Real Time Pricing as a Default or Optional Service for C&ICustomers: A Comparative Analysis of Eight Case Studies

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Description

Demand response (DR) has been broadly recognized to be an integral component of well-functioning electricity markets, although currently underdeveloped in most regions. Among the various initiatives undertaken to remedy this deficiency, public utility commissions (PUC) and utilities have considered implementing dynamic pricing tariffs, such as real-time pricing (RTP), and other retail pricing mechanisms that communicate an incentive for electricity consumers to reduce their usage during periods of high generation supply costs or system reliability contingencies. Efforts to introduce DR into retail electricity markets confront a range of basic policy issues. First, a fundamental issue in any market context is how ... continued below

Creation Information

Barbose, Galen; Goldman, Charles; Bharvirkar, Ranjit; Hopper,Nicole; Ting, Michael & Neenan, Bernie August 1, 2005.

Context

This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided by UNT Libraries Government Documents Department to Digital Library, a digital repository hosted by the UNT Libraries. More information about this report can be viewed below.

Who

People and organizations associated with either the creation of this report or its content.

Publisher

Provided By

UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Serving as both a federal and a state depository library, the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department maintains millions of items in a variety of formats. The department is a member of the FDLP Content Partnerships Program and an Affiliated Archive of the National Archives.

Contact Us

What

Descriptive information to help identify this report. Follow the links below to find similar items on the Digital Library.

Description

Demand response (DR) has been broadly recognized to be an integral component of well-functioning electricity markets, although currently underdeveloped in most regions. Among the various initiatives undertaken to remedy this deficiency, public utility commissions (PUC) and utilities have considered implementing dynamic pricing tariffs, such as real-time pricing (RTP), and other retail pricing mechanisms that communicate an incentive for electricity consumers to reduce their usage during periods of high generation supply costs or system reliability contingencies. Efforts to introduce DR into retail electricity markets confront a range of basic policy issues. First, a fundamental issue in any market context is how to organize the process for developing and implementing DR mechanisms in a manner that facilitates productive participation by affected stakeholder groups. Second, in regions with retail choice, policymakers and stakeholders face the threshold question of whether it is appropriate for utilities to offer a range of dynamic pricing tariffs and DR programs, or just ''plain vanilla'' default service. Although positions on this issue may be based primarily on principle, two empirical questions may have some bearing--namely, what level of price response can be expected through the competitive retail market, and whether establishing RTP as the default service is likely to result in an appreciable level of DR? Third, if utilities are to have a direct role in developing DR, what types of retail pricing mechanisms are most appropriate and likely to have the desired policy impact (e.g., RTP, other dynamic pricing options, DR programs, or some combination)? Given a decision to develop utility RTP tariffs, three basic implementation issues require attention. First, should it be a default or optional tariff, and for which customer classes? Second, what types of tariff design is most appropriate, given prevailing policy objectives, wholesale market structure, ratemaking practices and standards, and customer preferences? Third, if a primary goal for RTP implementation is to induce DR, what types of supplemental activities are warranted to support customer participation and price response (e.g., interval metering deployment, customer education, and technical assistance)?

Language

Item Type

Identifier

Unique identifying numbers for this report in the Digital Library or other systems.

  • Report No.: LBNL--57661
  • Grant Number: DE-AC02-05CH11231
  • DOI: 10.2172/891019 | External Link
  • Office of Scientific & Technical Information Report Number: 891019
  • Archival Resource Key: ark:/67531/metadc875977

Collections

This report is part of the following collection of related materials.

Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports

What responsibilities do I have when using this report?

When

Dates and time periods associated with this report.

Creation Date

  • August 1, 2005

Added to The UNT Digital Library

  • Sept. 21, 2016, 2:29 a.m.

Description Last Updated

  • Sept. 30, 2016, 12:42 p.m.

Usage Statistics

When was this report last used?

Congratulations! It looks like you are the first person to view this item online.

Interact With This Report

Here are some suggestions for what to do next.

Start Reading

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Citations, Rights, Re-Use

Barbose, Galen; Goldman, Charles; Bharvirkar, Ranjit; Hopper,Nicole; Ting, Michael & Neenan, Bernie. Real Time Pricing as a Default or Optional Service for C&ICustomers: A Comparative Analysis of Eight Case Studies, report, August 1, 2005; Berkeley, California. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc875977/: accessed August 24, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.