The document discusses energy efficiency and user behavior related to smart meters. It covers the features and advantages of smart meters, how they can provide consumption information to help users consume more efficiently based on microeconomic theory. Field test results on different ways of providing smart meter information are summarized, showing mostly 2-5% savings from in-home displays. However, results are difficult to compare due to biases from self-selecting participants and varying baseline consumption. Studies on the persistence of savings from smart meter feedback programs show both constant savings over years and reduced participation over months.

1. Energy Efficiency & User Behaviour
IEA DSM Task 24
“Energy Efficiency and Behavioral Change”
Energy Behaviour and Smart Meter
Simon Moser
Energy Institute at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
Graz/Austria, 2014-10-13

2. Content
• The “smart“ meter
• Microeconomic theory
• Providing the smart meter’s information
• Field test results & biases
• Persistence of savings
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
2

3. The „smart“ meter
• The “smart“ meter
• Meter readings: frequently or near real time
• Able to communicate
• Advantages when installed:
• uncomplicated provision of data
• automated use of and functions
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
3

4. Microeconomic theory
• Asymmetric information inefficient quantities
• Bill: Price and quantity (kWh) per year
• Price for the quantity (kWh)
• Quantity (kWh) for the sum of actions
• Missing information: price for one action
• Consumption information based on frequent meter readings:
• Interval (daily / hourly) or real time consumption = hint for kWh/action
• No evidence on actual consumption
• No price connected (fix price components remain)
• Feedback theoretically leads to more efficient consumption
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
• Adoptions in behaviour of energy/electricity consumption
• Adoptions in appliance stock (which in turn is consumption behaviour) 4

5. Providing the smart meter’s information
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
5
Medium xy xz
Seriousness of
information
Real Time
Information
Persistency of
impact
Postal Mail
E-Mail
Website
App (Tablet)
App (Smartphone)
SMS
Callcenter
In-House-Display
Meter‘s display
Ambient Equipment

6. Field test results
• International results
• meta study from Sarah Darby (ECI Oxford)
• 2,5 % savings due to IHD in UK households (real life)
• Rather incomparable to other countries (Consumption volumes, appliances, …)
• Region Germany – Austria – Switzerland (number of studies reviewed = 10)
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
6
Medium 2 % 2 – 5 % 5 %
Monthly Mail 1 2 1*
Website 1 4 1*
In-House-Display 1 4 1*
Ambient Equipment 1 - -
• Many problems with biases like selection of participants, number of participants, methods
of calculation
• * 11% by combining website, app and mail. However: no provision of n and CI
Kollmann, Moser, de Bruyn,
Schwarz, Fehringer (2013):
Smart Metering in the Context
of Smart Grids. Final project
report, in German.

7. Biases of field test results
• Participants = persons interested
• When feedback is provided, they are more engaged than average people
• Thus the observed impact is higher than what the impact would be in the
whole/real population
• Participants = persons interested
• As they are interested, participants had known about loads, appliance
consumption etc. and had already adopted their consumption patterns and
appliances even before the feedback was provided
• When feedback is provided, they are also more engaged than average
people but find less opportunities.
• Thus the observed impact is lower than what the impact would be in the
whole/real population
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
• Same starting point, different results only little empirical evidence on biases 7

8. Persistency of savings
• „People look at the In-House-Display for 3 months and then they are not
interested any more“.
• Results on persistency in load shift experiments are ambiguous
• CONSTANT
• Savings due to Critical Peak Pricing: 12% in year 1, 13% in year 2 (Faruqui and Sergici, 2010)
• “Constant savings in test period” (eTelligence, Agsten et al., 2012)
• “Interest remained in year 2” (Smart-A, Kollmann et al., 2014)
• Manual reactions in response to real-time pricing remained for a long period” (Hillemacher et
al., 2013)
• “Constant participation” (Karg et al., 2013)
• REDUCED
• Participation decreases to 33% after 3 months (Frey, 2013)
• Many expert interviews mention decreasing interest
• Is any more interest necessary after behaviour and appliances are adopted?
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
8

9. Thank you for your attention!
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
9
Simon Moser
Energy Institute at the Johannes Kepler
University of Linz
moser@energieinstitut-linz.at
T: +43 732 2468 5658