictitious Play," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2265-2294, November.
    14. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    15. Parise, Francesca & Ozdaglar, Asuman, 2019. "A variational inequality framework for network games: Existence, uniqueness, convergence and sensitivity analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 47-82.
    16. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    17. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    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. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare,in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 237-288 Elsevier.
    2. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    3. Healy, Paul J., 2006. "Learning dynamics for mechanism design: An experimental comparison of public goods mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 114-149, July.
    4. Ramesh Johari & John N. Tsitsiklis, 2011. "Parameterized Supply Function Bidding: Equilibrium and Efficiency," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1079-1089, October.
    5. Thirumulanathan, D. & Vinay, H. & Bhashyam, Srikrishna & Sundaresan, Rajesh, 2017. "Almost budget balanced mechanisms with scalar bids for allocation of a divisible good," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1196-1207.
    6. Raineri, Ricardo & Arce, Raúl & Ri­os, Sebastián & Salamanca, Carlos, 2008. "From a bundled energy-capacity pricing model to an energy-capacity-ancillary services pricing model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2868-2876, August.
    7. John Duggan & Joanne Roberts, 2002. "Implementing the Efficient Allocation of Pollution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1070-1078, September.
    8. Clark Robinson & Gerry Suchanek, 1985. "On the design of optimal mechanisms for the Arrow-Hahn-McKenzie economy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 313-335, January.
    9. Maniquet, François & Sprumont, Yves, 2010. "Sharing the cost of a public good: An incentive-constrained axiomatic approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 275-302, January.
    10. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    11. Jon X. Eguia & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2021. "Implementation by Vote-Buying Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(9), pages 2811-2828, September.
    12. Chen, Roy & Chen, Yan & Liu, Yang & Mei, Qiaozhu, 2017. "Does team competition increase pro-social lending? Evidence from online microfinance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 311-333.
    13. Reischmann, Andreas, 2016. "Conditional Contribution Mechanisms for the Provision of Public Goods in Dynamic Settings - Theory and Experimental Evidence," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145613, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    15. Bian, Zheyong & Liu, Xiang, 2019. "Mechanism design for first-mile ridesharing based on personalized requirements part I: Theoretical analysis in generalized scenarios," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 147-171.
    16. Oechssler, Joerg & Reischmann, Andreas & Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "The conditional contribution mechanism for repeated public goods – The general case," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    17. John O. Ledyard & Thomas R. Palfrey, 1994. "Voting and Lottery Drafts as Efficient Public Goods Mechanisms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 61(2), pages 327-355.
    18. Reischmann, Andreas & Oechssler, Joerg, 2018. "The Binary Conditional Contribution Mechanism for public good provision in dynamic settings — Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 104-115.
    19. Christian A. Vossler, 2016. "Chamberlin Meets Ciriacy-Wantrup: Using Insights from Experimental Economics to Inform Stated Preference Research," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(1), pages 33-48, March.
    20. Charles Laine, 1985. "Distribution of jointly owned private goods by the demand-revealing process: Applications to divorce settlements and estate administration," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 437-457, January.

    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:gam:jgames:v:12:y:2021:i:3:p:61-:d:606076. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.