Peter A. Darbee used to dock his three children 50¢ when they left a room without turning out the lights. Now, as CEO of Pacific Gas & Electric (PCG), the former investment banker and high school wrestling champion is trying to save energy on a grander scale. Paradoxically, he is helping his customers to buy less of his product. "When I tell big customers that we actually would be happy if we sell them less electricity, they look at me like I've burned out a few brain cells," says Darbee.
It's a radical departure from the traditional utility business model: making more money by selling more power. And it's not the only challenge to the old ways of doing things. New innovations and technology, such as a smart grid that allows any entrepreneur to be a power generator or a vendor of energy-efficient systems, threaten utilities' monopolies. Their CEOs must scramble to adapt, says Jon Wellinghoff, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). "You are not making a lot of money anymore building big power plants," says Wellinghoff. "You have to figure out what business you are in."
Here's how a utility can make more by selling less. Instead of spending $2 billion on a new 1,000-megawatt power plant, say, the utility decides to spend $2 billion or less insulating homes, paying customers to install more efficient equipment, and making the grid smarter. Taking those steps would slash power consumption by more than 1,000 Mw, eliminating the need to build the power plant and cutting greenhouse gas emissions at the same time.
The CEO then takes those calculations to the state public utility commission and makes the case that he must raise electricity rates enough to pay for the $2 billion investment—plus a normal profit—just as he would for a new power plant. If the commission agrees, the utility gets revenue from its investment, and customers' bill may actually go down. How come? Even though the price of electricity will be higher, customers who comply will be using much less power (and those who don't will effectively subsidize those who do). "Energy-efficiency programs cost electricity customers less than half what they pay to help fund a new power project" says Darbee.
In California, PG&E has spent hundreds of millions handing out energy-efficient lightbulbs and performing energy audits for companies to identify potential savings. In return, the California public utility commission has granted PG&E an extra payment representing a share of the energy savings. In Trenton, N.J., as part of a pilot program, workers from the utility Public Service Enterprise Group (PEG) are knocking on people's doors, offering improvements like insulation and energy-efficient light bulbs, all paid for by the company. "We've changed tens of thousands of lights, replaced thousands of thermostats, and done 11 energy audits of hospitals," says CEO Ralph Izzo. Duke Energy (DUK) has won approval in Ohio for a similar program dubbed "save-a-watt" that it hopes to expand to other states. "This is where we will make our money in the future," says Duke CEO James E. Rogers. "The business model fundamentally changes in the 21st century."
The new model isn't a sure thing, though. Duke initially ran into opposition from consumer advocates who charged that the company would make too much money off the energy-saving scheme, forcing Duke to modify the plan. "Some regulators have not yet understood and embraced this," says Darbee. "It really entails stepping through the looking glass, like Alice in Wonderland."
Track and share business topics across the Web.