High energy prices are forcing some consumers to seek
new ways to cut their overhead. One of the primary
beneficiaries of such thinking is demand response programs
-- a system whereby customers benefit if they curtail
their power usage during peak periods, or when the price
of electricity is most expensive.
|
Ken Silverstein
EnergyBiz Insider
Editor-in-Chief |
Lawmakers understand the need to educate consumers and
to enlighten them that power prices are tied to supply and
demand. In fact, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 signed last
August requires utilities to offer each of its customer
classes within 18 months a so-called time-based rate that
reflects the utility's cost of generating or procuring
electricity. That sounds like a mouthful, but it really
means that homes and businesses would be penalized or
rewarded for using power at certain times on the hottest
or coldest days.
"Market-based signals are being embraced up and down
the production, supply and consumption curve," says Peter
Corsell, CEO of Washington, D.C.-based Gridpoint. "For
larger industrial and commercial customers, demand
response will continue to grow." Gridpoint installs a box
on customers' premises that stores power to be used during
peak demand. The power inside the box is replenished in
the middle of the night when prices are lower, saving
consumers as much as 20 percent on their electric bills.
A Federal Energy Regulatory Commission-financed study
reported that a moderate amount of demand response could
save about $7.5 billion annually by 2010. A Rand Corp.
study reached similar conclusions and said that the
utility industry could save between $50 billion and $100
billion over the next two decades if demand response
becomes the norm.
By understanding their consumption patterns and the
costs tied to them, consumers can make smarter choices
that will conserve energy and save money -- not just for
themselves but also for utilities, which must oftentimes
procure power at expensive times. State regulators
understand the potential. Texas, for example, is working
with utilities to find ways to monitor meters as often as
hourly for commercial and industrial customers.
Utilities are open to the idea and many of the larger
ones have taken it on. And, further, many independent
system operators and regional transmission organizations
that dispatch available generation over the grid are
encouraging demand response. Cost pressures, however,
still stand in the way.
But a relatively quick payback may be possible. With
advanced metering, for example, utilities are given
greater control over load management. Dispatchers would
monitor weather forecasts and the subsequent demand for
their energy. Using that information, they can reduce
consumer demand if that becomes less expensive than
generating power or buying it on the spot market.
Consumers who use these services pay a monthly fee so that
they have the ability to reduce their usage and receive
lower bills.
"Consumers need to understand their consumption habits
to better control their costs," says Glenn A. Pritchard,
with Exelon's meter reading technologies unit in
Philadelphia. "Regulators should create programs that
incent consumers to participate in demand response
programs. Likewise, there need to be mechanisms and/or
processes for the utility or supplier to recover the cost
of the demand response program."
Volatile Markets
Two types of electricity demand response programs are
now in use: market-based, which enable consumers to
respond to changing electricity prices, and
reliability-driven programs. Those permit either consumers
or grid operators to adjust electricity usage when
supplies are tight or when system reliability is a
concern.
Changes in consumption pattern could have a huge affect
on the electric utility industry, which takes in annually
about $224 billion. But forward looking utilities with
sound balance sheets are motivated to control peak load --
a force that controls their generating capacity as well as
the cost of their power generation. Georgia Power, a
regulated utility, offers a voluntary real-time pricing
program to thousands of customers that equates to
thousands of megawatts of demand.
Meantime, Tampa Electric customers can choose
lower-priced electricity by using a programmable
thermostat. Allegheny Energy is doing the same. The
utility sends real-time pricing signals to certain
residential thermostats. During periods of high demand,
such access can promote energy management and prevent the
utility from having to buy wholesale power on the spot
market when the cost could be high.
"Shifting electric loads off the peak periods makes
good economic sense for ratepayers and all utilities...,"
says Robert Chiste, CEO of Comverge. "We are seeing many
utilities re-visit load management programs in light of
today's volatile energy markets and reduced communications
costs."
Despite the motivating factors, a study performed by
the General Accountability Office says that there are
three main barriers to implementing such programs: state
regulations that shield consumers from price fluctuations;
a lack of equipment at customers' locations; and a limited
awareness about the programs and their benefits. In
essence, customers generally do not respond to variations
in demand and supply because they are protected from wide
price swings through set pricing schedules.
But many larger industrial and commercial customers
must now manage their demand and they are therefore
looking into ways they can cut their heating and cooling
costs. And some utilities are encouraging this: Florida
Power & Light, for example, subsidizes the costs of some
energy-saving products.
"Some customers have nearly doubled their energy
costs," says Jeff Siegel, president of Intellicoat in New
York City. "For those customers, demand response programs
are at the top of their pile."
The most prolific offerings on the market are those
related to lighting, Siegel says. But, many such programs
are available including ones tied to cool-roofing
technologies that his company offers. "We'll compete for
budget dollars but the most effective ones are those that
offer a payback within two to four years."
While volatile energy markets are motivating change,
the transition toward time-of-use energy policies has been
a long one. Simply, adapting new technologies is often
costly and uncertain. But market forces along with
Congressional mandates passed last summer may just push
the idea into the mainstream. |