Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Exploring the impact of network tariffs on household electricity expenditures using load profiles and socio-economic characteristics

Abstract

Growing self-generation and storage are expected to cause significant changes in residential electricity utilization patterns. Commonly applied volumetric network tariffs may induce imbalance between different groups of households and their respective contribution to recovering the operating costs of the grid. Understanding consumer behaviour and appliance usage together with socio-economic factors can help regulatory authorities to adapt network tariffs to new circumstances in a fair way. Here, we assess the effects of 11 network tariff scenarios on household budgets using real load profiles from 765 households. Thus we explore the possibly disruptive impact of applying peak-load-based tariffs on the budgets of households when they have been mainly charged for consumed volumes before. Our analysis estimates the change in household network expenditure for different combinations of energy, peak and fixed charges, and can help to design tariffs that recover the costs needed for the sustainable operation of the grid.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Change in annual network expenditure under different tariff scenarios.
Fig. 2: Comparison of the load profiles of different types of households in our subsample with respective standardized load profile H0.
Fig. 3: Percentage of households exceeding certain load thresholds at a certain time of the day at least once during the observation period.

References

  1. Pérez-Arriaga, I. J. & Smeers, Y. in Transport Pricing of Electricity Networks Ch. 7 (Springer, Boston, MA, 2003).

  2. Jenkins, J. D. & Pérez-Arriaga, I. J. Improved regulatory approaches for the remuneration of electricity distribution utilities with high penetrations of distributed energy resources. Energy J. 38, 63–91 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schreiber, M., Wainstein, M. E., Hochloff, P. & Dargaville, R. Flexible electricity tariffs: power and energy price signals designed for a smarter grid. Energy 93, 2568–2581 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Linvill, C., Shenot, J. & Lazar, J. Designing Distributed Generation Tariffs Well: Fair Compensation in a Time of Transition (Regulatory Assistance Project, 2013).

  5. Rodríguez Ortega, M. P., Pérez-Arriaga, J. I., Abbad, J. R. & González, J. P. Distribution network tariffs: A closed question? Energy Policy 36, 1712–1725 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mountain, B. The rise of distributed generation and storage in South Australia. Energy Spectr. 549, 17–19 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bronski, P. et al. The Economics of Grid Defection (Rocky Mountain Institute, 2014); http://go.nature.com/ZXC65t

  8. Nijhuis, M., Gibescu, M. & Cobben, J. F. G. Analysis of reflectivity and predictability of electricity network tariff structures for household consumers. Energy Policy 109, 631–641 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schill, W. P., Zerrahn, A. & Kunz, F. Prosumage of solar electricity: pros, cons, and the system perspective. Econ. Energy Environ. Policy 6, 7–31 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Picciariello, A., Vergara, C., Reneses, J., Frías, P. & Söder, L. Electricity distribution tariffs and distributed generation: quantifying cross-subsidies from consumers to prosumers. Util. Policy 37, 23–33 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cossent, R., Gómez, T. & Frías, P. Towards a future with large penetration of distributed generation: Is the current regulation of electricity distribution ready? Regulatory recommendations under a European perspective. Energy Policy 37, 1145–1155 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson, E., Beppler, R., Blackburn, C., Staver, B., Brown, M. & Matisoff, D. Peak shifting and cross-class subsidization: the impacts of solar PV on changes in electricity costs. Energy Policy 106, 436–444 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Eid, C., Guillén, J. R., Marín, P. F. & Hakvoort, R. The economic effect of electricity net-metering with solar PV: consequences for network cost recovery, cross subsidies and policy objectives. Energy Policy 75, 244–254 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pérez-Arriaga, I. J., Schwene, S., Ruester, S., Batlle, C. & Glachan, J. M. From Distribution Networks to Smart Distribution Systems: Rethinking the Regulation of European Electricity DSOs Final Report (THINK, 2013).

  15. Chapman, A. J., McLellan, B. & Tezuka, T. Residential solar PV policy: an analysis of impacts, successes and failures in the Australian case. Renew. Energy 86, 1265–1279 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Macintosh, A. & Wilkinson, D. Searching for public benefits in solar subsidies: a case study on the Australian government’s residential photovoltaic rebate program. Energy Policy 39, 3199–3209 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Castaneda, M., Jimenez, M., Zapata, S., Franco, C. J. & Dyner, I. Myths and facts of the utility death spiral. Energy Policy 110, 105–116 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Laws, N. D., Epps, B. P., Peterson, S. O., Laser, M. S. & Wanjiru, G. K. On the utility death spiral and the impact of utility rate structures on the adoption of residential solar photovoltaics and energy storage. Appl. Energy 185, 627–641 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kind, P. Disruptive Challenges: Financial Implications and Strategic responses to a Changing Retail Electric Business (Edison Electric Institute, 2013).

  20. Severance, C. A. A Practical, affordable (and least business risk) plan to achieve “80% clean electricity” by 2035. Electr. J. 24, 8–26 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Muaafa, M., Adjali, I., Bean, P., Fuentes, R., Kimbrough, S. O. & Murphy, F. H. Can adoption of rooftop solar panels trigger a utility death spiral? A tale of two US cities. Energy Res. Social. Sci. 34, 154–162 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Costello, K. W. & Hemphill, R. C. Electric utilities’ ‘death spiral’: hyperbole or reality? Distribution pricing: theoretical principles and practical approaches. Electr. J. 27, 7–26 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Passey, R., Haghdadi, N., Bruce, A. & MacGill, I. Designing more cost reflective electricity network tariffs with demand charges. Energy Policy 109, 642–649 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Borenstein, S. The economics of fixed cost recovery by utilities. Electr. J. 29, 5–12 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McLaren, J., Davidson, C., Miller, J. & Bird, L. Impact of rate design alternatives on residential solar customer bills: increased fixed charges, minimum bills and demand-based rates. Electr. J. 28, 43–58 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jargstorf, J., Kessels, K. & Belmans, R. Capacity-based grid fees for residential customers. In 10th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM) 1–8 (IEEE, 2013); https://doi.org/10.1109/EEM.2013.6607294

  27. Hledik, R. Rediscovering residential demand charges. Electr. J. 27, 82–96 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Reneses, J. & Rodríguez Ortega, M. P. Distribution pricing: theoretical principles and practical approaches. IET Gener. Transm. Dis. 8, 1645–1655 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Simshauser, P. Distribution network prices and solar PV: resolving rate instability and wealth transfers through demand tariffs. Energy Econ. 54, 108–122 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Strielkowski, W., Štreimikienė, D. & Bilan, Y. Network charging and residential tariffs: a case of household photovoltaics in the United Kingdom. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 77, 461–473 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hledik, R. & Greenstein, G. The distributional impacts of residential demand charges. Electr. J. 29, 33–41 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rubin, S. Moving toward demand-based residential rates. Electr. J. 28, 63–71 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Blank, L. & Gegax, D. Residential winners and losers behind the energy versus customer charge debate. Electr. J. 27, 31–39 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Faruqui, A. The ethics of dynamic pricing. Electr. J. 23, 13–27 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bonright, J.C. Principles of Public Utility Rates (Columbia University Press, New York, 1961).

  36. Brown, T., Faruqui, A. & Grausz, L. Efficient tariff structures for distribution network services. Econ. Anal. Policy 48, 139–149 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Picciariello, A., Reneses, J., Frías, P. & Söder, L. Distributed generation and distribution pricing: Why do we need new tariff design methodologies? Electr. Power Syst. Res. 119, 370–376 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sakhrani, V. & Parsons, J. Electricity Network Tariff Architectures: A Comparison of Four OECD Countries No. 10–008 (Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, 2010).

  39. Adapting Distribution Network Tariffs to a Decentralised Energy Future (EDSO for Smart Grids, 2015); http://www.edsoforsmartgrids.eu/wp-content/uploads/151014_Adapting-distribution-network-tariffs-to-a-decentralised-energy-future_final.pdf

  40. Network Tariffs (EURELECTRIC, 2016); http://www.eurelectric.org/media/268408/network_tariffs__position_paper_final_as-2016-030-0149-01-e.pdf

  41. Klaassen, E. A. M., Kobus, C. B. A., Frunt, J. & Slootweg, J. G. Responsiveness of residential electricity demand to dynamic tariffs: experiences from a large field test in Netherlands. Appl. Energy 183, 1065–1074 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ayres, I., Raseman, S. & Shih, A. Evidence from two large field experiments that peer comparison feedback can reduce residential energy usage. J. Law Econ. Organ. 29, 992–1022 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zählwerte, Datenformate und standardisierte Lastprofile, Sonstige Marktregeln Strom—Version 3.3, Kapitel 6, 1–73 (Energie-Control Austria, 2011).

  44. Fares, R. L. & Webber, M. E. The impacts of storing solar energy in the home to reduce reliance on the utility. Nat. Energy 2, 17001 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sommerfeld, J., Buys, L., Mengersen, K. & Vine, D. Influence of demographic variables on uptake of domestic solar photovoltaic technology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 67, 315–323 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. De Groote, O., Pepermans, G. & Verboven, F. Heterogeneity in the adoption of photovoltaic systems in Flanders. Energy Econ. 59, 45–57 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zellner, A. An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 57, 348–368 (1962).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. Verordnung der Regulierungskommission der E-Control, mit der die Entgelte für die Systemnutzung bestimmt werden (Systemnutzungsentgelte-Verordnung 2012 in der Fassung der Novelle 2016) SNE-VO 2012 idF Novelle 2016, 1–12 (Energie-Control Austria, 2016); https://www.e-control.at/documents/20903/388512/SNE-2012-idF-Novelle-2016-konsolidiert.pdf/cef56a01-20b8-4b7c-8cb3-9429a6a56271

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was done as a part of PEAKapp project that has received funding under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement No. 695945 (http://www.peakapp.eu/). A.K. received additional funding from the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (No. 848114). D.E. and C.F. gratefully acknowledge the financial support by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy, the Austrian National Foundation for Research, Technology and Development and the Federal State of Salzburg. This research was enriched through discussions about international network regulation with B. Mountain, R. Muruais, J. Cohen and D. Pezenka.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

A.K. and J.R. were primarily responsible for the creation and implementation of the survey instrument. D.E. and C.F. were primarily responsible for the creation and management of the dataset, including load profiles. V.A. and J.R. mainly contributed to data analysis. All authors contributed to the writing of the paper with V.A., A.K. and J.R. as the primary authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johannes Reichl.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures 1–3, Supplementary Tables 1–6, Supplementary Notes 1–3 and Supplementary References.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Azarova, V., Engel, D., Ferner, C. et al. Exploring the impact of network tariffs on household electricity expenditures using load profiles and socio-economic characteristics. Nat Energy 3, 317–325 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0105-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0105-4

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing