Customer Preferences for Metering and Connectivity Metering Americas 2004 San Diego, CA March 24-26,...

Customer Preferences for Metering and Connectivity

Metering Americas 2004

San Diego, CA

March 24-26, 2004

Lynn Fryer Stein

Primen

2

Agenda

Study methodology

Participant characteristics

Notifications times and modes

Tools to encourage participation in DR

Conclusions

3

Quantitative Survey Method

Data collected between August 19 and September 10, 2004

All interviews conducted via telephone

Respondents included facility manager, building manager, operations manager and chief engineer

Average survey length was 24 minutes

Survey focused on four utility programs– Energy information

– Innovative pricing

– Demand response

– Outage notification

4

Respondent Distribution

All results were weighted to reflect actual population and avoid being skewed by over-sampling across segmentation categories

Size of company

Type of company Estimated peak demand

5

The Main Job of Customers is Not Energy

How often do you attend to energy?

6

How Much Time Do You Spend on Energy?

0 5 10 15 20

Mass

Large

Very large

Total Median

Mean

Percent

7

Customers and Utilities Don’t Speak the Same Language

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Demandresponse

Intervalmeters

Load shapes Peak demand Kilowatt Kilowatt hour

% very familiar

Mass (< 150 kW)

Large (150 kW - 1499 kW)

Very large (≥1500 kW)

8

Familiarity with Energy Terms

We asked how familiar with the following terms:

Demand response

Interval meters

Load shapes

Peak demand

Kilowatt

Kilowatt hour

Assigned score of 0-5

9

Primary Energy Concerns Facing Customers

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Keeping energycosts down

Managingfluctuating

costs withinbudget

Avoidingdowntime due

to outages

Protectingequipment from

PQ problems

Extendingequipment life

Identifying loadcontrol

opportunities

Trackingenergy use

Not knowingpower is out

Not knowingrestoration

time

Mass (<150 kW)

Large (150 kW - 1499 kW)

Very large (≥1500 kW)

%

10

When Do Customers Want to Communicate?

When they “need” their utility

The most pressing need is outage notification– Out of 25 questions related to value of helpfulness of

communication programs only two were rated at a “10” by a majority of respondents

Notification of when power is to be restored (52%)

Ability to retrieve estimate of power restoration (54%)

Value of other programs – pricing, demand response, energy information – limited to niche markets and smaller groups of customers

11

Outage Communications – Phone Calls Preferred

12

Non-outage Issues – One-way Communications Preferred

45% of customers prefer an e-mail, page or text message

Only 3% find such communication methods unacceptable

A utility employing a broadcast system that could send e-mail, page or text messages would meet the needs of 97% of the C&I population

13

Outages Are a Major Concern

56% of customers state avoiding downtime due to power outages is a major concern

However, lengthy power outages are rare:– 58% experienced no more than two outages lasting < 5 minutes

– 71% experienced no more than two outages lasting > 5 minutes

– 28% experienced no power outages at all

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Less than 15min

15 - 30 min 31 - 59 min 1 hr - lessthan 2 hrs

2 hr s- lessthan 4 hrs

4 hrs - lessthan 12 hrs

12-24 hrs More than 1day

%

14

Usefulness of Outage Notification Programs

15

Outage Notification – Additional Information

16

Little Interest in Demand Response

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 - Not atall likely

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-Extremely

likely

Likelihood of participating in curtailment program%

Likelihood of participatingin load curtailment

Percent of time spent on energy

Those who spend more time on energy are more likely to participate

17

What is Minimum Advance Notice You’d Need to Participate in Curtailment Program?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Industrial Institutional Commercial

18

Preferred Communication Modes for Curtailment Notification

24%

11%

22%

34%

5%1%

3% phone call from utility person

automated phone call

fax

email to computer

email to PDA

text message to cell phone

info posted on w ebsite

19

Tools to Aid Participation in DR

Helpfulness of demand response tools

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Energy use data tomonitor compliance

Real- time estimates ofsavings

Post-event savingsestimates

Control systems throughcustomer

Control systems throughutility

% rating 8-10

Mass (< 150 kW)Large (150 kW - 1499 kW)Very large (≥1500 kW)

There is less interest in post-event savings estimates (20% to 40%) among LES similar C&I states

20

Flexible Demand Response Communications

Preferences for communication method by minimum advanced

notice of curtailment periodMinimum advance notice required

for demand response by size

21

Automated Controls Need to Interface With Variety of Equipment

With customer override, 30% of very large, 40% of large and 47% of mass market customers would allow utility to remotely control equipment

22

Exception Reporting and Benchmarking Valued

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Energy used each day and cost

Graphs of current energy use in 15-minor hourly intervals

Prior year's energy use

Notification when power qualityproblem occurred at facility

Exception reports that highlight unusualincreases in consumption

Benchmarking of energy use acrossfacilities in company

Benchmarking of energy use betweenfacility and other similar facilities

Submetering

% rating 8-10

Mass (<150 kW)

Large (150 kW - 1499 kW)

Very large (≥1500 kW)

23

Preferences for Energy Consumption Data

24

The Frequency of Receiving Energy Information Impacts Technology Selection

Customer preferences for method of receiving energy consumption data

Preferred method of receiving information

Preferred frequency for receiving data

Mass (<150 kW)

Large (150 kW - 1499 kW)

Very large(1500 kW)

Monthly With monthly bill - 54%Email - 24% Website - 10%Fax - 12%

With monthly bill - 42%Email - 32% Website - 19%Fax - 8%

With monthly bill - 19%Email - 45%Website - 28%Fax - 7%

Daily With monthly bill - 25%Email - 27%|Website - 29%Fax - 20%

With monthly bill - 12% Email - 46% Website - 32%Fax - 10%

Email - 42%Website - 58%

Every 15-minutes N/A N/A Website - 87%Email - 13%

Note:This table shows customer preferences for the means of receiving energy consumption as a function of their preferences for how frequently to receive that information. Note that 25% of the mass market and 12% of the large segment indicate a preference with which no utility could comply — to receive information daily, but have it included with their monthly bill.

25

Larger Customers Can Tolerate Shorter Notice Time

26

Tools That Help with Pricing

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Monitoring and control systems toallow utility to automatically lower

use based on price signals

Monitoring and control systems toallow customer to quickly reduceenergy use based on price signals

Tool to predict how changes toequipment or energy use would

impact bill

Access to historical usage andbilling information

Access to current usageinformation

Tool to help choose the optimumrate plan

Mass (<150 kW)

Large (150 kW - 1499 kW)

Very large (≥1500 kW)

Customer communication preferences for innovative rates - services that would be helpful when participating in a variable pricing program

% rating 8 - 10

27

Conclusions

Customers really want to communicate with utility about outages

Energy information systems could share infrastructure with outage notification/management systems

Meter/machine to utility communications are transparent to customer

Demand response and energy information are of interest to a small subset of customers

Controlling energy costs is a major concern

Most customers do not have tools to manage energy costs

Energy information and automated control would help customers participate in demand response programs

28

Discussion

Lynn Fryer Stein

lfryerstein@primen.com

303.545.0100 x335