1 case study of demand response: con edison business program by eileen egan-annechino consolidated...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Case Study of Demand Response:
Con Edison Business Program
by
Eileen Egan-Annechino
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
2
Background
Residential Pilot Summer 2001
PSC Approval April 2002
Installations Begin June 2002
Business Pilot Summer 2004
PSC Approval September 2005
Installations Begin November 2005
3
Program Design
Design Objective
• Cost-effective load reduction
• Adequately verifiable
• Acceptable to customers
Quantitative Objective
• Summer peak kW load reduction
• Level of overrides
Qualitative Objectives
• Marketing strategy
• Customer understanding, satisfaction & reaction
• Barriers to participation
• Type of business most suitable for participation
4
Program Technology
• Programmable Thermostat
• Two-way pager communications, which ensures verification, remote access via Internet (customer and utility)
• Runtime & temperature data available (7 days)
• Capable of duty cycle control or temperature control
• Overrides can be tracked
5
Thermostat
L a r g e , b a c k l it L C D w ith c h a r a c te r m e s s a g in g
7 - d a y p r o g r a m m in g 4 p e r io d s p e r d a y
C le a n f i lt e r in d ic a to r
2 - w a y c o m m u n ic a t io n s
C u r ta ilm e n t o v e r r id e
Built into unit
6
Program Features
The Offer
• Programmable Thermostat• Control central air-conditioning system manually or remotely using the Internet
• Free Installation
• Bonus gift of $50
• Override without penalty
The Benefits
• Manage Energy Costs• Customized temperature settings
• Cool space only when occupied
• Internet access
• Monitor room temperature
• Adjust remotely
Energy Savings
• Business controls energy consumption
7
Recruitment and Participation
Recruitment
• Door-to-door marketing is the primary marketing strategy for the business customer
• Program specific web site which allows on-line applications
Participation
• 5,100 thermostats in 3,800 facilities (8MW)
• Some “technical” turn-downs
• Lack of access, existing equipment not working properly or in poor condition
8
Program Evaluation
Run Time Data Collection/Analysis
• Recovery of site data
• Run time duty cycle combined w/maximum load draw
• Comparison analysis of control day and baseline day
Customer Surveys
• Post Installation
• “Technical turndown”
• Annual Post-Season (2006 in progress)
9
Summer 2006
10
Load Impact
August 1st- August 3rd
Major heat wave - +100 deg. Temperatures
• Average peak impact 1.7kW – 2.0kW per cac
• Overrides average 19% to 25% (day 3)
• 65% of cac units running “flat out” on baseline day (8/1)
• Average temperature increase less than 3 degrees
11
Customer Impacts
• First curtailment experience for majority of customers
• Typical curtailments are 2-6 hours
• August 2006 – 10-14 hour duration
• Extraordinary heat wave exceeded design temperature of many cac units
• Most customers did not remember how to override
• Less than 2% of participants withdrew from program
• 2006 Annual survey in progress
12
Program Design Considerations
Vary control based on weather conditions and length of curtailment
• Duty Cycle more effective for short-term curtailments (typical 1- 6pm)
• Temperature control may more effective for long-term curtailments
13