Electricity Fee Control Device with Charge-Discharge Management
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing techniques for reducing electricity fees are user-dependent and lack a systematic approach to ensure fees are lowered below a target value, as they primarily rely on user intervention and do not execute a control for reducing fees effectively.
Innovation Solution
A control device and system that execute a charge-discharge control or electric power saving control to manage electricity usage, selecting between these controls based on user preference, electric power consumption, and time-based unit costs to minimize electricity fees, with a two-stage control mechanism to further reduce fees when the predicted fee exceeds the target.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Loss of information
If a technique merely supports users in suppressing electricity fees through information display, then user awareness of electricity fee status is improved, but actual electricity fee reduction cannot be guaranteed as it depends on user action
Solution Approach 1:
The control device automatically executes charge-discharge control or electric power saving control without requiring user intervention. The system monitors electricity fee predictions and autonomously implements control actions to reduce fees, transforming from a passive information display system to an active self-managing system that guarantees fee reduction effectiveness.
Solution Approach 2:
The system continuously calculates predicted electricity fees based on actual consumption patterns and compares them against target values. This feedback loop enables the control device to determine when control execution is necessary and to adjust control strategies dynamically, ensuring electricity fee reduction while maintaining operational flexibility.
2Productivity
If automatic control execution is implemented to reduce electricity fees, then electricity fee reduction effectiveness is improved, but device complexity increases due to control execution mechanisms
Solution Approach 1:
The control device dynamically selects between charge-discharge control and electric power saving control based on real-time conditions such as battery state of charge, electricity fee rates, and consumption patterns. This dynamic adaptability allows the system to achieve effective fee reduction without requiring overly complex fixed-structure control mechanisms, optimizing performance across varying operational scenarios.
Solution Approach 2:
The control device integrates multiple functions including electricity fee calculation, prediction, control execution, and information provision within a single system. By consolidating these functions, the system achieves effective electricity fee reduction without proportionally increasing overall device complexity, as the same hardware platform supports diverse operational modes.
3Productivity
If charge-discharge control is executed to reduce electricity fees, then electricity fee reduction is improved, but battery usage frequency increases which may affect battery lifespan
Solution Approach 1:
The control device executes charge-discharge control selectively rather than continuously, activating it only when predicted electricity fees exceed target values and when battery conditions are favorable. This partial action approach achieves sufficient electricity fee reduction while minimizing unnecessary battery cycles that would accelerate degradation, balancing fee reduction effectiveness with battery lifespan preservation.
Solution Approach 2:
The system adjusts control strategies based on battery state parameters such as state of charge and temperature. When battery parameters indicate vulnerability to degradation, the system reduces charge-discharge frequency or switches to electric power saving control, thereby protecting battery lifespan while maintaining electricity fee reduction capability through parameter-aware adaptive control.
4Productivity
If electric power saving control is executed to reduce electricity fees, then electricity fee reduction is improved, but user convenience may be reduced due to restricted power usage
Solution Approach 1:
The control device dynamically adjusts power saving measures based on user behavior patterns and preferences. Rather than implementing fixed restrictive controls, the system adapts its strategies to minimize impact on user convenience while achieving electricity fee reduction, such as allowing flexible timing for non-critical appliances or providing user override capabilities.
Solution Approach 2:
The control device acts as an intermediary between electricity fee reduction goals and user convenience requirements. It implements subtle, intelligent control strategies that achieve fee reduction through optimized appliance scheduling and power management rather than outright restrictions, maintaining user comfort and convenience while meeting energy efficiency objectives.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
A prediction value calculator (102) calculates a prediction value of an electricity fee based on the amount of electric power supplied from a commercial electric power source to electric equipment within an electricity fee calculation period. A selector (103) selects, as a first-stage control, either one control of an electric power saving control for the electric equipment and a charge-discharge control in which the electric power supplied from the commercial electric power source is stored in a storage battery in a first time slot and the electric power stored in the storage battery is supplied to the electric equipment in a second time slot in which the unit cost of the electric power supplied from the commercial electric power source is greater than that in the first time slot,. A controller (104) executes the first-stage control selected by the selector (103) when the prediction value calculated by the prediction value calculator (102) is greater than a targeted value of the electricity fee.