Rooftop photovoltaics (PV) have become widely adopted by domestic customers in tandem with energy storage systems to generate clean energy and limit import from the grid, however most applications struggle to achieve profitability. The level at which energy storage is deployed, be it household energy storage (HES), or as a community energy storage (CES) system, can potentially increase the economic feasibility. Furthermore, the introduction of a Time-of-Use (TOU) tariff enables households to further reduce their energy costs through demand side management (DSM). Here we investigate and compare the performance of HES and CES with DSM. The results suggest that TOU tariffs can effectively shave peak demand by up to 30% and lower energy bills by at least 20%, but do not improve self-consumption or self-sufficiency rate. This study indicates that all cases considered are environmentally friendly and can pay back the total CO₂ emissions associated with the manufacturing within 8 years. However, the levelised cost of storage (LCOS) is still beyond a household's affordability, ranging from £0.4 to £2.03 kWh⁻¹, though CES is proven more effective at improving self-consumption for consumers and shaving peak demand for network operators. The feasibility can be improved by 1) combining different services and tariffs to obtain more revenues for households; 2) more legislative and financial support to reduce system costs; and 3) more innovative business models and policies to optimise revenues with existing resource.

屋顶光伏（PV）已与储能系统一起被国内客户广泛采用，以产生清洁能源并限制从电网的进口，但是大多数应用都难以实现盈利。无论是家庭储能（HES）还是作为社区储能（CES）系统，部署储能的水平都可能提高经济可行性。此外，引入使用时间（TOU）费率使家庭可以通过需求侧管理（DSM）进一步降低其能源成本。在这里，我们调查并比较了DSM的HES和CES的性能。结果表明，TOU关税可以有效地将最高需求削减30％，将能源费用降低至少20％，但不会提高自耗或自给率。8年内与制造相关的_2种排放。然而，尽管事实证明CES在改善消费者的自消费和减少网络运营商的峰值需求方面更为有效，但平均存储成本（LCOS）仍超出了家庭的承受能力，范围从0.4英镑至2.03千瓦时^-1。可以通过以下方式提高可行性：1）结合不同的服务和资费以为家庭获得更多收入；2）提供更多的立法和财政支持以降低系统成本；3）更创新的业务模式和政策，以利用现有资源优化收入。