Customer Risk from Real-Time Retail Electricity Pricing: Bill Volatility and Hedgability

One of the most critical concerns that customers have voiced in the debate over real-time retail electricity pricing is that they would be exposed to risk from fluctuations in their electricity cost. The concern seems to be that a customer could find itself consuming a large quantity of power on the day that prices skyrocket and thus receive a monthly bill far larger than it had budgeted for. I analyze the magnitude of this risk, using demand data from 1142 large industrial customers, and then ask how much of this risk can be eliminated through various straightforward financial instruments. I find that very simple hedging strategies can eliminate more than 80% of the bill volatility that would otherwise occur. Far from being complex, mystifying financial instruments that only a Wall Street analyst could love, these are simple forward power purchase contracts, and are already offered to retail customers by a number of fully-regulated utilities that operate real-time pricing programs. I then show that a slightly more sophisticated application of these forward power purchases can significantly enhance their effect on reducing bill volatility.

U.S. Domestic Airline Pricing, 1995-2004

Between 1995 and 2004, I find that airline prices fell more than 20% adjusted for inflation. I also show that premia at hub airports declined and that there is now substantially less disparity between the cheaper and more expensive airports than there was a decade ago. Still, I find that prices remain quite high at a few dominated airports.Airline Competition, Airline Hubs, Price Indices

Markets for Anthropogenic Carbon Within the Larger Carbon Cycle

Human activity has disrupted the natural balance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and is causing climate change. Burning fossil fuels and deforestation result directly in about 9 gigatons of carbon (GtC) emissions per year against the backdrop of the natural carbon flux — emission and uptake — of about 210 GtC per year to and from oceans, vegetation, soils and the atmosphere. But scientific research now indicates that humans are also impacting the natural carbon cycle through less-direct, but very important, mechanisms that are more difficult to monitor and control. I explore the challenges this presents to market or regulatory mechanisms that might be used to reduce greenhouse gases: scientific uncertainty about these indirect processes, pricing heterogeneous impacts of similar human behaviors, and the difficulty of assigning property rights to a far larger set of activities than has previously been contemplated. While this does not undermine arguments for market mechanisms to control direct anthropogenic release of greenhouse gases, it suggests that more research is needed to determine how and whether these mechanisms can be extended to address indirect human impacts.

U.S. Domestic Airline Pricing, 1995-2004

Between 1995 and 2004, I find that airline prices fell more than 20% adjusted for inflation. I also show that premia at hub airports declined and that there is now substantially less disparity between the cheaper and more expensive airports than there was a decade ago. Still, I find that prices remain quite high at a few dominated airports.Airline Competition, Airline Hubs, Price Indices

Wealth Transfers from Implementing Real-Time Retail Electricity Pricing

Adoption of real-time electricity pricing %u2014 retail prices that vary hourly to reflect changing wholesale prices %u2014 removes existing cross-subsidies to those customers that consume disproportionately more when wholesale prices are highest. If their losses are substantial, these customers are likely to oppose RTP initiatives unless there is a supplemental program to offset their loss. Using data on a random sample of 636 industrial and commercial customers in southern California, I show that RTP adoption would result in significant transfers compared to a flat-rate tariff. When compared to the time-of-use rates (simple peak/offpeak tariffs) that these customers already face, however, the transfers drop by nearly half; even under the more extreme price volatility scenario that I examine, 90% of customers would see changes of between a 9% bill reduction and a 14% bill increase. Though customer price responsiveness reduces the loss incurred by those with high-cost demand profiles, I also demonstrate that this offsetting effect is unlikely to be large enough for most customers with costly demand patterns to completely offset their lost cross-subsidy. The analysis suggests that adoption of real-time pricing may be difficult without a supplemental program that compensates the customers who are made worse off by the change. I discuss how "two-part RTP" programs, which allow customers to purchase a baseline quantity at regulated TOU rates, can reduce the transfers associated with adoption of RTP.