Bill Overview
Title: Responsive Energy Demand Unlocks Clean Energy Act
Description: This bill requires organizations that operate electric grid transmission facilities (e.g., Regional Transmission Organizations or Independent System Operators) to accept bids from certain aggregators, which procure power for groups of electricity customers participating in demand response programs. In demand response programs, end-use electricity customers are typically remunerated for voluntarily decreasing their short-term electrical consumption generally in response to compromised grid reliability or high wholesale electricity prices.
Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: People participating or potentially participating in demand response programs
Estimated Size: 50000000
- This bill impacts electricity consumers globally who can participate in demand response programs.
- The bill focuses on demand response, which involves retail electricity customers reducing their power usage during peak times or when the grid is stressed.
- Demand response programs are prominent globally in regions where electricity grids are robust and have technical capabilities to support such programs.
- Electricity consumers in regions with well-established electricity grids, especially those facing high electricity prices or grid reliability issues, are more likely to participate and be impacted by this bill.
Reasoning
- The population impacted by this policy largely consists of electricity consumers who are enrolled in demand response programs, which are most prevalent in regions with established electricity grids and issues like high prices or reliability concerns.
- Given the US audience, participants in RTO and ISO managed regions will see significant effects as these organizations will be required to accept bids from aggregators, potentially enhancing market competition and pricing benefits for consumers.
- The budget restrictions suggest a scale of impact which would affect approximately 50,000,000 consumers in the US, aligning with regions already engaged in such programs.
- Simulated interviews will cover diverse consumers with various levels of electricity usage and involvement in demand response programs, from urban to rural locations and across different economic strata.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The high electricity bills during summer months are a burden.
- I hope the policy will bring some relief through better pricing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
IT Professional (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I already try to minimize my energy use, so being compensated for it would be great.
- This policy could mean greater savings on my bills.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Nurse (New York)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how directly this will affect me since I'm not in a specific program.
- It sounds like a positive move for grid health, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Manufacturing Worker (Illinois)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that helps lower our operating costs is beneficial.
- I support more competition in energy markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Florida)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful the bill will encourage more sustainable habits nationwide.
- Being paid to reduce energy sounds like a win-win for the planet.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired (Ohio)
Age: 60 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's important that energy costs don’t keep going up.
- I support anything that might control those costs sensibly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Nevada)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The flexibility in energy costs could help during slower months.
- I would consider this a positive policy if it helps us save money.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Government Employee (Washington)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This isn't just about personal benefit but also about community resilience.
- Excited for results that contribute to sustainability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Freelancer (Massachusetts)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Flexible job gives me the ability to participate in these programs easily.
- If this saves money and energy, it's worth it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Arizona)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I constantly worry about my utility bills during the summer.
- Hoping this will ease that burden a bit.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $65000000)
Year 3: $51000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $65000000)
Year 5: $52000000 (Low: $46000000, High: $68000000)
Year 10: $55000000 (Low: $48000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $55000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $75000000)
Key Considerations
- Integration of aggregators into the bid process could face resistance from existing suppliers and utilities.
- Administrative requirements may vary by region, reflecting differing regulatory environments.
- The pace of technological adaptation across regions will influence the speed and cost efficiency of implementation.