Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Demand response in wholesale electricity markets: the choice of customer baseline

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Regulatory Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Given a hybrid electricity market structure, demand response (DR) in wholesale electricity markets depends critically on the choice of customer baseline. This paper reviews alternative customer baseline designs, focusing on administrative and contractual approaches. Administrative customer baselines have been developed over many years to provide estimates of the counterfactual consumption levels that would have prevailed without demand-response programs. However, experience suggests that this approach is vulnerable to opportunities for gaming and could result in illusory demand reductions. With full locational marginal price (LMP) payment, this approach imputes double-payment incentives that could induce excessive demand reduction undermining the efficiency of DR programs. Alternatively, a contractual customer baseline approach provides transparent rights and obligations for a robust framework that restores efficient DR under full LMP payment. As a retail rate design that provides two-sided contractual customer baselines, demand subscription service and DR programs form a much needed connection between the wholesale and retail markets in ways that promote price-responsive demand in a smart grid future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Borlick, R. L. (2010). Pricing negawatts. Public Utilities Fortnightly, August 14–19.

  • Bushnell J., Hobbs B., Wolak F. (2009) When it comes to demand response, is FERC its own worst enemy?. The Electricity Journal 22(8): 9–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao H. (1983) Peak load pricing and capacity planning with demand and supply uncertainty. Bell Journal of Economics 14(1): 179–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao H. (2010) Price responsive demand management for a smart grid World. Electricity Journal, 23: 7–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao H., Siddiqi R. (1993) Why service differentiation? Why now. In: Oren S., Smith S. (eds) Service opportunities for electric utilities: Creating differentiated products, topics in regulatory economics and policy series. Kluwer, Boston/Dordrecht/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao H., Wilson R. (1987) Priority service: Pricing, investment, and market organization. American Economic Review 77: 899–916

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao H., Oren S., Smith S., Wilson R. (1986) Multilevel demand subscription pricing for electric power. Energy Economics 8: 199–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao H., Oren S., Wilson R. (2005) Restructured electricity markets: A risk management approach. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao H., Oren S., Wilson R. (2008) Reevaluation of vertical integration and unbundling in restructured electricity markets. In: Sioshansi P. (ed.) Competitive electricity markets. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicchetti, C., Hogan, W. W. (1989). Including unbundled demand-side options in electric utility bidding programs, Public Utility Fortnightly, June 8.

  • Crew M., Kleindorfer P. (1978) Reliability and public utility pricing. American Economic Review 68: 31–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Crew M., Fernando C., Kleindorfer P. (1995) The theory of peak-load pricing: A survey. Journal of Regulatory Economics 83: 215–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doorman G.L. (2005) Capacity subscription: Solving the peak demand challenge in electricity markets. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 20(1): 239–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doucet J. A., Roland M. (1993) Efficient self-rationing of electricity revisited. Journal of Regulatory Economics 5: 91–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EPRI. (1986). Priority service: Unbundling the quality attributes of electric power. Electric Power Research Institute Report, EA-4851, Project 2440-2, November.

  • EPRI. (2004). Integrated engineering and economic operation of power systems. Electric Power Research Institute Report 1009483, Palo Alto, CA.

  • EPRI (2005), Electricity market transformation: A risk management approach, Electric Power Research Institute Report, Palo Alto, CA.

  • Faruqui F., Chao H., Niemeyer V., Platt J., Stalkopf K. (2001) Economics of California’s power crisis. The Energy Journal 22: 29–52

    Google Scholar 

  • FERC. (2006). Demand response and advanced metering, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Staff Report, Docket AD06-2-000, Washington, DC.

  • FERC. (2008). Wholesale competition in regions with organized electric markets, Order No. 719, 73 Fed. Reg. 64,100 (Oct. 28, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. P 31,281 (2008) (Order No. 719 or Final Rule).

  • FERC. (2009). A national assessment of demand response potential Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Staff Report; prepared by The Brattle Group Freeman, Sullivan & Co Global Energy Partners, LLC, June.

  • FERC. (2010). Demand response compensation in organized wholesale energy markets, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. RM10-17-000, Washington DC, March 18 and August 2.

  • Hirst, E., Kirby, B. (2001). Retail-load participation in competitive wholesale electricity markets, January 2001, http://webapp.psc.state.md.us/Intranet/Reports/SU_CM_appendix_A.pdf (prepared for the Edison Electric Institute and Project for Sustainable FERC Energy Policy).

  • Hogan, W. W. (2001). Hearing on FERC: Regulators in a Deregulated Electricity Market, before the United States House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs, August 2.

  • Hogan, W. W. (2009). Providing incentives for efficient demand response, Prepared for Electric Power Supply Association, Comments on PJM Demand Response Proposals, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Docket No. EL09-68-000.

  • Hogan, W. W. (2010). Implications for consumers of the NOPR’s proposal to pay the LMP for all demand response, Prepared for Electric Power Supply Association, Comments on Demand Response Compensation in Organized Wholesale Energy Markets, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Docket No. RM10-17-000.

  • ISO New England. (2008). Docket No. ER08-538-000; Filing of Changes to Day-Ahead Load Response Program (February 5).

  • ISO-NE. (2009). Status Report on the Future of Price-Responsive Demand Programs Administered by ISO New England Inc. February 13. http://www.iso-ne.com/committees/comm_wkgrps/mrkts_comm/mrkts/mtrls/2009/feb202009/a2_iso_status_report_prd_draft_version_1_02_13_09.pdf

  • Joskow, P. (2001). California’s electricity crisis (vol. 17). Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

  • Joskow P., Tirole J. (2006) Retail electricity competition. RAND Journal of Economics 37: 799–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, A. E. (2010). Affidavit attached to Reply Comments of the Demand Response Supporters, FERC Docket No. RM10-17-000, August 30.

  • Lovins A. B. (1985) Saving gigabucks with negawatts. Public Utilities Fortnightly 115(6): 24

    Google Scholar 

  • Oren S., Smith S. (1993) Service opportunities for electric utilities: Creating differentiated products, topics in regulatory economics and policy series. Kluwer, Boston/Dordrecht/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Panzar J. C., Sibley D. S. (1978) Public utility pricing under risk: The case of self-rationing. American Economic Review 68(5): 888–895

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruff L. (2002) Economic principles of demand response in electricity. Edison Electric Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney J. (2002) The California electricity crisis. Hoover Institution Press, Stanford, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellinghoff J., Morenoff D. (2007) Recognizing the importance of demand response: The second half of the wholesale electric market equation. Energy Law Journal 28(2): 389–419

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson R. (1989) Efficient and competitive rationing. Econometrica 57: 1–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woo C. K. (1990) Efficient electricity pricing with self-rationing. Journal of Regulatory Economics 2: 69–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ISO New England Inc., One Sullivan Road, Holyoke, MA, 01040, USA

    Hung-po Chao

Authors
  1. Hung-po Chao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hung-po Chao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chao, Hp. Demand response in wholesale electricity markets: the choice of customer baseline. J Regul Econ 39, 68–88 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-010-9135-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-010-9135-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation