A Welfarist Perspective on Fair Generation Curtailment

TL;DR

This paper introduces a welfarist, axiomatic framework for fair power curtailment in distribution grids with photovoltaics, emphasizing fairness principles over utility comparability.

Contribution

It models curtailment as a social choice problem, deriving objectives from foundational axioms, and unifies existing schemes under the Kalai-Smorodinsky rule.

Findings

Existing schemes are specific instances of the Kalai-Smorodinsky rule.

Adopting a non-comparability stance reduces assumptions about prosumer preferences.

Provides an auditable, principled basis for fairness in energy distribution.

Abstract

This paper presents a welfarist approach to fair active power curtailment in distribution grids with distributed photovoltaics. We address the lack of consistent axiomatic foundations in existing ad-hoc curtailment rules by modeling the decision as a social choice problem over feasible operating points and by deriving curtailment objectives from a set of foundational axioms that express principled stances on fairness and grid access rights. Rather than relying on the typically assumed full comparability of utilities, which can lead to undesirable outcomes in heterogeneous residential systems, we adopt a cardinal non-comparability stance on utilities. This approach requires far fewer assumptions about prosumers' private preferences while providing a rigorous basis for fair social ranking. We then present a unified framework that demonstrates that existing curtailment schemes represent specific instances of the Kalai-Smorodinsky rule applied to different normative reference points. This perspective offers grid operators an auditable, axiomatic foundation for justifying fairness in local energy systems.