On Monday, engineering consultant Mervyn Davies posted this article on WattClarity outlining the pitfalls of several different potential demand management schemes. In his article he contrasts and compares Time of Use Demand Tarriffs, Time of Use Energy Tariffs and Controlled Load Tariffs. Mervyn highlighted “Only switching actions, which genuinely shift customer load entirely away from periods of likely network maximum demand, contribute positively to network economics. Switching actions which merely smooth the customer’s load do not.”
Sunday, January 19 2014
Yesterday on WattClarity, we posted this article on how the demand response debate is heating up in Victoria and South Australia.
Wednesday, January 21 2015
Today Paul McArdle posted this article on WattClarity observing Queensland and Victorian demand over the past week. Paul commented on AusNet Services‘ Critical Peak Demand Tariff program and visualises the changes in demand for both Queensland and Victoria’s demand using…
Thursday, January 3 2019
The AEMC is currently considering 3 separate, but related, rule change proposals relating to a particular form of demand response in the NEM as noted here. Given our experience in supporting the growth of different forms of demand response in…
Monday, June 23 2014
This afternoon we posted this article on WattClarity, exploring how the proposed new buy-back mechanism (one potential form of Demand Response in the NEM) might impact on the way in which prices are set for the NEM.