Flexibility Potential of Space Heating Demand Response in Buildings for District Heating Systems
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I do not have direct comments, factual comments or something that needs to be specified.
A case study has been prepared. The model is designed for a specific DH system with validated historical data. With computer modeling, we know how much we would save (we can optimize) the DH system.
Parameters characterizing the correct DH work have been collected.
Submitted result: „The results show that flattening the total system heating demand results in more-efficient heat generation“ The proposed result is not novel and the model is not usable for forecasts.
For me, the question is, what could be added at the end of the article:
What should the operators do to "prevent" or "flatten" fluctuations. Can the model be deployed to the so-called SCADA level?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
1. Briefly summarize the content of the manuscript; This manuscript considers the heat generation problem and savings using integrated demand-supply optimization model in the light of cost optimization by investigation of flexible heating demand based on demand response in households of Gothenburg Sweden. Authors tried to integrate two models into one EBUS and than applied this to modeling the heating demand response for the residential and non-residential building. The article leads through assumptions, model creation and integration, simulation and tests as well as conclusions on possibilities of applying results in heating savings or cost savings with the peak start up units limitations due to increase temperature above set point level. 2. Illustrate what are, in your opinion, the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses [this is an essential step, because the Editor will consider the reasoning behind your recommendation and needs to understand it properly]; The strength of this approach is connecting two models together as one integrated EBUC model. It is also based on critical approach to the case study of Gothenburg area of Sweden, where this heating demand is essential especially in winter months. There is also a validation part which is important for adjusting the model to show the correct results and authors take also a trial to explain the differences between the model and real measurements which helps them to find the reasons. The weaknesses are that consideration takes only cases where it is 1 degree or 3 degree above. Also authors simplify the model due to the calculation capabilities. There is also assumption about building heating which is taken into the modelling procedure. It is clearly understand that modeling takes one year but it is worth of consideration if this year was representative among the other years to avoid mismatch between the normative demands and real heating demand. 3. Provide a point-by-point list of your major recommendations for the improvement of the manuscript; Authors should provide information about normative regulation about comfort heating range in the buildings – residential and commercial. Authors should provide more clarification on how these two models DS and BH are integrated. It is very clear for the authors but there are only parameters used and basic scheme of adding them together as the EBUC. There is no savings calculations. Only based on the W/m2 calculations. Authors should also provide the cost optimization criteria or explanation. There are also many conclusions about optimization but there the title is flexibility potential of space heating demand response in buildings so it would be worth of consider the results in the light of the title to point out the potential, which is derived from the article however not stated clearly in conclusions and numbers. It would be also worth of consideration to explain why only temperature growth is considered. Not because of the simplifying the model and calculations but in the light of the real conditions and demands and regulations. 4. If necessary, provide a point-by-point list of your minor for the improvement of the manuscript. Line 57 – flexible instead of elastic?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
