Refocusing Rate Design Debates

Deck: 

Public Interest before Special Interest

Fortnightly Magazine - November 2016
This full article is only accessible by current license holders. Please login to view the full content.
Don't have a license yet? Click here to sign up for Public Utilities Fortnightly, and gain access to the entire Fortnightly article database online.

Utilities compete with distributed generation and microgrids. Regulators as well as stakeholders address the challenges of potential death spirals. And rate design is finally getting attention.

The primary economic goal of utility regulation is to have regulated utilities and their customers produce and consume the same economically efficient amount of power that would occur under competition.

This fundamental goal gets lost in the morass of other goals, such as reasonable revenue requirements, billing or metering limitations, and protecting the environment.

Economically efficient concepts of pricing have been forgotten in the wake of distributed generation. They’ve been replaced by concepts such as net metering, avoided costs, feed-in tariffs and decoupling. Economic efficient rate design has fallen prey to concepts such as rate discounts, average cost pricing and income stability.

Regardless of the market structure, government often needs to intercede to internalize externalities such as protecting the needy. But in unregulated markets, these changes are made after the market (not the regulator) sets prices. Too often under retail utility regulation, solutions to externalities are built upon the shaky foundation of rate designs that encourage inefficient behavior by producers and consumers.

This full article is only accessible by current license holders. Please login to view the full content.
Don't have a license yet? Click here to sign up for Public Utilities Fortnightly, and gain access to the entire Fortnightly article database online.