demand response and the california information display pilot
DESCRIPTION
Demand Response and the California Information Display Pilot. 2005 AEIC Load Research Conference Myrtle Beach, South Carolina July 11, 2005 Mark S. Martinez, Manager, Program Development, SCE Craig Williamson, Research Director, EPRI Solutions. Background. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Demand Response and the California Information Display Pilot
2005 AEIC Load Research Conference
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
July 11, 2005
Mark S. Martinez, Manager, Program Development, SCE
Craig Williamson, Research Director, EPRI Solutions
2 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Background
In 2003, California embarked on Statewide Pricing Pilot (SPP), a study to determine customer responsiveness to dynamic pricing rates
Time of Use (two part)
Critical Peak Pricing (Fixed)
Critical Peal Pricing (Variable)
$12M study designed to develop inputs into Advanced Metering Infrastructure business cases from three IOUs in 2005
3 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Smart Thermostat – Enabling Technology
Due to the short-term notification of the CPP-V Super Peak, customers were offered “smart thermostats” as basic enabling technology
These thermostats automatically adjusted customer’s HVAC temperature during Super Peak period
Residential customers were also offered water heater and pool pump controls
Some commercial customers were offered small energy management systems
4 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SCE and SDG&E Smart Thermostat
3) BroadcastCurtailment
MessageWireless
Fan Coil Unit
Carrier EMiThermostat
Silicon Energy REM
SCEOperator
2) Curtailment Message
Pager
Emi UIOB Standard WebBrowser
1) CurtailmentRequest
4) Unique AcknowledgmentWireless
[A user override will generatea real-time message from
the EMi back to the server]
5) Acknowledgments from all EMi’s
6) Verification ofLoad Reductionand Override
Notices
5 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Potential Enhanced CPP Treatments
SPP specific web site (what to do when you want to “Smart Shift and Save”)
More timely inbound usage feedback
• Post event notice (email and letter)
• Monthly comparison bill or statement
SPP “Report Card” or activity report
Additional event or price notification
In-home usage or energy display
Additional enabling technologies
6 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Research Purpose – Information Display Pilot (IDP)
Does more timely feedback on household energy use increase average level of peak energy savings?
Dynamic rates may be difficult to understand, and existing “price signals” may not generate response to consequences in a timely manner – what would?
Awareness, understanding, and behavior modification for SPP are based on materials provided, and bill feedback – could we do better?
What would be incremental increase in energy savings and load reduction from enhanced deployment of information and technology?
7 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Direct Feedback Methodology
“Push” approach that is scheduled (mailers) or polled on demand (observe) – Options:
• Provide more frequent information on consequences of customer behavior with energy usage – “Who left all the lights on?”
• Make price signal and events more obvious to consumer – “in their face”
• Provide direct usage information on a near real-time basis
8 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Newsletter – focus group feedback
Groups generally favor IDP newsletter, but this alone might not change behavior during peak periods.
Some skeptical of information in IDP treatments: not representative of home/lifestyle.
Some had mixed responses about whether they want information on/with bill, in hard copy, or by e-mail.
Most with internet access want info via internet, but were mixed regarding how wished to be alerted about information.
9 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Impact Assessment Goals
•Assess the load impact of providing enhanced information treatments to customers, over and above the impact of enabling technology and the rate/price
•Control for other factors, including– Customer size (high-low consumption)– Day-specific conditions– Treatment installation date
•Groups include residential and commercial customers on the CPP-V rate (2003 Track A SPP sample)
•Challenge – only 62 total customers available
10 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Impact Assessment Process
•Include both a treatment and a control group in the analysis, both on CPP-V
•Collect interval load data during pre-treatment period for both groups, begin treatments, then collect post-treatment data
•Use Energy Orb installation date as start of treatment
• Newsletters started at about the same time
•Energy Orbs installed from 7/28/04 through 8/31/04
•Pre-treatment and post-treatment periods are different for different customers
11 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Impact Assessment Methodology
Difference of Differences approach• Corrects for changes over time (pre and post) and recognizes differences
between treatment and control groups
First calculate average for each customer for pre and post period (customer-specific)
Then average all customers in each sample cell for control and treatment group
First difference: Treatment – control for each hour in both the pre-treatment and post-treatment periods
Second difference: (difference in the post-treatment period) – (difference in the pre-treatment period)
Calculate weighted average of cell differences, using weights based on the number of treatment customers in each cell
12 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Pre and Post Differences (after averaging)
hkhkhk
hkhkhk
CpostloadTpostloadpostdiff
CpreloadTpreloadprediff
,*,*,,*,*,,
,*,*,,*,*,,
h. cellin k,hour for period,ment post treat theduring average
control theand average treatmentebetween th difference theis
h. cellin k,hour for period, treatmentpre theduring average
control theand average treatmentebetween th difference theis
,
,
hk
hk
postdiff
prediff
hkhkhk prediffpostdiffcelleffect ,,, h. cellin k,hour for impact load estimated theis ,hkcelleffect
ncells
hhkhk celleffectwimpact
1,
h. cellin
customers treatmentofnumber on the based weight theis
1
ncells
lh
hh
nTcust
nTcustw
13 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
2004 IDP Sample Design
IDP Treatment Group (enhanced)
• 33 residential customers on CPP-V
• 29 commercial customers on CPP-V
IDP Control Group (standard)
• 100 residential customers on CPP-V
• 138 commercial customers on CPP-V
Residential customers located in SDG&E areas, and C/I customers located in SCE territory
IDP Control Group was the 2004 Track A
14 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
2004 IDP Results - Residential
Difference of differences approach, with CPP-V as common rate in treatment and control groups, and adjusting for pre and post
treatments periods for both groups
Residential (SDG&E) Load ImpactAll days, actual time
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time
Ave
rag
e kW
15 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Residential – average for 2-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat different days consistently
Residential (SDG&E) Load Impact2 hour event days
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Load Impact
Start Time
2-hour end
Start Flashing
16 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Residential – individual 2-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Residential (SDG&E) Load ImpactAll 2 hour event days
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Aug 11
Aug 27
Sep 9
Sep 10
Start Time
2-hour end
Start Flashing
17 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Residential – average for 2-hour event day with 90% confidence intervals
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Residential (SDG&E) Load Impact2 hour event days, with 90% confidence interval
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time
Ave
rag
e kW
Load Impact
Upper 90% CI
Lower 90% CI
Start Time
2-hour end
Start Flashing
18 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Residential – average for 5-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Residential (SDG&E) Load Impact5 hour event days
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Load Impact
Start Time
5-hour end
Start Flashing
19 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Residential – individual 5-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Residential (SDG&E) Load ImpactAll 5 hour event days
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Aug 31
Sep 8
Start Time
5-hour end
Start Flashing
20 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Residential – average for 5-hour event day with 90% confidence intervals
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Residential (SDG&E) Load Impact5 hour event days, with 90% confidence interval
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time
Ave
rag
e kW
Load Impact
Upper 90% CI
Lower 90% CI
Start Time
5-hour end
Start Flashing
21 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
2004 IDP Results - Commercial
Difference of differences approach, with CPP-V as common rate in treatment and control groups, and adjusting for pre and post
treatments periods for both groups
Commercial (SCE) Load ImpactAll days, actual time
-4-3.5
-3-2.5
-2-1.5
-1-0.5
00.5
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time
Ave
rag
e kW
22 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Commercial – average for 2-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Commercial (SCE) Load Impact2 hour event days
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Load Impact
Start Time
2-hour end
Start Flashing
23 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Commercial – individual 2-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Commercial (SCE) Load ImpactAll 2 hour event days
-7-6-5-4-3-2-101234
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Aug 11
Aug 27
Sep 9
Sep 10
Start Time
2-hour end
Start Flashing
24 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Commercial – average for 5-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Commercial (SCE) Load Impact5 hour event days
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Load Impact
Start Time
5-hour end
Start Flashing
25 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP Commercial – individual 5-hour event days
Difference of differences approach, using “relative time” to treat days with different start times consistently
Commercial (SCE) Load ImpactAll 5 hour event days
-6-5-4-3-2-101234
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Time relative to start of event
Ave
rag
e kW
Aug 9
Aug 10
Aug 31
Sep 8
Start Time
5-hour end
Start Flashing
26 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Impact Analysis Conclusions
Residential customers show an impact during Super Peak, and also during the 4 hour warning period
Commercial customers, while they are very positive about the program, do not show a consistent impact. But something appears to be happening
None of the results are statistically significant• Limit of small sample sizes
• Variability of the commercial customer types
Customer feedback indicates that treatments are somewhat responsible for the apparent impacts, either alone or combined
Individual analysis of each customer or subgroups would be beneficial in “teasing out” specific behavioral effects
27 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Recommendations for 2005
Sample sizes are obviously too small – recommend increasing to improve significance
Residential customers may be responding to both the Energy Orb and the newsletter – recommend a bifurcation of treatments or focus on one treatment
Commercial customers are too variable – need to increase sample size and also focus on one treatment
Difference of differences approach can be repeated more effectively if Super Peak events and treatment start times are properly coordinated
28 Copyright © 2005 EPRI Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
IDP for 2005
• Proposed research objectives for 2005 include
- Continue to evaluate incremental effect of enhanced treatments on peak load impacts
- Augment commercial segment with CPP-V customers from SPP (non-Track A) and offer visual and informational treatments
- Augment residential segment with CPP-F from SPP to evaluate incremental load impacts of monthly information treatments for residential CPP
• Continuation of current sample and augmenting residential sample with CPP-F customers receiving newsletter treatments have been approved.