Virtual Power Plants: Definition, Applications and
Barriers to the Implementation in the Distribution
System
Glenn Plancke1, Kristof De Vos and Ronnie Belmans
Department of Electrical Engineering, ELECTA
KU Leuven, EnergyVille
Abstract—A virtual power plant assists in the integration of
distributed energy resources in the power system. With a rising
share of distributed generation, an active management of
distributed energy resources is indispensable in order to ensure
operation of the electricity network towards the future. In this
paper, the virtual power plant concept is analyzed. Three
essential components that characterize a virtual power plant are
distinguished, followed by a comprehensive overview of the
services they can deliver in today’s liberalized markets in
Europe. It is found that a combination of technical, economic
and regulatory barriers still hamper a widespread
implementation of the concept. In addition, specific regulatory
barriers are identified that hinder a virtual power plant in
providing certain services. Hence, it is advised that primarily
product and service definitions, as well as market mechanisms,
are reviewed.
Index Terms--Distributed Energy Resources, Distributed
Generation, Smart Grid, Virtual Power Plant
I. INTRODUCTION
Historically, electricity markets were characterized by a
top-down approach in which large, centralized power plants
dominated electricity generation. Nowadays, the system is
shifting away from this traditional approach in the direction of
distributed generation (DG). DG units can be defined as
electric power sources connected directly to the distribution
network or on the consumer side of the meter [1], [2]. The
growing share of DG can be explained by market reforms on
the one hand and renewable energy policy and targets on the
other. In Europe, this trend is fostered especially by ambitious
targets concerning the share of renewable energy consumed in
the EU, which is set at 27% – not yet converted into binding
regulation – in the 2030 framework for climate and energy
policies [3].
The increasing share of DG creates challenges for the
power system. DG units are generally characterized by
relatively small installation size and by intermittent power
output. Intermittency refers to the limited controllability and
only partial predictability of their output [4]. Photovoltaics
(PV), wind turbine installations, as well as Combined Heat &
1
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium
glenn.plancke@esat.kuleuven.be
Submitted to: International Conference on the European Energy Market –
EEM15
978-1-4673-6692-2/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
Annelies Delnooz
VITO, EnergyVille
Mol, Belgium
Power (CHP) plants, are all weather dependent. DG
components are currently connected using a fit and forget
strategy [5], [6]. Hence, DG is not actively monitored and
system operators (SOs) are confronted with an increasing
complexity of system operation. On the transmission level,
TSOs are challenged to maintain an instantaneous balance
between supply and demand, which is a prerequisite for
reliable system operation and to avoid black-outs [7]. On the
distribution system level, network congestion and voltage
control problems may occur [8].
In order to cope with these challenges, DG units will have
to be aggregated with other distributed energy resources
(DERs) and actively controlled. DERs comprise not only DG
and storage units, but also include flexible electrical loads that
inherently have the ability to be postponed, modulated or
shed, such as heating and cooling applications or electrical
vehicles [9]. In practice, virtual power plants (VPPs) provide
opportunities to support the integration of DERs in the current
power system by aggregating the various components and
acting as a single player on the energy markets [5], [10].
Hereby, they reduce scale and intermittency related problems
of DG.
The VPP concept appeared in the late 1990s and various
different interpretations have emerged since. The objective of
this paper is to report on the state of the VPP concept in the
current market given the technical, economic and regulatory
context. Section I sets the scene by clarifying the definition of
a VPP. Section II continues with an elaborate overview of the
services VPPs can provide in liberalized markets. Next,
section III goes deeper into the technical, economic and
regulatory barriers a VPP faces in marketing its services. A
last section concludes.
II. DEFINITION OF A VIRTUAL POWER PLANT
A. Definition
A variety of definitions exists in literature. A widely
accepted definition determines a VPP as:
“A flexible representation of a portfolio of DERs, not only
aggregating the capacity of many diverse DERs, but also
 creating a single operating profile from a composite of the
parameters characterizing each DER and incorporating
spatial constraints [5].”
Additionally, some definitions specifically stress the
involvement of software systems as an essential component of
a VPP:
“Virtual Power Plants rely upon software systems to
remotely and automatically dispatch and optimize
generation- or demand side or storage resources in a
single, secure web-connected system [10].”
VPPs and Microgrids are often mentioned together as
alternative solutions for integrating DERs in the power
system. However, important differences exist [10], [11]. The
most compelling feature of a Microgrid consists of its ability
to operate in islanded mode, while VPPs are always grid-tied.
Recently, the notion of a dynamic VPP emerged. As
opposed to the traditional static type, dynamic VPPs – also
referred to as clusters – cooperate only temporarily referring
both to the actual situation at the market and to the prognosis
of the expected feed-in from the participating units. The
dynamic VPP is reformed each time after the delivery of a
product [8].
Finally, a clear distinction has to be made between the
concept of a VPP discussed in this paper and virtual power
plant auctions. The latter can be defined as sales of electricity
capacity which, rather than “physical” divestitures, are
“virtual” divestitures by one or more dominant firms in a
market. Instead of selling the physical power plant, the firm
retains management and control of the plant, but offers
contracts that are intended to replicate the output of the plant
[12]. We target VPPs that assist in the integration of DERs in
the power system.
Based on this context and these definitions, a VPP can be
generally defined as:
“A portfolio of DERs(1), which are connected by a control
system(2) based on information and communication
technology (ICT). The VPP acts as a single visible entity in the
power system(3), is always grid-tied and can be either static
or dynamic.”
2) Control System
The second crucial component of a VPP is its control
system. This coordination mechanism is indispensable in order
to operate as one visible entity on the energy markets. VPPs
can be divided according to the way the individual DERs are
controlled [13]. In a centralized system, one control
coordination center exists, which centrally processes the
signals it receives from all individual units by means of a logic
algorithm. On the contrary, in a decentralized VPP, each DER
is locally controlled by its own local controller (LC) with its
own logic algorithm. An integrated system is formed by
connecting the LCs via a mere communication network.
3) Role in the Power System
Finally, the role of the VPP in the power system is crucial
since a VPP has to be able to market its services. Generally,
the provision of energy services is distinguished from grid
services. According to this classification, a popular and widely
adopted distinction exists between a commercial VPP (CVPP)
and a technical VPP (TVPP) [5], [14]. The purpose of a CVPP
is to participate and trade in energy markets the same way a
transmission-connected generation plant can. A TVPP rather
focuses on providing system services. While this classification
certainly makes sense countering the limits individual DERs
face, no market participation (CVPP) and unsuitability to
provide system balancing services (TVPP), this terminology
may create confusion. After all, a VPP always tries to
commercialize its position and be profitable. Therefore, in
section III, a more comprehensive overview of services VPPs
can deliver in today’s liberalized markets will be presented.
III. APPLICATIONS OF VIRTUAL POWER PLANTS IN
LIBERALIZED MARKETS
Acting as a single entity in the power system and being
connected to the distribution grid, a VPP can provide a range
of services in today’s electricity markets, as depicted in Fig. 1.

B. Building Blocks of a Virtual Power Plant

Three essential components that characterize a VPP can be
distinguished from the definition.
1) Portfolio of Distributed Energy Resources
First of all, a VPP always consists of a portfolio of DERs.
DG and storage units, as well as flexible loads, can be
included. As a consequence of aggregation, VPPs are
characterized by a set of parameters usually associated with
traditional transmission-connected generators, such as
scheduled output, ramp rates, voltage regulation capability and
reserve capacity [5]. A categorization of VPPs can be made
based on the type of DERs in the portfolio [10]. While supply-
side VPPs consist of DG units, demand-response (DR) VPPs
are formed by a combination of flexible loads, both potentially
supplemented by storage components. Finally, the mixed asset Figure 1. Applications of VPPs in liberalized markets
type combines all possible DERs. DR VPPs are the most
occurring type of VPP in the US, while in Europe, supply-side
VPPs are currently most implemented [10].
A. Grid Services
When a network user is characterized by a certain
controllability, it can provide ancillary services to the network
operators. Because a VPP generally includes some sort of
flexibility, either through storage or flexible loads, the
majority of VPPs is able to provide these grid services.
1) Assisting the Transmission System Operator
Frequency control is one of the main responsibilities of the
TSO [15]. To guarantee frequency stability, TSOs procure
reserve capacity from balancing service providers (BSPs).
These are typically conventional power plants which can
rapidly alter their output up- and downward upon request [16].
Recently, there is a trend towards reserve capacity procured
from the demand-side, as well as on the distribution level by
means of aggregation, e.g. Belgium [17]. The German
company Badenova consists of a combination of CHP plants
and can thus be considered as a VPP. In accordance with the
MASSIG project, the company has decided to offer a part of
its generation capacity as reserves (“Minutenreserve”) [18].
Voltage control is enabled by means of reactive power
services which are difficult to transport over long distances
[19]. For this reason, it is generally accepted that voltage
control on transmission level is best met by means of
transmission connected devices, and that providing reactive
power services with DERs can generally be considered as
inefficient. Additionally, the TSO is responsible for
congestion management and black start services. VPPs are
suited to aid in congestion management services as they
locally control demand or injections. Furthermore, VPPs that
include generation units which are capable of starting without
external electrical support are applicable for assistance in case
of a black-out.
2) Assisting the Distribution System Operator
Just as the TSO on the transmission grid, the DSO has to
guarantee a reliable, yet efficient operation of the distribution
grid. While in the past, these networks were operated rather
passively, the increasing share of DG makes a more active
approach towards the future imperative [15]. In this respect,
the DSO can incentivize VPPs to limit electricity demand or
injections to an agreed upon maximum load or injection level,
or even reward VPPs for maintaining an “atypical grid usage”
profile [20]. Hereby, periods of highest demand are shifted to
– locally considered – off-peak hours while periods of highest
injections are shifted to peak hours, resulting in load balancing
on the distribution grid. The DSO can incentivize such
behavior via a price-based or an incentive based approach.
Lacking an elaborate price-based system, the DSO mainly has
to manage its network locally via bilateral contracts, for which
VPPs might become an additional target. To streamline the
incentive-based mechanism, a market for DSO congestion
management ancillary services could be useful. Denmark has
launched an initiative in this respect called FLECH [21].
B. Energy Services
Depending on size and composition, a VPP can participate
in different energy service activities. As such, VPPs can assist
in portfolio management activities or may prefer to act as a
single entity on wholesale markets themselves. Moreover, a
VPP that is mainly an electricity consumer can alter its
production/consumption profile such that it can optimize its
contracts with electricity suppliers.
1) Portfolio Management
A VPP can be added to the portfolio of other energy
market players such as producers, consumers and balance
responsible parties (BRPs). BRPs are responsible for
controlling the balance of their portfolio of injections and
offtakes [7]. Assistance from VPPs provide market players the
flexibility to optimize the scheduling of their portfolio, e.g.
avoid the start-up of an expensive peak power plant.
Furthermore, this flexibility can be used to optimize their
position in real time, and avoid costs due to real-time
imbalances, following unexpected deviations in their portfolio
resulting from power plant outages, demand and renewable
production prediction errors. Alternatively, VPPs can offer
flexibility indirectly, through aggregators who operate as
intermediaries. Finally, VPPs may also act as an individual
market party or BRP themselves, in which case they balance
their own portfolio.
2) Wholesale Market Trading
Three different types of wholesale markets can be
distinguished [22]. First of all, in the forward market, bilateral
trades are made months or even years before the actual
physical delivery. As such, trading is based on long term
output forecasts [22]. Next, a day-ahead and intraday market
exist. The day-ahead market uses a short term forecast for the
following day, whereas the intraday market allows continuous
trading on the day of delivery in order to cope with forecast
deviations [22]. Next Kraftwerke is a German company that
operates a large-scale VPP. Being recognized as a certified
power trader, the company trades the aggregated power output
on the EPEX energy exchange’s spot market [23].
3) Contract Optimization
A VPP that is primarily a consumer engages in contracts
with electricity suppliers. Because a VPP can flexibly shift
production and/or consumption, contracts can be renegotiated
in its favor. Retail electricity price structures influence the
potential of benefiting from contract optimization, i.e. by
planning time of consumption. Alternatively, prosumers could
engage in contracts stipulating a selling price for electricity.
Again, this strategy also depends on the regulatory framework
about retail energy prices. The Belgian company Group
Machiels offers a good example of a VPP targeting contract
optimization [24]. By actively controlling their generation
portfolio consisting of gas engines and a PV installation, they
are maximizing revenues within the limits of their contract
with the electricity retailer.
C. Other
Finally, with the rise of DERs, existing energy market
structures might not suffice for ensuring future safe and
efficient operation of the power system. In this respect, two
new opportunities are presented where VPPs could create
value.
1) Capacity Mechanisms
Capacity mechanisms are additional mechanisms
influencing the installed generation capacity to long-term
generation adequacy [25], i.e. the ability of the power system
to meet peak demand. Current capacity mechanisms in place
focus mainly on conventional generation and demand
response. However, as VPPs may provide firm generation or
demand reduction capacity, they could potentially participate
in these capacity mechanisms in the future [25].
2) Flexibility Market
Future flexibility markets can be considered as markets
where units of flexibility are traded and where products are
characterized by technical parameters as a maximum capacity
and frequency of activation. This can be interesting for all
entities in the electricity market who have to optimize the
scheduling and dispatch of their portfolio, but also for grid
operators who have to attract flexibility for services discussed
in Section III, part A. VPPs are well-suited to offer services on
such a flexibility market.
IV. BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION
An analysis of the current market framework shows that
multiple barriers hamper the deployment of the VPP concept
and in particular the delivery of the services defined in Section
III. In this section, an overview of the technical, economic and
regulatory barriers prevailing in Europe are presented.
A. Technical
A vital technical component of a VPP consists of its
control system by which it manages and communicates with
individual DERs. The absence of an interoperable solution is
an obstacle concerning the scalability of VPPs [26].
Interoperability refers to all conceptual and ICT related
challenges, such as communication standards and the
coexistence of multiple solutions on the same grid, pertaining
to the many actors and their complex interactions that are
required for an effective deployment of a solution [27]. In
today’s market, a variety of custom solutions are being
developed, e.g. Kraftwerke’s “Next Box” [23]. Moreover, the
control system also has to be sufficiently performant to
manage numerous units in near real-time. This depends
largely on the implemented control algorithm.
Furthermore, the absence of smart grid infrastructure has a
negative effect on the deployment of VPPs. A smart grid can
be defined as an “electricity network that can cost efficiently
integrate the behavior and actions of all users connected to it –
generators, consumers and those that do both – …” [8].
Therefore, it increases the potential for accurately monitoring
the demand and production profiles of its connected units. A
wider use of real-time metering would thus encourage VPPs to
make full use of DER flexibility [14]. However, with such a
solution, it will still be a challenge to determine to which
extent a unit has delivered flexibility, by comparing actual off-
take or injection data with a reference scenario.
B. Economic
For parties operating DER units, joining a VPP has to be
profitable over stand-alone operation. The outcome of this
consideration first of all depends on price-based mechanisms.
Renewable energy support schemes certainly influence the
decision. For example, a feed-in tariff results in DG units
producing as much as possible, not considering network and
market realities. But also dynamic pricing of energy and
network use may interact with the incentive of units to
participate in a VPP [28]. Energy prices and network tariffs
are usually strongly regulated.
Alternatively, an incentive-based approach can encourage
the formation of a VPP. This is because DERs are better suited
to provide the services described in Section III when
aggregated. Incentive-based schemes are less bound by the
regulatory framework, however struggle with economic
feasibility due to market barriers in existing markets. Current
markets do not facilitate (e.g. high entry barriers on wholesale
market) or allow VPP participation (e.g. reserve capacity
requirements). Furthermore, some markets are still to be
developed (e.g. a flexibility market). These barriers, some of
them established in the regulatory framework, result in
negative business cases, as the real value of flexibility of VPPs
cannot be captured.
C. Regulatory
Finally, regulatory barriers can be divided in three
categories, as illustrated in Fig. 2.
Figure 2. Regulatory barriers to implementation of VPP
First of all, markets should be designed and mechanisms
organized in a non-discriminatory way for VPPs to be able to
participate. Where necessary, product and service definitions,
which are often determined in accordance with regulators,
have to be adapted such that also VPPs qualify for providing
balancing services. Additionally, up to now, ancillary services
were often tailored to conventional generation units. Recently
though, a tendency has emerged to allow distribution-
connected entities to participate in operating reserves, e.g. the
“Flexibility R3DP” product [17]. Next, also market
mechanisms should be reviewed. In the MASSIG project for
example, a recommendation has been made to reduce gate
closure time before the delivery period to preferably only a
couple of hours [18]. This helps more volatile technologies to
participate as well. Finally, regulation also plays a role in
establishing standards concerning communication technology
or infrastructure, which might have a positive effect regarding
the interoperability of the control systems of VPPs or on
facilitating a widespread roll-out of smart meters.
Secondly, a clarification surrounding the roles and actors
in today’s liberalized electricity markets is required. Besides
taking into account incumbent players, thought should also be
given to potentially desirable new market parties. As
mentioned in Section III, the DSO is evolving to a more active
role. In this respect, it can be questioned to what extent the
DSO should be responsible for managing the distribution grid
and providing system services. Another key aspect is that the
way in which DSO remuneration is organized influences its
behaviour [29]. The current incentive-based remuneration, in
which regulators determine the maximum tariffs grid
operators can charge, has a negative impact on innovation
from the DSO in general [29]. Furthermore, it is important to
establish to what extent the rising number of prosumers can be
held liable to help in ensuring grid stability. Lastly, new
market players are emerging. With respect to aggregators, for
example, their level playing field should be defined.
Finally, regulation about retail energy prices and network
tariffs has an impact on the deployment of VPPs in the
distribution grid. Renewable energy support schemes, as well
as the structure of retail electricity prices, influence the
operation of DER units and their decision whether to organize
in a VPP. Next, distribution tariffs, which are nowadays
typically flat and based on consumption volume, do not reflect
the true cost drivers of electricity distribution [29]. This
further discourages market parties to operate according to grid
constraints.
V. CONCLUSION
This paper elaborates on the current state of the integration
of VPPs in the electricity market, by clarifying the definition
of a VPP, providing an overview of their applications, and
identifying the main barriers for deployment.
Three essential building blocks that determine a VPP are
distinguished. A VPP is always composed of a portfolio of
DERs, possesses a control system and has to be able to fulfill a
role in the power system acting as a single entity.
It can be concluded that a VPP is able to provide grid
services to TSOs and DSOs, as well as a range of energy
services. In addition, future market initiatives facilitating
flexibility – tailored to accommodate the rise in DERs – might
provide interesting new business cases for VPPs. Although a
couple of technical and economic barriers to form a VPP can
be overcome, certain specific regulatory barriers such as
discriminating product and service definitions, as well as
unadapted market mechanisms, limit the market opportunities
of VPPs. Furthermore, the regulatory framework surrounding
the roles and actors in our liberalized markets, as well as about
retail energy prices and network tariffs, should be reviewed.
REFERENCES
[1] T. Ackermann, G. Andersson, and L. Söder, “Distributed
generation: A definition,” Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 57, no. 3,
pp. 195–204, 2001.
[2] G. Pepermans, J. Driesen, D. Haeseldonckx, R. Belmans, and W.
D’haeseleer, “Distributed generation: Definition, benefits and
issues,” Energy Policy, vol. 33, pp. 787–798, 2005.
[3] General Secretariat of the Council, “European Council (23 and 24
October 2014) Conclusions,” European Council, Brussels,
Belgium, EUCO 169/14, Oct. 2014.
[4] MIT Energy Initiative. Managing Large-Scale Penetration of
Intermittent Renewables. presented at An MIT Energy Initiative
Symp. Apr. 2011 [Online]. Available:
https://mitei.mit.edu/system/files/intermittent-renewables-full.pdf.
[5] D. Pudjianto, C. Ramsay, and G. Strbac, “Virtual power plant and
system integration of distributed energy resources,” Renewable
Power Generation, IET, vol.1, no. 1, pp. 10–16, 2007.
[6] J. A. P. Lopes, N. Hatziargyriou, J. Mutale, P. Djapic, and N.
Jenkins, “Integrating distributed generation into electric power
systems: A review of drivers, challenges and opportunities,” Electr.
Power Syst. Res., vol. 77, no. 9, pp. 1189–1203, Jul. 2007.
[7] Elia System Operator NV. Product sheets. (2012) [Online].
Available: http://www.elia.be/~/media/files/Elia/Products-and-
services/ProductSheets/E-Evenwicht/E1_F_equilibre.pdf.
[8] M. Sonnenschein, O. Lünsdorf, J. Bremer, and M. Tröschel,
“Decentralized control of units in smart grids for the support of
renewable energy supply,” Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., Sep.
2014.
[9] P. Nyeng and J. Ostergaard, “Information and Communications
Systems for Control-by-Price of Distributed Energy Resources and
Flexible Demand,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 334–
341, Jun. 2011.
[10] P. Asmus, “Microgrids, Virtual Power Plants and Our Distributed
Energy Future,” Electr. J., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 72–82, Dec. 2010.
[11] D. Pudjianto, C. Ramsay, and G. Strbac, “Microgrids and virtual
power plants: concepts to support the integration of distributed
energy resources,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part a-Journal Power
Energy, vol. 222, no. A7, pp. 731–741, Nov. 2008.
[12] L. M. Ausubel and P. Cramton, “Virtual power plant auctions,”
Util. Policy, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 201–208, Dec. 2010.
[13] E. A. Setiawan, “Concept and Controllability of VPP,” M.S. thesis,
Dept. Elect. Eng., Univ. of Kassel, Kassel, Germany, 2007.
[14] FENIX, “FENIX Results,” 2009. [Online]. Available:
http://www.smartgrids.eu/documents/projects/2009_Fenix_Book_F
INAL_for_selfprinting.pdf.
[15] C. Kieny, B. Berseneff, N. Hadjsaid, Y. Besanger, and J. Maire,
“Concept and interest of VPP : some results from the European
project FENIX,” in 2009 PES General Meeting, pp. 1–6.
[16] K. De Vos, “Sizing and allocation of operating reserves following
wind power integration,” PhD. Dissertation, Dept. Elect. Eng., KU
Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, 2013.
[17] Eandis cvba. Flexibiliteit R3DP. (2015) [Online]. Available:
http://www.eandis.be/nl/klant/aansluitingen/meer-over-
aansluitingen/flexibiliteit-r3dp.
[18] T. Erge and C Sauer, “MASSIG,” 2010. [Online]. Available:
http://www.iee-
massig.eu/papers_public/MASSIG_Brochure_Final_c.pdf.
[19] I. O. Akwukwaegbu and O. G. Ibe, “Concepts of Reactive Power
Control and Voltage Stability Methods in Power System Network,”
IOSR J. Comput. Eng., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 15–25, 2013.
[20] e-harbours, “Strategies and Business Cases for Smart Energy
Networks,” 2012. [Online]. Available:
http://www.northsearegion.eu/files/repository/20130124182440_e-
harbours_StrategiesandBusinessCasesforSmartEnergyNetworks_w
p3_4.pdf
[21] C. Zhang, Y. Ding, N. C. Nordentoft, P. Pinson, and J. Østergaard,
“FLECH: A Danish market solution for DSO congestion
management through DER flexibility services,” J. Mod. Power
Syst. Clean Energy, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 126–133, Apr. 2014.
[22] K. Imran and I. Kockar, “A technical comparison of wholesale
electricity markets in North America and Europe,” Electr. Power
Syst. Res., vol. 108, pp. 59–67, 2014.
[23] Next Kraftwerke GmbH. [Online]. Available: https://www.next-
kraftwerke.com/.
[24] D. Geysen, K. Kessels, Y. Tielemans, K. Vinck, M. Hommelberg,
and M. Ghijsen, “Optimization of Revenues From a Distributed
Generation Portfolio : a Case Study,” in 21st Int. Conf. Electr.
Distrib., no. 1173, pp. 6–9, 2011.
[25] KU Leuven, “Capacity mechanisms,” Dept. Elect. Eng., KU
Leuven, Leuven, EI Fact sheet Capacity mechanisms, 2013.
[26] S. Jaffe, M. Torchia, J. Feblowitz and R. Nicholson, “The VPP:
Integrating Operations Technology and IT Transformation of the
Power Industry,” IDC Energy Insights, MA, USA, Apr. 2011.
[27] EnergyVille, “Research into sustainable energy and smart energy
systems,” 2014. [Online]. Available:
http://homes.esat.kuleuven.be/~energyville/sites/default/files/Energ
yVille%20industriedag%20Interoperability.pdf.
[28] A. Delnooz, D. Six, K. Kessels, and M. P. F. Hommelberg, “e-
harbours : Identification and analysis of barriers for Virtual Power
Plants in harbour regions,” in 9th Int. Conf. EEM, pp. 1–6, 2012.
[29] P. Van Dievel, K. De Vos and R. Belmans, “Demand Response in
Electricity Distribution Grids : Regulatory Framework and
Barriers,” presented at the 2014 IEEE Young Researchers Symp.