Peak and Off-Peak Industrial Demand for Electricity: The Hopkinson Rate in Ontario,Canada

Abstract

The Hopkinson rate consists of an energy charge for every kilowatt- hour of electricity a customer uses, plus an additional demand charge, a peak-demand charge on the maximum usage during the month. Historically, industries in North America have generally been charged a Hopkinson rate for electricity use. In 1983, for example, 97 percent (see Blinder [1984]) of the publicly owned electric utilities in North America had demand charges in their commercial/industrial rate structure, whereas only 11 percent had time-of-day rates. However, with the exception of papers by Corio and Trimnell (1978) and Veall (1981), the focus of empirical research on industrial firms (like the focus of research in the residential sector) has been on examining the impact of time-of-use rates (e.g. Chung [1978], Chung and Aigner [1981], and Panzar and Willig [1979]).

Keywords

Industrial electricity demand Peak and Off-peak load Ontario Hydro Hopkinson rate

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amemiya

(1980). “Selection of Regressors.” International Economic Review 21 (2): 331-54.

Arrow

Chenery

H. B.

Minhas

B. S.

Solow

R. M.

(1961). “Capital-Labour Substitution and Economic Efficiency.” Review of Economics and Statistics 43(3): 225-35.

Blinder

(1984). “APPA 1983 Retail Rate Survey Report.” Washington, DC: American Public Power Association.

Christensen

L. R.

Jorgenson

D. W.

Lau

L. J.

(1973). “Transcendental Logarithmic Production Frontiers.” Review of Economics and Statistics 5(1): 28-45.

Chung

(1978). “Econometric Modelling of the Industrial Demand for Electricity by Time of Day: An Application to the California Cement Industry.” Paper presented at the EPRI Workshop on Modeling and Analysis of Electricity Demand by Time of Day. San Diego, Calif.: EPRI Workshop.

Chung

Aigner

D. J.

(1981). “Industrial and Commercial Demand for Electricity by Time-of-Day: A California Case Study.” The Energy Journal 2(3): 91-110.

Cobb

Douglas

(1928). “A Theory of Production.” American Economic Review, Supplement to 18.

Corio

Trimnell

(1978). “Assessing the Impact of the Introduction of Time-of-Day Rates on Industrial Electricity Consumption.” Paper presented at the Canadian Economics Association meetings, London, Ontario.

Denny

May

J. D.

(1978). “Homotheticity and Real Value—Added in Canadian Manufacturing.” In Fuss

McFadden

, eds., Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 53-70.

10.

Drèze

(1964). “Some Postwar Contributions of French Economists to Theory and Public Policy.” American Economic Review 54(4): 1-64.

11.

Henderson

J. S.

(1983). “The Economics of Electricity Demand Charges.” The Energy Journal 4 (Special Electricity Issue): 127-40.

12.

Hirschberg

J. G.

Aigner

D. J.

(1983). “An Analysis of Commercial and Industrial Customer Response to Time-of-Use Rates.” The Energy Journal 4 (Special Electricity Issue): 103-26.

13.

Hsiao

Mountain

D. C.

(1983). “Modeling the Off-Peak to Peak Consumption Response to Changing Rate Structures: An Econometric—Time Series Analysis of Ontario’s Industrial Customers.” Research Report. Toronto, Canada: Load Forecasts Department and Rates Department, Ontario Hydro.

14.

Leontief

W. W.

(1951). The Structure of American Economy, 1919-1939, Second ed. Fair Lawn, N.J.: Oxford University Press.

15.

MacKinnon

J. G.

(1983). “Model Specification Tests Against Non-Nested Alternatives.” Econometric Review 2: 85-110.

16.

Panzar

J. C.

Willig

R. D.

(1979). “Theoretical Determinants of the Industrial Demand for Electricity by Time of Day.” Journal of Econometrics 9 (1/2): 193-207.

17.

Veall

M. R.

(1981). “Industrial Electricity Pricing: An Examination of Two Alternate Rate Structures.” Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

18.

Wales

T. J.

(1977). “On the Flexibility of Flexible Functional Forms: An Empirical Approach.” Journal of Econometrics 5(2): 183-93.