Distributional impacts of state-level energy efficiency policies in regional electricity markets

A number of U.S. states have passed legislation targeting energy efficiency and peak demand reduction. We study one such state, Pennsylvania, within the context of PJM, a regional electricity market covering numerous different states. Our focus is on the distributive impacts of this policy—specifically how the policy is likely to impact electricity prices in different areas of Pennsylvania and in the PJM market more generally. Such spatial differences in policy impacts are difficult to model and the transmission system is often ignored in policy studies. Our model estimates supply curves on a “zonal” basis within regional electricity markets and yields information on price and fuel utilization within each zone. We use the zonal supply curves estimated by our model to study regional impacts of energy-efficiency legislation on utilities both inside and outside of Pennsylvania. For most utilities in Pennsylvania, it would reduce the influence of natural gas on electricity price formation and increase the influence of coal. It would also save 2.1 to 2.8 percent of total energy cost in Pennsylvania in a year similar to 2009. The savings are lower than 0.5 percent in other PJM states and the prices may slightly increase in Washington, DC area.

[1]  M. G. Morgan,et al.  Short run effects of a price on carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. electric generators. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  P. Linares,et al.  Energy Efficiency: Economics and Policy , 2010 .

[3]  P. Cappers,et al.  Demand Response in U.S. Electricity Markets: Empirical Evidence , 2010 .

[4]  Electric rate design and greenhouse-gas emissions reduction , 2009, 2009 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting.

[5]  P. Hines,et al.  Estimating the Impact of Electric Vehicle Charging on Electricity Costs Given Electricity-Sector Carbon Cap , 2010 .

[6]  S. Borenstein,et al.  Measuring Market Inefficiencies in California's Restructured Wholesale Electricity Market , 2002 .

[7]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Evaluating the CMA Evolution Strategy on Multimodal Test Functions , 2004, PPSN.

[8]  N. Eyre,et al.  Public policy analysis of energy efficiency and load management in changing electricity businesses , 2003 .

[9]  S. Holland,et al.  The Short-Run Effects of Time-Varying Prices in Competitive Electricity Markets , 2006 .

[10]  Goran Strbac,et al.  Transmission Networks and Electricity Markets , 2005 .

[11]  Benjamin K. Sovacool,et al.  The importance of comprehensiveness in renewable electricity and energy-efficiency policy , 2009 .

[12]  Kathleen L. Spees,et al.  Demand Response and Electricity Market Efficiency , 2007 .

[13]  Jay Apt,et al.  Competitive Energy Options for Pennsylvania , 2007 .

[14]  R. Walawalkar,et al.  Evolution and current status of demand response (DR) in electricity markets: Insights from PJM and NYISO , 2010 .

[15]  Felix F. Wu,et al.  Folk theorems on transmission access: Proofs and counterexamples , 1996 .

[16]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Christian Igel,et al.  Efficient covariance matrix update for variable metric evolution strategies , 2009, Machine Learning.

[18]  Jay Apt,et al.  An economic welfare analysis of demand response in the PJM electricity market , 2008 .

[19]  Kathleen L. Spees,et al.  Impacts of Responsive Load in PJM: Load Shifting and Real Time Pricing , 2007 .

[20]  Jay Apt,et al.  Near-term implications of a ban on new coal-fired power plants in the United States. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Adapting arbitrary normal mutation distributions in evolution strategies: the covariance matrix adaptation , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.