The campaign to conserve electricity in the home needs to pay more attention to consumers and not just fix on the gee-whiz technology of smart meters, a leading energy conservation advocacy organization says.

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) released a report yesterday summarizing 57 pilot tests of household energy conservation strategies in this country and abroad, finding that annual electricity savings ranged from 4 to 12 percent.

The good news from the tests is that consumers can trim their electricity consumption significantly, said Steven Nadel, ACEEE's executive director.

"The bad news is that smart meters alone don't get the job done," said Nadel, taking issue with the swarm of attention surrounding the accelerating rollout of smart meters around the country.

To realize the potential savings in household electricity use, consumers must be provided a range of "positive reinforcement" through up-to-the-minute feedback showing them that their conservation efforts matter, he said.

Many utilities are deploying smart meters for their own business purposes, ACEEE concludes. The devices eliminate the need for meter readers, permit remote customer connections and disconnects, and speed restoration of service after storms.

But programs to enlist consumer support are lagging, the council contends. "No U.S. utilities are providing the full range of needed services we recommend," said Karen Ehrhardt-Martinez, senior research associate at the University of Colorado's Renewable And Sustainable Energy Institute, one of the report's authors. Non-utility service providers, such as Google's PowerMeter energy usage tracker, could take up the slack, says ACEEE.

"There is a lot we could be doing to help every Americans to become part of the solution," Ehrhardt-Martinez said.

Confusion lingers from Md. decision
The ACEE report does not give similar weight to proposals for real-time or time-of-use pricing -- controversial policies that would permit utilities to vary their electricity rates during the day based on the costs they pay for wholesale power. Some leading analysts argue that unless consumers see, and pay for, the true cost of power when demand peaks, they won't have the financial motivation to turn off appliances or shift thermostat settings in the heat of the day, or run the laundry at night, when prices fall.

Ehrhardt-Martinez said the ACEEE study shows that some programs have achieved large electricity savings with the economic motivation of time-of-use rates.

"The focus on financial benefits may backfire," said John "Skip" Laitner, ACEEE's director of economic and social analysis. It is more critical to appeal to people's sense of responsibility as energy consumers, he said. Feedback that shows customers how their energy use changes when they try to conserve and how they stack up in comparison with their neighbors can be a powerful motivator, he said.

Last week's decision by the Maryland Public Service Commission to reject a smart meter deployment plan by Baltimore Gas & Electric Co., the state's largest utility, was based in large part on the regulators' disapproval of the utility's plan to collect the program's costs up front through a customer surcharge, Nadel noted.

5 Comments

1. 1. candide 02:09 PM 6/30/10

   I have a "time of use" meter and even with the exact same energy usage I will receive up to $500 per year savings - as most of my usage is "off peak" anyway.
   
   Assuming I attempt to actually reduce my electricity usage my savings can be even greater.
   
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. borrows1 07:57 AM 7/1/10

   The technology should be cost effective (save money) out of the box. If the administrative cost savings to the utility is sufficient to pay for the technology over its expected life -- its a no brainer -- deploy. If, in order to be cost effective, assumptions must be made about changes in customer behavior as a result of the information, then those assumptions must be examined, perhaps by experiment. There is no room in this decision for "doing it for the environment" or "don't do it because meter readers will lose their jobs." Cold - hard dollars and cents is where the sensible answer will be found.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. mathor 09:45 AM 7/1/10

   In Ontario, we are billed by "time of Use", with peak hours almost double $/kWh. In summer the peak hours are 11am to 5pm and off-peak from 9pm to 7am. Mid-peak fills in the difference. Weekends and holidays are 24h off-peak times.I am retired so I'm home
   much of the time. By running my pool-pump at night only and by setting my air to 24-25 (Celsius) during the day and 21 for 11pm to 7:30 am, I have gone from 53% peak hours to 7% peak and 73% off-peak use. I believe that My bills this year will be down from previous years before the smart meters came on line.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. olderone 10:18 AM 7/1/10

   I live in San Pablo, Ca, we just got the smart meters and I've already noticed that my bill is lower than before the installation. I haven't experienced the peak hour rates, but knowing P.G.&E., I'm sure it will be a whopper if & when they get the chance to implement such rates. The are notorious for raising the rates, yet slow to drop them. Not sure how I'll be able to respond to the increase, other than become a night owl & sleep during the day. Indeed, it will be an adjustment.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. Keller 12:10 PM 7/1/10

   The driving force behind "smart" meters is to enable utility companies to make more money by selectively charging higher rates, pure and simple. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.
   
   For the consumer, the bulk of energy usage is heating and cooling related, which is more or less not particularly affected by "time-of-use". When it is too hot in your home, you want the air conditioner “on”. Running a dish washer or washing machine in the middle of the night is an inconsequential use of electrical energy.
   
   Rather than waste money on smart meters, a significantly more rationale policy would be to replace the vast numbers of older and inefficient heating & cooling machines.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this