Framing of customer engagement opportunities and renewable energy integration by electric utility representatives

Distributed and renewable energy technologies are changing the electricity sector and altering traditional relationships between electric utilities and their customers. This analysis involving focus groups with fourteen electric utilities in seven U.S. states (California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Texas, and Vermont) demonstrates divergence in framing among utility representatives in terms of how they characterize customer engagement opportunities and renewable energy integration. This research is among the first qualitative studies comparing utility representatives’ discourse across the United States. Utilities in Texas and Vermont are particularly divergent especially in their framing of customer engagement opportunities during this time of energy transition.

[1]  Elizabeth J Wilson,et al.  Wind deployment in the United States: states, resources, policy, and discourse. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  R. Halvorsen,et al.  The relative efficiency of public and private firms in a regulated environment: The case of U.S. electric utilities , 1986 .

[3]  Elizabeth J. Wilson,et al.  Implementing energy efficiency: Challenges and opportunities for rural electric co-operatives and small municipal utilities , 2008 .

[4]  Tarla Rai Peterson,et al.  Socio-political evaluation of energy deployment (SPEED) , 2014 .

[5]  Sangjoon Ka,et al.  Ideology and Professionalism , 2002 .

[6]  Tarla Rai Peterson,et al.  Which Way Does the Wind Blow? Analysing the State Context for Renewable Energy Deployment in the United States , 2014 .

[7]  Frank A. Felder,et al.  The Life and Death of the Utility Death Spiral , 2014 .

[8]  E. Wilson,et al.  Winds of change in energy systems: Policy implementation, technology deployment, and regional transmission organizations , 2016 .

[9]  Shlomo S. Sawilowsky,et al.  Review of Twenty Nonparametric Statistics and Their Large Sample Approximations. , 2000 .

[10]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  The destabilisation of existing regimes: Confronting a multi-dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913-1967) , 2013 .

[11]  S. Kihm,et al.  Does Disruptive Competition Mean a Death Spiral for Electric Utilities , 2014 .

[12]  Sebastian Strunz.  The German energy transition as a regime shift , 2014 .

[13]  R. Righter.  Power Loss: The Origins of Deregulation and Restructuring in the American Electric Utility System , 1999 .

[14]  B. Rabe,et al.  Carbon Taxation and Policy Labeling: Experience from American States and Canadian Provinces , 2012 .

[15]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  Trying to prosume: toward a theory of consumers as co-creators of value , 2008 .

[16]  Santiago Grijalva,et al.  Prosumer-based smart grid architecture enables a flat, sustainable electricity industry , 2011, ISGT 2011.

[17]  P. Sainsbury,et al.  Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. , 2007, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[18]  Tarla Rai Peterson,et al.  Socio-Political Evaluation of Energy Deployment (SPEED): An integrated research framework analyzing energy technology deployment , 2008 .

[19]  P. Mayring.  Qualitative Content Analysis , 2000 .

[20]  Janet Larsen,et al.  The Great Transition: Shifting from Fossil Fuels to Solar and Wind Energy , 2015 .

[21]  Tarla Rai Peterson,et al.  Smart Grid (R)Evolution: Electric Power Struggles , 2015 .