IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v378y2025ipas0306261924021482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjective-uncertainty-oriented dynamic renting framework for energy storage sharing

Author

Listed:
  • He, Yan
  • Xiao, Jiang-Wen
  • Wang, Yan-Wu
  • Liu, Zhi-Wei
  • He, Shi-Yuan

Abstract

In recent years, shared energy storage has gained significant attention for mitigating the supply and demand imbalance caused by the intermittency of distributed renewable energy. Considering the subjective perception of prosumers when facing uncertainty, this paper proposes a new dynamic competitive on-demand renting framework for energy storage capacity (ESC) sharing to increase energy storage utilization, increase energy storage operator (ESO) profits, and reduce prosumer costs. In this framework, a demand-based dynamic capacity pricing mechanism is introduced, modeling the relationship between ESO and prosumers as a Stackelberg game while establishing a generalized Nash equilibrium (GNE) problem among prosumers. ESO determines the dynamic capacity pricing mechanism, while prosumers determine the hourly renting capacity based on demand. In capacity sharing, prospect theory is introduced for the first time to describe the subjective perceptions of prosumers when facing the uncertainty of renewable energy. Moreover, the existence of SE and the uniqueness of GNE are analyzed, followed by a summary and proposal of a method to determine the existence of equilibrium in a nested generalized non-cooperative Stackelberg game. Simulations show the effectiveness of the proposed framework on improving the ESC utilization rate, the impact of subjective perceptions on prosumers’ decision-making, and the profit favorability of the correct estimation of subjective perceptions on ESO. Specifically, the framework increases ESO utilization by 24.07% and profit by 13.73%.

Suggested Citation

  • He, Yan & Xiao, Jiang-Wen & Wang, Yan-Wu & Liu, Zhi-Wei & He, Shi-Yuan, 2025. "Subjective-uncertainty-oriented dynamic renting framework for energy storage sharing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 378(PA).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:378:y:2025:i:pa:s0306261924021482
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261924021482
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124765?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. Zheng, Boshen & Wei, Wei & Chen, Yue & Wu, Qiuwei & Mei, Shengwei, 2022. "A peer-to-peer energy trading market embedded with residential shared energy storage units," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    2. Aneke, Mathew & Wang, Meihong, 2016. "Energy storage technologies and real life applications – A state of the art review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 350-377.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Guo, Hongye & Chen, Qixin & Shahidehpour, Mohammad & Xia, Qing & Kang, Chongqing, 2022. "Bidding behaviors of GENCOs under bounded rationality with renewable energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).
    5. Xiao, Jiang-Wen & Yang, Yan-Bing & Cui, Shichang & Liu, Xiao-Kang, 2022. "A new energy storage sharing framework with regard to both storage capacity and power capacity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    6. Francisco Facchinei & Christian Kanzow, 2010. "Generalized Nash Equilibrium Problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 177-211, March.
    7. Wang, Chutong & Zhang, Xiaoyan & Wang, Yucui & Xiong, Houbo & Ding, Xi & Guo, Chuangxin, 2023. "Pricing method of electric-thermal heterogeneous shared energy storage service," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).
    8. Zhang, Tianhan & Qiu, Weiqiang & Zhang, Zhi & Lin, Zhenzhi & Ding, Yi & Wang, Yiting & Wang, Lianfang & Yang, Li, 2023. "Optimal bidding strategy and profit allocation method for shared energy storage-assisted VPP in joint energy and regulation markets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 329(C).
    9. Walker, Awnalisa & Kwon, Soongeol, 2021. "Analysis on impact of shared energy storage in residential community: Individual versus shared energy storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    10. Liu, Xuezhi & Yan, Zheng & Wu, Jianzhong, 2019. "Optimal coordinated operation of a multi-energy community considering interactions between energy storage and conversion devices," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 256-273.
    11. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    12. Han, Ouzhu & Ding, Tao & Zhang, Xiaosheng & Mu, Chenggang & He, Xinran & Zhang, Hongji & Jia, Wenhao & Ma, Zhoujun, 2023. "A shared energy storage business model for data center clusters considering renewable energy uncertainties," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 1273-1290.
    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. Bian, Yifan & Xie, Lirong & Ye, Jiahao & Ma, Lan & Cui, Chuanshi, 2024. "Peer-to-peer energy sharing model considering multi-objective optimal allocation of shared energy storage in a multi-microgrid system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    2. He, Ye & Wu, Hongbin & Wu, Andrew Y. & Li, Peng & Ding, Ming, 2024. "Optimized shared energy storage in a peer-to-peer energy trading market: Two-stage strategic model regards bargaining and evolutionary game theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    3. Jiahao Chen & Bing Sun & Yuan Zeng & Ruipeng Jing & Shimeng Dong & Jingran Wang, 2023. "An Optimal Scheduling Method of Shared Energy Storage System Considering Distribution Network Operation Risk," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-24, March.
    4. Talihati, Baligen & Tao, Shengyu & Fu, Shiyi & Zhang, Bowen & Fan, Hongtao & Li, Qifen & Lv, Xiaodong & Sun, Yaojie & Wang, Yu, 2024. "Energy storage sharing in residential communities with controllable loads for enhanced operational efficiency and profitability," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 373(C).
    5. Glücker, Philipp & Pesch, Thiemo & Benigni, Andrea, 2024. "Optimal sizing of battery energy storage system for local multi-energy systems: The impact of the thermal vector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 372(C).
    6. Xia, Yuanxing & Xu, Qingshan & Chen, Lu & Du, Pengwei, 2022. "The flexible roles of distributed energy storages in peer-to-peer transactive energy market: A state-of-the-art review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 327(C).
    7. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier L’Haridon & Horst Zank, 2010. "Separating curvature and elevation: A parametric probability weighting function," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 39-65, August.
    8. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    9. Xue Dong He & Sang Hu & Jan Obłój & Xun Yu Zhou, 2017. "Technical Note—Path-Dependent and Randomized Strategies in Barberis’ Casino Gambling Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 97-103, February.
    10. Ariane Charpin, 2018. "Tests des modèles de décision en situation de risque. Le cas des parieurs hippiques en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(5), pages 779-803.
    11. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver & Wiercinski, Ben, 2017. "The Relationship between Farmers' Shock Experiences and their Uncertainty Preferences - Experimental Evidence from Mexico," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 256212, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    13. Basieva, Irina & Khrennikova, Polina & Pothos, Emmanuel M. & Asano, Masanari & Khrennikov, Andrei, 2018. "Quantum-like model of subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 150-162.
    14. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    15. Scott Duke Kominers & Xiaosheng Mu & Alexander Peysakhovich, 2019. "Paying for Attention: The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Bayesian Inference," Working Papers 2019-31, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    16. Yves Alarie & Georges Dionne, 2005. "Testing Explanations of Preference Reversal: a Model," Cahiers de recherche 0510, CIRPEE.
    17. Xiao, Yu & Fukuda, Daisuke, 2015. "On the cost of misperceived travel time variability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 96-112.
    18. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2010. "Linking Decision and Time Utilities," MPRA Paper 27541, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Stein T. Holden & Mesfin Tilahun, 2024. "Can Climate Shocks Make Vulnerable Subjects More Willing to Take Risks?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(4), pages 967-1007, April.
    20. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2014. "An experimental test of prospect theory for predicting choice under ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, February.

    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:appene:v:378:y:2025:i:pa:s0306261924021482. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    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.