CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL RATE GROUP Residential Demand Charges -- To be or Not to Be -- April 28, 2016 Los Angeles, CA requirements/recover costs … in the face of flat or declining sales
SCPPA Rate Design Working Group Formed in Q4 2013 to: Review Members’ existing rate structures Assess potential changes to improve Utilities’ ability to meet revenue requirements Made up of staff from 8 of 11 Member Utilities Anaheim Imperial Irrigation District Azusa Los Angeles Banning Pasadena Glendale Riverside
SCPPA Rate Design Working Group Final Position Paper concluded: Need to increase/improve fixed cost recovery System-wide Demand Charges, Tiered Customer Charges … Current net metering structure must change to provide fair and equitable revenue recovery from all customers
Residential Demand Charges Cons Costly for most utilities, requiring new: demand meters rates billing systems (possibly) “Complicated” for customers
Residential Demand Charges Pros Widely used in Comm/Ind sectors Fair and equitable fixed cost/revenue recovery mechanism “Accepted” by solar industry as alternative to higher fixed costs or minimum bills LADWP 2016 Rate Case
Residential Demand Charges Opportunities to Implement AMI installed and operational Correlate service panel size to a demand level Correlate energy usage to a demand level Sample existing housing stock actual demand levels and apply the level to similar (size & vintage) housing units
Residential Demand Charges Possible added benefit with implementation If Res (and/or Comm) rates are changed to bill demand on max “flow through meter” instead of use, utilities could charge for PV production if it is greater than the max energy use/demand – and still comply w/ Net Metering requirement
ADDED BONUS QUESTION
Power Factor Calculations Has anyone figured out how to calculate a Power Factor for a net metered customer if your PF calc is based on lagging kVarh to kWh relation – but you don’t have the gen set metered?