Demand charges for commercial and industrial customers have long been a part of the electric industry. Since utilities need to build infrastructure to meet both instantaneous and long-term requirements, the utility bill contains both an energy charge, which measures the amount of electricity a customer uses over time, and a demand charge, which measures how much power is used at any given point in time.
However, residential customers are rarely subject to a bill with a demand charge. This is because, until recently, residential electricity loads were pretty much the same from one customer to the next. We all (more or less) woke up, took a shower, went to work, came home, turned on the lights, cooked dinner, watched TV, did a load of laundry, went to bed. With each customer in the residential class looking an awful lot like the next, utilities and regulators could lump energy and demand elements together into one $/kWh price.
But today, this assumption is no longer true. All residential customers are not the same. We now have access to LED lights, smart thermostats, plug-in electric vehicles, rooftop solar, demand-flexible water heaters, battery energy storage, and myriad other technologies that make our respective loads and our consumption patterns potentially very different. Critically, it is now inexpensive to meter these differences, including time of use and the magnitude of the demand. Separating out demand charges may be a good way to promote more fairer cost allocation among ratepayers, while also motivating customers to reduce strain on the system. More than a dozen utility companies across the country have implemented or are currently considering residential demand charges.
A demand charge is based on the maximum amount of energy a customer uses at any one instance over the course of a billing cycle. It reflects the cost that a utility incurs to maintain the infrastructure to deliver what the customer wants, when the customer wants it. Think of it as the “size of the pipe” (figuratively) that delivers electricity to customers—a bigger pipe costs more, but can deliver more juice at any instant.
The distinction between how much electricity you need right now and how much you need in total over time is important. Imagine you want to fill a swimming pool with water. You could fill it in minutes with a fire hose. Or you could fill it in hours with a trickle from a garden hose. In both cases, you get the same amount of water. But how much water you get how fast is quite different, and that difference incurs costs to the system.
Historically, this has only been important for large customers that require high amounts of power throughout the day. But as the penetration of distributed energy resources from rooftop solar PV to electric vehicle charging to programmable, controllable thermostats to stationary storage grows, the demand charge can be both a promising solution to the puzzle of how to more equitably collect grid infrastructure costs as well as a price signal that encourages efficiency, load shifting and peak management, and the diverse array of DER product combinations that can perform these tasks.
Consider two hypothetical residential customers, both with the same monthly kWh usage:
At the end of the month, the kWh usage is the same, but the peak demand and benefits and costs to the grid of each customer are very different. Yet both pay the same $/kWh energy charge. In this example, a demand charge would more equitably charge each customer for the service required from the grid closer to each customer’s true cost of service. The customer with a “traditional” and smoother load curve would cause fewer system costs, while the customer whose net grid demand surges from essentially zero to peak would cause greater costs for grid resources (generation, transmission, distribution) to meet that surging need.
Source: Adapted from SDG&E
The above chart shows two similar customers each with rooftop solar, air conditioning, and a pool pump. The blue line shows one customer using timers and other load controls to align consumption with solar output and away from peak periods (assuming demand charges vary by peak and off-peak periods). The red line shows a customer with unmanaged load. While the overall peak demand is comparable, a demand charge with peak and off-peak rates would charge the blue customer much less (with demand shifted to off-peak hours) than the red customer (with demand coincident with peak hours).
Thus, the demand charge accomplishes two important goals as DERs proliferate:
Demand charges can also help to address one of the most vexing debates between utilities, regulators, DER providers, and customers—how to properly charge and compensate distributed generation (DG) customers. Proposals to increase fixed charges or to offer value of solar tariffs remain controversial; there is little agreement on an appropriate value of solar calculation and on which charges are fixed and which charges are variable. This uncertainty creates an unclear value proposition for DG customers, making financing more difficult (and expensive) and constraining the growth of DERs. So while demand charges could be good for all residential customers, they’re especially suited to customers with DERs.
Two utilities recently added demand charges for DG customers. While these charges might slow adoption of solar, or may be too drastic a change all at once, they could potentially unleash new combinations of DERs to help customers better manage the demand, which can bring value to the entire system.
Demand charges can be beneficial for customers without solar as well. At least 14 utilities have implemented demand charge rate options for residential customers with or without solar. For example:
Demand charges are a promising step in the direction of more sophisticated rate structures that incentivise optimal deployment and grid integration of customer-sited DERs. A demand charge more equitably charges customers for their impact on the grid, can reward DG customers with bill savings, and opens up potential for an improved customer experience using load management tools. It can also benefit all customers through reduced infrastructure investment and better integration of renewable, distributed generation.
This article was originally published on the Rocky Mountain Institute’s Outlet blog
AER says bidding behaviour of some electricity market participants - peaking plants and big batteries…
Gas lobby hoorays the proposed South Australia capacity scheme that would include existing gas generators,…
News Australia's only wind turbine tower manufacturer has decided to pack it in has been…
The rules of Australia's main electricity grid are constantly changing. Should they be completely rewritten?…
Australia joins UN coalition that rules out new coal power and promises to encourage others…
Zeppelins could have an advantage over road transport for wind and solar projects. It's an…