Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response

Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response Karen Herter February 23, 2006 Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Overview • Questions to Answer • Do critical peak pricing (CPP) tariffs reduce peak demand? • How does local climate affect residential customer response to CPP events? • Motivation – why CPP? • Economics: better link wholesale and retail markets • Reliability: respond to local or system emergencies • Customer service: the California Statewide Pricing Pilot (SPP) participants liked the experimental CPP rates Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Avg. Economics: California Power Costs, 2000 Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Reliability: still working on response time & technology issues Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Customer Service: SPP Post-pilot Survey (N=196) Why? Save money 58% Control/save energy 17% I like it 12% Would you stay on the new rate? New Rate 77% Why Not? Need more time to decide 58% Too much hassle 22% Old Rate 23% (only about 50% actually did stay on the CPP rate once the pilot participation incentive was removed) Should it be offered to other customers? Why? Save energy 19% Save money 17% It’s good/we like it 15% Conservation awareness 13% Chance to participate 12% Control/manage energy use 5% Definitely 62% Probably 25% Definitely/ probably not 13% Source: Momentum 2004 Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

I. Background Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

CA Statewide Pricing Pilot, 2003-2004 • Cooperative effort • CEC, CPUC joint proceeding • PG&E, SCE and SDG&E joint pilot • Pilot design • ~2000 residential customers • 3 new revenue-neutral rates • 15-minute load data • Data stratification • By climate zone (4) • By building/usage type (3) • Bayesian sampling determined sample sizes for each of 12 strata Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Experimental CPP Tariff(approximate average values) $0.60 critical peak price $ $0.20 peak price $0.10 off-peak price 0 14 19 24 Hour of the day Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

CA System Loads as a function of Temperature Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Two Groups Considered in this Analysis • Manual Group • CPP rate • Information on how to respond • PCT Group • CPP rate • Information on how to respond • Programmable communicating thermostat (PCT) programmed to automatically respond to CPP signals Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

II. Manual Response (no automated controls) Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Data Analysis for Manual Group • Divide hourly data (24-hour load shapes) • 5°F peak temperature bins • Normal/critical days • Average daily load shapes across days, by customer •  2 load shapes per customer - one normal and one critical • Average customer load shapes across customers, by stratum •  2 load shapes per stratum - one normal and one critical • Average stratum load shapes across strata, weighted by population and sample share •  2 final load shapes - one normal and one critical - representing the average response of SPP participants exposed to the given temperature and weighted to reflect the CA population Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

For those who had coffee this morning… Responseij = (Hourly Usage on Critical Days) - (Hourly Usage on Normal Days) = Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Manual Response, by 5°F Temperature Bin Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Manual Group: Diurnal Load Shapes, 95-105°F (Hot) Average Response = -13% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Manual Group: Diurnal Load Shapes, 60-95°F (Mild) Average Response = -4% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Manual Group: Diurnal Load Shapes, 50-60°F (Cold) Average Response = -9% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Manual Response as a Fraction of Normal Load Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

III. Response with PCTs (Programmable Communicating Thermostats) Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Data Analysis for PCT Group • Divide hourly data (24-hour load shapes) • 5°F peak temperature bins • Normal/critical days • Average load shapes across days for each customer • Average load shapes across customers • PCT sample not stratified Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

PCT Response, by 5°F Temperature Bin Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

5-hour PCT Response, 90-95°F Average Response = -25% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Average Normal Load Shapes:Manual and PCT Groups, 70-95°F Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Manual vs. PCT Response, by 5°F Temperature Bin Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

California System Response Potential under Mandatory CPP: Recent ISO Emergencies Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Conclusions • In hot weather, households on CPP tariffs alone (without technology) reduced peak load by 13% over a 5-hour critical event period • In hot weather, households on CPP tariffs coupled with programmable communicating thermostats reduced peak load by 25% over a 5-hour critical event period and 41% over a 2-hour critical peak period • Comparable groups with and without PCTs responded similarly in mild weather, but PCT customers outperformed manual customers in hot weather • Assuming similar response by all California customers, residential CPP tariffs could have reduced system load by 1-4% during recent California ISO events Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

The End Full report available at: http://www-library.lbl.gov/docs/LBNL/589/56/PDF/LBNL-58956.pdf (or just search the LBL library for LBNL-58956) Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presentation Transcript