The ESKOM Pilot Testing and Findings of the Residential Time-of-Use Tariff (Homeflex) Project by Vashna Singh and Marcus Dekenah 17 October 2006.
Post on 16-Dec-2015
215 Views
Preview:
Transcript
The ESKOM Pilot The ESKOM Pilot
Testing and Findings of the Testing and Findings of the
Residential Time-of-Use Residential Time-of-Use
Tariff (Homeflex) ProjectTariff (Homeflex) Project
by Vashna Singh and Marcus Dekenah
17 October 2006
Contents
• Objective of Homeflex• Background• Market Drivers• Pilot Objectives• Pilot Testing• Pilot Results• Conclusions• Questions
The Objective
• The objective of the Homeflex Pilot Project is to develop and introduce a residential time-of-use tariff that will penetrate the market and provide incentives and benefits to customers which will ultimately result in the optimization of the country’s peak demand curve profile.
Background • Eskom identified the need for Residential
Time-of Use tariff.• A tariff (Homeflex) was developed,
various pilots were run - less than 5% load shift.
• Various other load management & efficiency strategies were studied during this period - not integrated with the tariff.
• Changing environment - WEPS, ISEP, ESI, EDI - tariff become outdated.
• A revised Business Case was proposed and accepted by Distribution Group Sales - recommended piloting of tariff with load management technologies.
Market Drivers
• The continued increase in Eskom’s peak demand and requirements for increased capacity decisions that need to be made.
• A requirement for increased sales in off-peak times.
• The Energy Policy White Paper and DME’s Electricity Pricing Policy stipulations for time-of-use tariffs, cost reflective tariffs, differentiated capacity charges and sophisticated tariffs for the upper market.
• Increased customer needs for flexibility and lower costs - increase in customer service due to reduced bills and more value adding options.
Market Drivers
• Load shifting in an all electric market reduces the Distributor’s purchase costs and increase profitability.
• Better alignment to WEPS - increased incentive to shift load, resulting in improved net contribution for the Distributor.
• A target market exists for medium to high residential consumers who have ability to shift load.
• Major market for Homeflex lies in municipal areas (still benefit Eskom Generation).
Pilot objectives
• Primary aim: to determine whether a TOU pricing signal would encourage customers to shift their electricity consumption from peak to off peak periods.
• Other aspects tested: Customer’s acceptance of and
response to the tariff and load management technologies.
The Distributor’s support structures required for the implementation of Homeflex e.g. Metering, Billing, Contact Centre, Field Services.
Pilot Testing
• Pilots funded by Eskom’s DSM.• Revised pilots were launched at eThekwini
Electricity and Sandton, Tableview was a new site.
• Three pilots were run - Tableview, Sandton and Durban Metro.
• Each Pilot sample was made up of – 50 Test customer on 2 Part Homeflex tariff,– 50 Test customers on 3 Part Homeflex
tariff,– 50 Control customers (on Homepower)
• An ABB Load Research installed at each together with current domestic meter.
Pilot Testing
• Durban Metro pilot (customer controlled load management - timers used), pilot is closed.
• Tableview Pilot (utility controlled load management - Flexicon system used), pilot is closed.
• The Sandton pilot is still in operation to test other metering options.
Pilot Results
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250
Consumption [kWh/mth]
Gey
ser
Ow
ners
hip
[pu]
Source: NRS/TSI LR projects 1994-2003
Who has a geyser?
Customers over 500kwh/mth
Who is the target?
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Consumption [kWh/mth]
Cu
m p
rob
ab
ilit
y o
f c
on
su
mp
tio
n
Analysis of C1,C2,C3 sales Y2002
Load shift: Sandton
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time of day (hour)
Ave
rag
e lo
ad (
kW)
CON
TOU2
TOU3
Avg. Winter weekday, 2002
Mid-range customers only
Load shift: Tableview
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time of day (hour)
Ave
rag
e lo
ad (
kW)
CON
TOU2
TOU3
Avg. Winter weekday, 2002
Mid-range customers only
Modeled response to TOU
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time of day (hour)
Avg
erag
e w
inte
r w
eekd
ay l
oad
(kW
)
STOU
SCON
TTOU
TCON
Avg. Winter weekday
Summary of load shift*
AM07h00-10h00
PM18h00-20h00
Sandton 0.9 kW/hh(-17%)
0.5 kW/hh(-7%)
Tableview 0.7 kW/hh(-30%)
0.9 kW/hh(-29%)
Eskom target market
0.76 kW/hh(-23%)-86MW
0.72kW/hh(-18%)-82MW
*Avg. high season weekday per model. Highest mean saving per time-interval in PSO peak-slot shown.
Summary (Contd.)
• TOU2/TOU3 does not affect consumption.
• Profile of TOU2/TOU3 the same.• Profile of TOU2/3 different from
Homepower control. Geyser control is profile modifier.
• Difference between local/remote load control.
• Elasticity not modelled.
Outputs
• Statistical conclusions based on 200 consumers.
• Annual hourly profile model with household (C, TOU2/3) and network (WEPS) sales and load.
• TOU Tariffs can be tested on model.• Profile model can be applied to
each Accops.
Implementation Strategies
• Pilot testing proved that Eskom’s Distribution support structures can adequately handle Homeflex.
• Lessons from pilot test show that the metering technologies and integration with billing system needs further refinement in order to develop a more feasible and cost effective package for roll out.
• A request for a metering, load management and data management solution was sent out to the market.
• The Request for Proposal is currently being evaluated.• Chosen technologies will be tested for suitability,
implementation readiness and customer acceptance in a Proof of Concept Phase later this year.
Conclusion
• Homeflex may be usefully practiced on consumers using more than 500kWh/month.
• Response to a 2 part or 3 part tariff is not distinguishable, but was distinguishable from the control groups.
• The introduction of the tariff did not change the levels of consumption.
• The tariff may be the “glue” that keeps the load shedding devices in place, operating normally and untampered.
Conclusion
• To make load management strategy most successful, the customer must see direct benefits. A time-of-use tariff is an extremely effective strategy which provides immediate incentives for customers to do load shifting, hence reaping direct benefits.
top related