1 / 29

Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response

Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response. Karen Herter February 23, 2006. 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?

octavio-tyson
Télécharger la présentation

Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

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

  2. 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

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

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

  5. 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

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

  7. 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

  8. 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

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

  10. 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

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

  12. 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  20. 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

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

  22. 5-hour PCT Response, 90-95°F Average Response = -25% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

  23. 2-hour PCT Response, 90-95°F Average Response = -41% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

  24. 2-hour PCT Response, 80-85°F Average Response = -16% Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG

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

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

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

  28. 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

  29. 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

More Related