Are US utility standby rates inhibiting diffusion of customer-owned generating systems?

New, small-scale electric generation technologies permit utility customers to generate some of their own electric power and to utilize waste heat for space heating and other applications at the building site. This combined heat and power (CHP) characteristic can provide significant energy-cost savings. However, most current US utility regulations leave CHP standby rate specification largely to utility discretion resulting in claims by CHP advocates that excessive standby rates are significantly reducing CHP-related savings and inhibiting CHP diffusion. The impacts of standby rates on the adoption of CHP are difficult to determine; however, because of the characteristically slow nature of new technology diffusion. This study develops an agent-based microsimulation model of CHP technology choice using cellular automata to represent new technology information dispersion and knowledge acquisition. Applying the model as an n-factorial experiment quantifies the impacts of standby rates on CHP technologies under alternative diffusion paths. Analysis of a sample utility indicates that, regardless of the likely diffusion process, reducing standby rates to reflect the cost of serving a large number of small, spatially clustered CHP systems significantly increases the adoption of these technologies.

[1]  Leigh Tesfatsion,et al.  Agent-Based Computational Economics: Growing Economies From the Bottom Up , 2002, Artificial Life.

[2]  K. Train.  Discount rates in consumers' energy-related decisions: A review of the literature , 1985 .

[3]  G. Orcutt,et al.  A new type of socio-economic system , 1957 .

[4]  Henry Lee,et al.  Assessing the Challenges Confronting Distributive Electric Generation , 2003 .

[5]  Michael W. Macy,et al.  In Search of Excellence: Fads, Success Stories, and Adaptive Emulation1 , 2001, American Journal of Sociology.

[6]  Daniel McFadden,et al.  Residential End-use Energy Planning System (REEPS) , 1982 .

[7]  Stephen J. DeCanio,et al.  The efficiency paradox: bureaucratic and organizational barriers to profitable energy-saving investments , 1998 .

[8]  Thomas Berger,et al.  Agent-based spatial models applied to agriculture: A simulation tool , 2001 .

[9]  S. Winter,et al.  An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.by Richard R. Nelson; Sidney G. Winter , 1987 .

[10]  Chris Marnay,et al.  Distributed energy resources in practice: A case study analysis and validation of LBNL's customer adoption model , 2003 .

[11]  A. Jaffe,et al.  The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology , 1994 .

[12]  Chris Marnay,et al.  The Effects of Electricity Tariff Structure on Distributed Generation Adoption in New York State , 2005 .

[13]  Avraham Shama,et al.  Energy conservation in US buildings: Solving the high potential/low adoption paradox from a behavioural perspective , 1983 .

[14]  M. Muller,et al.  On Decision Making Following an Industrial Energy Audit , 1995 .

[15]  Frank M. Bass,et al.  A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[16]  S. Kulakowski.  Large organizations' investments in energy-efficient building retrofits , 1999 .

[17]  Sean Casten.  Are Standby Rates Ever Justified? The Case Against Electric Utility Standby Charges as a Response to On-Site Generation , 2003 .

[18]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[19]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[20]  Z. Griliches.  HYBRID CORN: AN EXPLORATION IN THE ECONOMIC OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE , 1957 .

[21]  Jacob Goldenberg,et al.  Using Complex Systems Analysis to Advance Marketing Theory Development , 2001 .

[22]  P. LeMar,et al.  Integrated Energy Systems (IES) for Buildings: A Market Assessment , 2002 .

[23]  Herbert Dawid,et al.  Agent-based Models of Innovation and Technological Change , 2006 .

[24]  A. Jaffe,et al.  Technological Change and the Environment , 2000 .

[25]  D. Greene,et al.  Energy efficiency and consumption — the rebound effect — a survey , 2000 .

[26]  R. Newell,et al.  Information programs for technology adoption: The case of energy-efficiency audits , 2004 .