Electric-utility DSM-program costs and effects, 1991 to 2001

Technical Report · Sat May 01 00:00:00 EDT 1993

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/10168866· OSTI ID:10168866

Hirst, E

For the past three years (1989, 1990, and 1991), all US electric utilities that sell more than 120 GWh/year have been required to report to the Energy Information Administration data on their demand-side management (DSM) programs. These data provide a rich and uniquely comprehensive picture of electric-utility DSM programs in the United States. Altogether, 890 utilities (of about 3250 in the United States) ran DSM programs in 1991; of these, 439 sold more than 120 GWh and reported details on their DSM programs. These 439 utilities represent more than 80% of total US electricity sales and revenues. Altogether, these utilities spent almost $1.8 billion on DSM programs in 1991, equal to 1.0% of total utility revenues that year. In return for these (and prior-year) expenditures, utility DSM programs cut potential peak demand by 26,700 MW (4.8% of the national total) and cut annual electricity use by 23,300 GWh (0.9% of the national total). These 1991 numbers represent substantial increases over the 1989 and 1990 numbers on utility DSM programs. Specifically, utility DSM expenditures doubled, energy savings increased by almost 50%, and demand reductions increased by one-third between 1989 and 1991. Utilities differed enormously in their DSM-program expenditures and effects. Almost 12% of the reporting utilities spent more than 2% of total revenues on DSM programs in 1991, while almost 60% spent less than 0.5% of revenues on DSM. Utility estimates of future DSM-program expenditures and benefits show continuing growth. By the year 2001, US utilities expect to spend 1.2% of revenues on DSM and to cut demand by 8.8% and annual sales by 2.7%. Here, too, expectations vary by region. Utilities in the West and Northwest plan to spend more than 2% of revenues on DSM that year, while utilities in the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, Southwest, Central, and North Central regions plan to spend less than 1% of revenues on DSM.

• Research Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)
• DOE Contract Number: AC05-84OR21400
• OSTI ID: 10168866
• Report Number(s): ORNL/CON-364; ON: DE93016238; TRN: 93:001957
• Resource Relation: Other Information: PBD: May 1993
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION
29 ENERGY PLANNING
POLICY AND ECONOMY
ELECTRIC UTILITIES
ENERGY CONSERVATION
COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS
POWER DEMAND
FORECASTING
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
ELECTRIC POWER
US ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION
US ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
320603
291000
PUBLIC UTILITIES
CONSERVATION