1 Proposed Policies to Increase the level of Demand Response Energy Action Plan Update April 24 th, 2006, Sacramento, CA Mike Messenger, CEC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SmartPOWER Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) June 3, 2008.
Advertisements

Recent Successes in Demand Response
Achieving Price-Responsive Demand in New England Henry Yoshimura Director, Demand Resource Strategy ISO New England National Town Meeting on Demand Response.
BG&E’s PeakRewards SM Demand Response Program Successful Approaches for Engaging Customers August 20, 2014.
CPUC CSI Workshop CPUC CSI Stakeholder Workshop San Francisco, CA February 15, 2012.
Time-of-Use and Critical Peak Pricing
January 20, 2004 California’s Statewide Pricing Pilot Larsh Johnson – President and Chief Technical Officer, eMeter Sanjoy Chatterjee – Principal, Chatterjee.
1 The Potential For Implementing Demand Response Programs In Illinois Rick Voytas Manager, Corporate Analysis Ameren Services May 12, 2006.
Automated Demand Response Pilot 2005/2004 Load Impact Results and Recommendations Final Report © 2005 Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) Research & Consulting.
California Public Utilities Commission Residential Rate Structure Rulemaking R Workshop Overview Time Variant Pricing (TVP) Workshop Gabe Petlin.
Energy Efficiency and Demand Response: Separate Efforts or Two Ends of a Continuum? A Presentation to: Association of Edison Illuminating Companies Reno,
1 SMUD’s Small Business Summer Solutions Pilot: Behavioral response of small commercial customers to DR programs (with PCTs) Karen Herter, Ph.D. Associate.
1 Customer Experience with Dynamic Rates: Load Impacts, Satisfaction Levels and Lessons Learned from the California Pricing Pilot Load Management and Demand.
February 23, 2006Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG 1 /29 Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response Karen Herter February 23, 2006.
Developing Critical-Peak Pricing Tariffs with the PRISM Software Ahmad Faruqui May 30, 2007.
System Reliability Procurement: Non-wires Alternatives in Rhode Island Tim Roughan National Grid.
What Drives the Response in Demand Response? Craig Boice Boice Dunham Group Metering, Billing, CRM/CIS America 2005 Las Vegas, Nevada April 13, 2005 BOICE.
Presentation Overview
1 Demand Response Update April, Strategic Perspective Demand Response  Aligns with PGE’s Strategic Direction; helping to provide exceptional.
California Statewide Pricing Pilot Lessons Learned Roger Levy Demand Response Research Center NARUC Joint Meeting Committee on Energy.
Overview of Residential Pricing/Advanced Metering Pilots Charles Goldman Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory SMPPI Board Meeting August 3, 2005.
Colorado Rural Electric Association Energy Innovations Summit Demand Response: Are Customers Ready to Change Their Ways? Confidential October 27, 2014.
+ Customer-side Smart Grid Technologies How will they change utility offerings? Karen Herter, Ph.D. Association of Women in Water, Energy, and Environment.
Innovative approach to DSM through Open Access Jayant Deo MD & CEO, Indian Energy Exchange
MEC: Customer Profitability Models Topic DSM – DR, Advanced EE and Dispatch Ability Jesse Langston, OG&E Oct 20 th 2013.
Energy Action Plan “Report Card” and the AB32 “Umbrella” CFEE ROUNDTABLE CONFERENCE ON ENERGY Julie Fitch California Public Utilities Commission Director.
California SONGS\OTC Plants Assumptions TEPPC – Data Work Group Call Tuesday, September 15, 2015.
2011 Residential HAN Pilots Evaluation Results © 2011San Diego Gas & Electric Company. All copyright and trademark rights reserved. 1.
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Status Report Demand Responsive Building Program William J. Keese California Energy Commission March 30, 2001.
OVERVIEW OF ISSUES DR AND AMI HELP SOLVE Dr. Eric Woychik Executive Consultant, Strategy Integration, LLC APSC Workshop on DR and AMI.
Load Management SMUD & Demand Response Jim Parks CEC Load Management Standards Scoping Workshop March 3, 2008.
Demand Response and the California Information Display Pilot 2005 AEIC Load Research Conference Myrtle Beach, South Carolina July 11, 2005 Mark S. Martinez,
California Energy Commission - Public Interest Energy Research Program Demand Response Research Center Research Overview Load Management Informational.
“Demand Response: Completing the Link Between Wholesale and Retail Pricing” Paul Crumrine Director, Regulatory Strategies & Services Institute for Regulatory.
March 25, 2004 California’s Statewide Pricing Pilot Larsh Johnson – President and Chief Technical Officer, eMeter.
Linking the Wholesale and Retail Markets through Dynamic Retail Pricing Presented by: Henry Yoshimura Manager, Demand Response ISO New England September.
CPUC Workshop on Best Practices & Lessons Learned in Time Variant Pricing TVP Pilot Design and Load Impact M&V Dr. Stephen George Senior Vice President.
Leading the Way in Electricity TM Tariff Programs & Services Customer Services Business Unit Overview of Demand Response At Southern California Edison.
James Strapp Associate Partner, IBM Business Consulting Services Potential Smart Metering Issues for Ontario Residential Customers.
California Public Utilities Commission Residential Rate Structure Rulemaking R Status Update Low Income Oversight Board Meeting Gabe Petlin Analyst,
THE MIX: FACTS, FIGURES, AND THE FUTURE INDEPENDENT ENERGY PRODUCERS ANNUAL MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2013 William A. Monsen MRW & Associates Oakland, California.
CEC 08-DR-1 Efficiency Committee Workshop 3/3/08.
Idaho Power Company Demand Response & Dynamic Pricing Programs PNDRP December 5, 2008 Darlene Nemnich Pete Pengilly.
The State of Demand Response in California Ahmad Faruqui, Ph.D. Principal June 13, 2007.
DR issues in California discussed last year in March Historical DR in California: some background issues –Twenty years of programs/tariffs I/C and AC cycling.
Dynamic Pricing Case Studies. Digi International.
EDISON INTERNATIONAL® SM Smart Grid Value Proposition October 4, 2010 Lynda Ziegler.
Utilities’ Update on Energy Savings Assistance Program Studies Ordered in D LIOB Meeting August 21, 2013 Sacramento, California.
Government’s Evolving Role in Resource Planning and Environmental Protection Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission April 19, 2002.
More Than Smart – A Distribution System Vision © 2011San Diego Gas & Electric Company. All copyright and trademark rights reserved. Dave Geier – VP Electric.
California Energy Commission 2015 IEPR Self-Generation Forecast Sacramento, CA 12/17/2015 Asish Gautam Demand Analysis Office Energy Assessments Division.
Utility Benefits of Demand Response Trevor Lauer DTE Energy Marketing Executive Conference Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.
California Energy Action Plan December 7, 2004 Energy Report: 2004 and 2005 Overview December 7, 2004.
CEC Public Workshop Order Instituting Informational and Rulemaking Proceeding (08-DR-01) March 3, 2008.
CEC Load Management Standards Workshop March 3, Update on the CPUC’s Demand Response and Advanced Metering Proceedings Bruce Kaneshiro Energy Division.
Communicating Thermostats for Residential Time-of-Use Rates: They Do Make a Difference Presented at ACEEE Summer Study 2008.
1 City of Palo Alto Utilities Large Commercial Customer Pilot Demand Response Program Customer Meeting March 8, 2012.
CLECA Proposal on Matinee Pricing Barbara R. Barkovich, Barkovich & Yap., Inc. For California Large Energy Consumers Association Matinee Pricing Workshop.
SMECO Demand Response filing
Self-Generation Forecast CED 2017 Preliminary
National Grid Rhode Island: Piloting Wireless Alternatives
Allegheny Power Residential Demand Response Program
Preliminary Electricity Rate and Time of Use Rate Scenarios
Engaging Energy Consumers Energy Action, Fuel Poverty & Climate Action Conference - March 2017 Aoife MacEvilly Commissioner for Energy Regulation Regulating.
DEMAND ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP (DAWG) Demand Response Subgroup – TOU Rates October 2014 © 2011San Diego Gas & Electric Company. All copyright and trademark.
CPUC Rate Proceedings Relevant for TOU
  Advanced Metering Infrastructure: The Business Case for San Diego Gas & Electric Ed Fong Director, AMI                                                                
State Allocation Board Hearing Solar Energy and Energy Efficiency Project Options for California Schools Mark Johnson, Energy Solutions Manager - Schools.
Retail Rate Options for
Impact of Dynamic Pricing on AMR
Presentation transcript:

1 Proposed Policies to Increase the level of Demand Response Energy Action Plan Update April 24 th, 2006, Sacramento, CA Mike Messenger, CEC

2 Agenda for This Talk Present brief status report on update of Title 24 proceedings to include Programmable Communicating Thermostats Propose 3 new policies to increase level of price based or economic DR achieved in next 3-5 years

3 Title 24 Update- Requiring PCT’s in all New Homes by 2008 Potential to provide immediate and geographic specific load drops for all new homes and HBAC retrofits during emergencies.( 400,000 homes /year) Proof of Concept “plain vanilla” PCT (including material and fabrication costs) and functional specifications have been developed for new programmable communicating thermostats (PCT’s) to support one or two way communication systems. Preliminary analysis shows requiring PCT’s is cost effective in all climate zones assuming CPP as default rate and most climate zones for CPP as voluntary.

4 Policy Recommendations to Increase the Level of Demand Response Policy 1- Support continued installation of AMI systems with functionality to support dynamic rates for all CA utilities. Policy 2- Develop performance based incentive system to encourage DR goal attainment by 2008 Policy 3- Support use of Critical Peak Pricing rates (CPP) as the default rate for residential customers with opportunity to opt out to TOU or current rates after trial period

5 Policy 1 -Rationale for Support of AMI System Deployment for IOU’s and Municipal Utilities Take advantage of burgeoning interest in AMI nationwide after successes in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and in California Business cases positive in CA for most utilities and opportunity to piggyback with water meters Additional operational benefits and value from AMI support of California Solar Initiative ( AMI permits performance based incentives)

6 Policy 2-Rationale for Development of Performance based Mechanism to Achieve DR goals  System should compensate utilities for:  reducing procurement costs and or  Increasing system load factor and or  Meeting DR goals  Consider share the savings model using in EE proceedings; consistent with recent OIR from Judge Gottstein.

7 Policy 3-Make Critical Peak Pricing the Default Rate for Small commercial and Residential Customers - Rationale Over 2/3 of the customers on the Pricing pilot;  Saved money by participating on a CPP rate (see Slide 8)  Supported use of CPP as the default rate in post pilot surveys ( see Slide 9)

8 Fraction of Customers on CPP Rates with Lower bills in 2004 and Residential and Small Commercial Fraction of Customers on CPP Rates with Lower bills in 2004 and Residential and Small Commercial

9 Customer Acceptance of CPP rates Should all customers be placed on a dynamic rate and given an option to switch to another rate? Should dynamic rates be offered to all customers? Definitely Probably 95% 69% 65% 73% 61% 69% 22% 30% 20% 26% 17% 0%20%40%60%80%100% Total TOU CPP-F CPP-V Info Only % 93% 87% 86% 43% 39% 46% 41% 21% 28% 17% 23% 22% 0%20%40%60%80% TOTAL TOU CPP-F CPP-V Info Only % 67% 63% 64% 63% Residential participants express a strong interest in having dynamic rates offered to all customers. Source: Statewide Pricing Pilot: End-of-Pilot Customer Assessment, December 2004, Momentum Market Intelligence.

10 Source: Response of Residential Customers to Critical Peak Pricing and Time-of-Use Rates during the Summer of 2003, September 13, 2004, CEC Report. Residential Response on a typical hot day Control vs. Flat rate vs. CPP-V Rate ( Hot Day, August 15, 2003, Average Peak Temperature ) CPP rates – Load Impacts

11 Policy 3- Make CPP the Default Rate Rationale…(continued) Use of Default CPP strategy will increase fraction of customers on CPP rate from 10-15% (opt in) to 60-75% ( opt out) and thus level of DR. ( Increases DR MW achieved by factor of 4: up to 2000 MW in CRA report) 80% to 90% of customers in the SPP pilot report they prefer CPP rates ( over old rates) after they have had the time to adjust/ experience the new rates. Need at least a 3-6 month trial period to ensure low drop out rate.

12 Policy 3- Make CPP the Default Rate for all Classes- (continued) Customers report they prefer CPP rates because they :  Save energy and money on their bills,  Have more control over their energy bill, and  Contribute to increasing environmental quality by saving energy on peak Disadvantages of Voluntary CPP rates  Lower levels of overall participation  Structural winners/free riders who join produce lower levels of peak reduction

13 Summary Recommendations Policy 1- Support continued deployment of AMI at investor owned and extend policy to municipal utilities Policy 2-Support exploration of a new performance based mechanism to support attainment of DR goals Policy 3- Make Time Differentiated Rates the Default rate for all Classes  Direct all utilities to file time differentiated rates as the default ( with Opt Out) rate in next rate design proceeding ( including in the current PG&E proceeding) for all classes and or  Make the CPP rate the “rebuttable presumption” default rate in all rate design proceedings unless utilities or other parties make a strong showing that the time differentiated rates are not fair and reasonable compared to other alternative rates and/or  Direct staff to work with a willing utility to jointly develop a default CPP rate for small customers and strategy outside of hearing process. Thanks for your time//Questions ????

14 Proposed Policies to Increase the level of Demand Response Energy Action Plan Update April 24 th, 2006, Sacramento, CA Mike Messenger, CEC

15 Back up Slides if more information is asked for needed on key slides DR Goals details, definitions, Roll out options, DR timelimes

16 Keys to Implementing CPP as a Default Rate- Well orchestrated customer education campaign before and during trial period is required to minimize risk of customer backlash Legislative changes may be required to reach all customers and there may be other rate design options to achieve the default policy Billing system administrator must anticipate problems with new rates via enhanced quality control systems

17 Options for CPP Rollout/ Educational Campaign/Rate Design CPP rates with credit/surcharge to ensure customer cost is more than existing maximum revenue cap for delivering the first two tiers of energy use, up to 130%. CPP rates with bill protection for 1 year – bill is lowest of total charges based on current rate and CPP rate CPP with 3-6 month trial and opt in choice at the end- billing analysis presented to inform their choice- CPP rates allowed by legislative fix New rate design to separately recover total charges for first two tiers of energy use and use CPP rates for remainder of revenues

18 Policy 3- Make CPP the Default Rate…Rationale (continued) The estimated peak-energy reduction for residential customers on fixed period CPP tariffs during on peak event days was 13% (7.6 % to 15.8% depending on climate zone); The estimated energy reduction for residential customers with high energy usage (<600kWh per month), central A/C, and enabling technology was 16 to 27%; see next slide for example

19 Policy PCT AMI Future DR Timeline Policy Auto DR AMI Residential Commercial <200 kW, ~11,000,000 meters, ~8 GW of A/C >200 kW, ~20,000 meters, ~8 GW of A/C 13 SCE SDG&E PG&E SCE PG&E SDG&E IOUs are starting residential AMI … … but won’t fully deploy for 5 years!

20 Policy PCT AMI Future DR Timeline Policy Auto DR AMI Residential Commercial IOU pilots Limited CPP in placeInterval meters already installed <200 kW, ~11,000,000 meters, ~8 GW of A/C >200 kW, ~20,000 meters, ~8 GW of A/C 1 GW reliability over 3 years Commercial may be ready sooner…