IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v41y2020i1p199-240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Efficiency and Distributional Effects of Alternative Residential Electricity Rate Designs

Author

Listed:
  • Scott P. Burger
  • Christopher R. Knittel
  • Ignacio J. Perez-Arriaga
  • Ian Schneider
  • Frederik vom Scheidt

Abstract

Electricity tariffs typically charge residential users a volumetric rate that covers the bulk of energy, transmission, and distribution costs. The resulting prices, charged per unit of electricity consumed, do not reflect marginal costs and vary little across time and space. The emergence of distributed energy resources—such as solar photovoltaics and energy storage—has sparked interest among regulators and utilities in reforming electricity tariffs to enable more efficient utilization of these resources. The economic pressure to redesign electricity rates is countered by concerns of how more efficient rate structures might impact different socioeconomic groups. We analyze the bill impacts of alternative rate plans using interval metering data for more than 100,000 customers in the Chicago, Illinois area. We combine these data with granular Census data to assess the incidence of bill changes across different socioeconomic groups. We find that low-income customers would face bill increases on average in a transition to more economically efficient electricity tariffs. However, we demonstrate that simple changes to fixed charges in two-part tariffs can mitigate these disparities while preserving all, or the vast majority, of the efficiency gains. These designs rely exclusively on observable information and could be replicated by utilities in many geographies across the U.S.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott P. Burger & Christopher R. Knittel & Ignacio J. Perez-Arriaga & Ian Schneider & Frederik vom Scheidt, 2020. "The Efficiency and Distributional Effects of Alternative Residential Electricity Rate Designs," The Energy Journal, , vol. 41(1), pages 199-240, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:41:y:2020:i:1:p:199-240
    DOI: 10.5547/01956574.41.1.sbur
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/01956574.41.1.sbur
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/01956574.41.1.sbur?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arik Levinson & Emilson Silva, 2022. "The Electric Gini: Income Redistribution through Energy Prices," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 341-365, May.
    2. Baker, Paul & Blundell, Richard, 1991. "The Microeconometric Approach to Modelling Energy Demand: Some Results for UK Households," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 54-76, Summer.
    3. Koichiro Ito, 2014. "Do Consumers Respond to Marginal or Average Price? Evidence from Nonlinear Electricity Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 537-563, February.
    4. Brown,Stephen J. & Sibley,David Sumner, 1986. "The Theory of Public Utility Pricing," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314008, October.
    5. Anthony B. Atkinson & Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2015. "Lectures on Public Economics Updated edition," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 2, number 10493.
    6. Joskow, Paul L., 2008. "Capacity payments in imperfect electricity markets: Need and design," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 159-170, September.
    7. Frank A. Wolak, 2011. "Do Residential Customers Respond to Hourly Prices? Evidence from a Dynamic Pricing Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 83-87, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scott P. Burger & Christopher R. Knittel & Ignacio J. Pérez-Arriaga & Ian Schneider & Frederik vom Scheidt, 2019. "The Efficiency and Distributional Effects of Alternative Residential Electricity Rate Designs," NBER Working Papers 25570, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Phuong Ho, 2023. "Nonlinear pricing, biased consumers, and regulatory policy," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 138(2), pages 149-164, March.
    3. ITO Koichiro & IDA Takanori & TANAKA Makoto, 2015. "The Persistence of Moral Suasion and Economic Incentives: Field experimental evidence from energy demand," Discussion papers 15014, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    4. Harding, Matthew & Lamarche, Carlos, 2019. "A panel quantile approach to attrition bias in Big Data: Evidence from a randomized experiment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 61-82.
    5. Bert Willems & Juulia Zhou, 2020. "The Clean Energy Package and Demand Response: Setting Correct Incentives," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Klaus Eisenack & Mathias Mier, 2019. "Peak-load pricing with different types of dispatchability," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 105-124, December.
    7. Manuel Frondel and Gerhard Kussel, 2019. "Switching on Electricity Demand Response: Evidence for German Households," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 5).
    8. Lin, Boqiang & Zhu, Penghu, 2021. "Has increasing block pricing policy been perceived in China? Evidence from residential electricity use," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Valeria Di Cosmo & Sean Lyons & Anne Nolan, 2014. "Estimating the Impact of Time-of-Use Pricing on Irish Electricity Demand," The Energy Journal, , vol. 35(2), pages 117-136, April.
    10. Gilbert, Ben & Graff Zivin, Joshua, 2014. "Dynamic salience with intermittent billing: Evidence from smart electricity meters," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 176-190.
    11. Kostakis, Ioannis & Lolos, Sarantis & Sardianou, Eleni, 2021. "Residential natural gas demand: Assessing the evidence from Greece using pseudo-panels, 2012–2019," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Wichman, Casey, 2024. "Efficiency, Equity, and Cost-Recovery Trade-Offs in Municipal Water Pricing," RFF Working Paper Series 24-18, Resources for the Future.
    13. Thoa Thi Kim Nguyen & Koji Shimada & Yuki Ochi & Takuya Matsumoto & Hiroshi Matsugi & Takao Awata, 2016. "An Experimental Study of the Impact of Dynamic Electricity Pricing on Consumer Behavior: An Analysis for a Remote Island in Japan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, December.
    14. Iztok Podbregar & Sanja Filipović & Mirjana Radovanović & Olga Mirković Isaeva & Polona Šprajc, 2021. "Electricity Prices and Consumer Behavior, Case Study Serbia—Randomized Control Trials Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-12, January.
    15. Michael K. Price, 2014. "Using field experiments to address environmental externalities and resource scarcity: major lessons learned and new directions for future research," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 30(4), pages 621-638.
    16. Kahn, Matthew E. & Walsh, Randall, 2015. "Cities and the Environment," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 405-465, Elsevier.
    17. Winston W. Chang & Tai‐Liang Chen, 2022. "Multi‐tier pricing in uniform and non‐uniform tax/subsidy systems," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 18(4), pages 486-508, December.
    18. Bo wang & Nana Deng & Wenhui Zhao & Zhaohua Wang, 2022. "Residential power demand side management optimization based on fine-grained mixed frequency data," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 603-622, September.
    19. Lang, Corey & Qiu, Yueming (Lucy) & Dong, Luran, 2023. "Increasing voluntary enrollment in time-of-use electricity rates: Findings from a survey experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Lisa Bagnoli & Salvador Bertomeu & Antonio Estache & Maria Vagliasindi, 2020. "Are the Poor Better Off with Public or Private Utilities ?A Survey of the Academic Evidence on Developing Economies," Working Papers ECARES 2020-24, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:41:y:2020:i:1:p:199-240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.