1. Integrated Community energy systems
A techno-institutional Analysis
Dr. Binod Koirala

2. Outline Changing energy landscape
Conceptualizing integrated community energy system
Added values and performance assessment
Comparative case studies
Benedenbuurt
Heeten
Conclusions and discussions

3. Changing local energy landscape
CO-RISE

4. Changing energy landscape
Integrated energy system at household level

5. Changing energy landscape
Integrated energy systems

6. Changing Energy landscape
Energy system integration, community energy and Flexibility
Surge of distributed energy resources
Electrification and digitalization
Flexibility and energy storage
Changing ownership and business models
Citizens engagement
Local energy initiatives

7. Conceptualizing Integrated community energy system (ICES)
Energy system integration and community engagement
Multi-faceted approach for supplying local community
Grid-integrated or grid-defected operation
ICES as complex socio-technical system
Complex and non-linear interactions and dynamics among layers
Community level and co-shaping dynamics
Different socio-technical system for different configuration: local, virtual
Community energy as multi-level / multi-actor system
Socio-technical landscape: energy system transformation, energy transition
Socio-technical regime also engaged with community energy
Current energy landscape favors large / virtual energy communities

8. Added values of ICES
Value stacking

9. ICES Model Optimization of planning and operation
20 Household profiles – Liander open access data
Household and community investment
System of prices and charges
Local exchange + exchange with grid
Grid integrated and defected ICES
Performance assessment metrics
Total energy costs
CO2 emissions

10. Economics of Grid integrated ICES
 Case
Annual CO2 emissions (tons)
Grid supply (baseline)
84.5
Individual DER investment
43.9
Individual DER investment (ICES)
32.9
Individual plus Community DER investment (ICES)

11. ECONOMICS of Grid Defected ICES
Case
Annualized Total energy costs (€)
Annual CO2 emissions (tons)
Grid integrated
23,951
32.9
Grid defected
198,762 14

12. Willingness to participate in ICES
Survey in the Netherlands
Perceived barriers
User transformation vs. engagement

13. Comparative case studies
Gridflex Heeten / Benedenbuurt
Gridflex Heeten, The Netherlands - 47 households energy community / shared residential energy storage 120 kWh (24 households with 5 kWh each)/ 2 MW PV park / local energy market
Benedenbuurt, Wageningen, pilot project for gas free city blocks, 490 households, energy cooperatives warmtenet oost Wageningen (WoW)

14. Comparative case studies
Gridflex Heeten / Benedenbuurt
Both projects are ongoing
we attend core meetings (observe and participate (in part action research!), collect written materials, interviews stakeholders, focus groups (with users), possible co-design workshops.
Aim: insight into the social shaping dynamics of the community innovation: > mapping actor positions and relations: problem definitions, motivations, argumentations, strategies, power relations, tensions & discussions (content and process) > articulation and argumentation of technological options, articulations of user needs, alignment to sustainability discourse, positioning of the initiative in broader context.

15. Gridflex heeten
Initiated by 3-4 active citizens from Heeten (board of Endona & Escozon)
100 % participation from Veldlegge
Subsidized project (topsector Energy RVO) ( )
Exemption of Electricity law > allowing transformative experiments with local energy market
Involved actors in consortium:
Enexis (DSO)
Enpuls/Buurkracht
Endona and Escozon
ICT
DrTen
University of Twente
Source: ENEXIS

16. Benedenbuurt
Initiated by one active citizen (Wanka Lelieveld): occasion replacement of sewage system (autumn 2016) > replacing gas?
He aligned other actors: residents, municipality, housing corporation
6 scenarios calculated different energy sources and HT/LT network (Rhine water heatpump /WKO/airheatpump/ ecovat)
Tensions / mismatches between HT/LT
Residents working groups now have formed energy co-operatives
1/10/2018: Subsidy from
New national policy
“no gas at 2030”.
CURIOUS 2018
15/08/2018

17. Comparative case studies
Gridflex Heeten / Benedenbuurt
Benedenbuurt
Heeten
Inspiring initiators
Charismatic, creative idealist (resident) (heterogeneous citizens)
Combi: smart strategist (Escozon) charismatic resident (Endona) (heterogeneous citizens)
Stakeholders /organization
Only local stakeholders, little involvement of traditional energy regime actors
Involvement of combination of local stakeholders & energy regime actors
Organization/problem definitions
Fuzziness who is responsible, inequalities of paid and volunteer workers, ad hoc incidental yet successful financing/ problem definitions shift easily
Different roles are clear, All projects participants and materials are financed. Much alignment in problem definitions.
Involvement of users/residents
Users become stronger organized during the process/ now growing group of residents on drivers seat, discussions on ownership, energy co-operatives formation
Users/residents: 100 % participation but mainly in limited user role. More active contribution can grow in next phase of project
Tensions /conflicts
Between energy cooperative & interested commercial actors, HT/LT
DSO’s interest in conflict with vision of ‘behind the transformer’
Material redefinitions
Reframing ecovat as logistic nightmare (number of truck)
Battery safety was foregrounded / linking seasalt batterij to regular BMS a hassle

18. Conclusions and discussions
Interactions, dynamics and strategic exchanges among household, communities and society important for ICES assessment.
Technological and social challenges from regime and landscape level for integration of ICES.
Complex socio-technical conceptualization helps to outline co-shaping dynamics, actor networks, as well as community level dynamics.
Grid integrated ICESs are attractive options in terms of cost and emission reductions but grid defection not economically rationale yet.
ICESs enhance energy transition by acting as a bridge between local energy initiatives and centralized energy systems.
: Use is anticipated in design and design is finalized in use.