Ei is a government authority that is responsible for monitoring the energy markets, mea- ning that Ei is working to ensure a safe and efficient supply of electricity and naturalgas for the consumers in the Swedish market (its commission also includes district heating). Customer access to the electricity and gas networks should take place under reasonable terms, and for this reason, Ei monitors the monopolised activities of the network opera- tors to ensure reasonable fees and a good quality in the electricity network. When you are connecting your home to the electricity network, you can turn to Ei to apply for an assessment of your connection fee if you feel that it is unjustified.
Complexity and uncertainty within a system would make the relationships between variables more complicated. Thus, the general pattern between variables is nonlinear rather than linear (Chen and Chang, 2010b; Chen et al., 2012). Thus, exploring the nonlinear relationships between variables is important not only in the field of engineering, but also in the field of energy. Because there is complexity and uncertainty in a system, traditional mindset about linear relationships between variables in the field of energy is not always effective (Poornashankar and Pawar, 2011a). Considering the complex and uncertain essence is so important in the academic areas, because the patterns of the relationships between carbon emissions and its antecedents are not always linear (Tian et al., 2010). However, there is few studies in the field of energy explores whether the patterns of the relationships between carbon emissions and its three antecedents, naturalgas consumption, thermal electricity, and renewable electricity, are nonlinear by means of ANN (Poornashankar and Pawar, 2011b). Therefore, this study would like to explore the nonlinear effects between carbon emissions and its three antecedents to fill the research gap.
Abstract:- This research aim is to test and analyze the influence of price, product quality, and service quality towards the purchasing decision of naturalgas product, a product sold by PT Perusahaan Gas Negara, Tbk. The research data used in this research is questionnaire data, that have been carried out from January to July of 2019 towards the existing customer in electricity sector. The sampling method used is purposive sampling from 50 existing customer. The method of analysis used is multiple linear regression. The result of this research shows that price, product quality, and service quality (simultaneously) contribute significantly to purchasing decision. The result also suggest that partially, the price, product quality, and service quality also significantly contribute to the purchasing decision. Price is the most influencial variable of all and significantly affects the purchasing decision.
9.6.1 Where the cost of installation is socialised (free of charge to the customer) (, suppliers should ensure that budget controllers/ prepayment meters only in installed in cases where a customer is in genuine financial hardship. A customer is taken to be in genuine financial hardship if they are unable to make payments against their bills without assistance and are finding themselves in constant arrears. In order to identify customers who need these meters suppliers are expected, where possible, to work with MABS and St. Vincent DePaul who are best placed to identify individuals in need of this level of assistance. The CER will monitor the level of installation by suppliers to ensure that these meters are installed appropriately. 9.6.2 Debt for the purpose of prepayment metering is considered to be debt accumulated due to failure to make payment against costs for the supply of naturalgas or electricity. It does not cover costs associated with the purchase of additional services or products from a supplier and debt associated with the purchase of such additional services or products cannot be recovered through the prepayment meter. 9.7 Tariffs
A controversial area of energy policy has been the use of electric rate payer funds to finance naturalgas infrastructure. Independent of the merits of new pipeline additions, private capital is a viable alternative financing option. This would serve to eliminate one of the more divisive aspects of the pipeline by not exposing rate payers to risks of over paying for additional naturalgas capacity and stranded costs. On August 17, 2016, the Massachusetts Supreme Court and on October 6, 2016 the NH PUC determined that rate payer funds should not be used to support naturalgas pipeline capacity contracts. Furthermore, on October 25, 2016, the Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection cancelled a request for proposal (RFP) it has issued for naturalgas related capacity despite acknowledging that “ . . . the New England region is facing volatile electricity prices and significant risks to electric reliability due to limitations in our restructured electricity market that have driven investment in new naturalgas-fired power plants, but not in the naturalgas delivery infrastructure needed to ensure that those plants can run reliably all year round.” 236
b. Agency and Point of Sale. (i) If you are receiving naturalgas service, you hereby designate Company as your agent to: (A) arrange and administer contracts and service arrangements between you and your Utility, and between you and the interstate pipeline transporters of your naturalgas (including capacity release, re-release, and recall arrangements); (B) nominate and schedule with the interstate pipelines the transportation of your naturalgas from the Sales Points to the Delivery Points, and with your Utility for the transportation of your naturalgas from the Delivery Points to your premises; and (C) aggregate your naturalgas with the natural supplies of Company’s other customers in order for you to qualify for transportation service and to address and resolve imbalances (if any) during the Term of this Agreement. As your agent, Company will schedule the delivery of a quantity of naturalgas at the Sales Points necessary to meet your city gate requirements based on the consumption and other information that Company receives from your Utility. Company, as your agent, will arrange for the transportation of naturalgas from the Sales Points to the Delivery Points, and from the Delivery Points to your premises; and (ii) if you are receiving electric service, you hereby designate Company as your agent for the purpose of arranging, contracting for, and administering transmission services (including those provided by your Utility) for the delivery of electricity.
Abstract: This paper investigates the economic implications of disruptions of one to ninety days to the supply of naturalgas in Ireland. We assess the impact of a hypothetical gas supply disruption in both winter and summer in 2008 (with observed market characteristics) and in 2020 (with projected market characteristics). The cost of a naturalgas outage includes the cost of naturalgas being unavailable for heating and other purposes in the industrial and commercial sectors, lost consumer surplus in the residential sector, the cost of lost electricity in all sectors and lost VAT on the sale of gas and electricity. Ireland produces much of its electricity from naturalgas and the loss of this electricity accounts for the majority of the cost of a naturalgas outage. Losing gas-fired electricity would cost 0.1 to 1.0 billion euro per day, depending on the time of week, the time of year, and rationing of electricity. Industry should be rationed before households to minimize economic losses, but current emergency protocols favour industry. If gas-fired electricity is unavailable for three months, the economic loss could be up to 80 billion euro, about half of Gross Domestic Product. Losing gas for heating too would add up to approximately 8 billion euro in economic losses. We also discuss some options to increase Ireland’s security of supply, and find that the cost is a small fraction of the avoided maximum damage.
with a steam turbine in combined cycle mode. Naturalgas burns more cleanly than other hydrocarbon fuels, such as oil and coal, and produces less carbon dioxide per unit of energy released. For an equivalent amount of heat, burning naturalgas produces about 30% less carbon dioxide than burning petroleum and about 45% less than burning coal. Combined cycle power generation using naturalgas is thus the cleanest source of power available using hydrocarbon fuels and this technology is widely used wherever gas can be obtained at a reasonable cost. Fuel cell technology may eventually provide cleaner options for converting naturalgas into electricity, but as yet it is not price-competitive. Naturalgas is one of the most efficient and one of the cleanest ways of generating electricity. When compared to coal or oil, its environmental credentials are sound. It emits less of the acid gases – So x and
Findings from this investigation are presented in Table 1. The survey results in Figure 1, showed naturalgas accounting for 26 % of the energy and utilities consumption in the healthcare sector. This huge amount of gas used is probably because some of the participating healthcare facilities employ a combined heat and power (CHP) station option to generate electricity on site. As a consequence, a reasonable quantity of gas has been expended for electricity generation needed for services delivery.
Hydropower, while cheap to produce, has a large environmental, maintenance, and regulation costs associated with it. The utilization of hydropower systems might have run its course, with new techniques for collecting naturalgas, solar, and wind to be the better alternatives. Maintenance costs associated with fossil fuels is 0.7 cents per kilowatt-hour produced, operation costs are 0.3 cents per kilowatt-hour produced and the fuel costs are 2.1 cents per kilowatt-hour produced (US Department of the Interior, 2005). Hydroelectric has maintenance costs of 0.6 cents per kilowatt-hour produced, 0.8 cents per kilowatt-hour produced, and no fuel costs (US Department of the Interior, 2005). While hydroelectric is a cheap form of electricity, the maintenance and environmental costs out way the upfront costs. The amount of money that is spent annually for the maintenance of the hydro projects could be spent developing cleaner and more efficient ways to produce electricity with solar, wind, coal, or naturalgas.
(2) The lack of energy information in the labeling process. Three different approaches are examined to determine the annual energy usage of social care farm Alldrik: the energy bills kept by the utility company, measurements on site and the theoretical use calculated by Vabi Elements. The annual energy usage is divided between the naturalgas usage and electricity usage and can be found in Table 39. An important point to call into question is the lack of electronic appliances in the theoretical energy usage. Therefore, the theoretical energy usage has a large difference in energy demand compared to the other methods. This difference in energy demand could be explained by the calculation in Vabi Elements. Vabi Elements calculates the buildings as fully operational in a year, while the operational hours of the two buildings are in correlation with each other. The electricity demand difference of the measurements on site in 2016- 2017 can be explained by the presence of the PV-panels since October 27, treated in Section 4.3.1. It is assumed that the measurements on the site follow the energy bill of 2015-2016 registered by the utility company. Therefore, the annual energy usage of the measurements on the site is considered as the most reliable. However, the theoretical annual energy usage could still be helpful by findings manners to reduce the EPC.
constitute the demand of resident particular people such as households, private persons, organizations and professionals (Thioune, 2015). Since then, analysis about electricity demand is at the chore of energetic debates all around the world and interest a great number of economists. Those latter seek generally to analyze the determining elements of electricity demand or the energetic efficiency; to find the optimal price scale in the electricity domain and to analyze the link that exists between electricity consumption and economic growth. If the consumption of electric energy represents so much interest in economic analysis, that is surely because of its great importance in the world development process since the industrial revolution at the end of the eighteenth century. In fact, the industrial revolution is characterized by a tremendous acceleration of the economic growth, the consumption rate and so on. Those facts deeply overwhelm Western Europe countries (Thioune, 2015). According to Hounkpatin (2013) the available electric energy in sufficient quantity and quality in a given country constitute a determinant factor of its economic and social development; it brings comfort and well-being in households, favors the artisanal development of Small and Medium size Business (SMB) and industries. It also favors the development of administration services along with agriculture and that all allowing a very interesting economic growth of the country in balance with its population growth. Unfortunately, it is evident enough to remark that until today, access to electricity remains a major problem in Africa, though the continent overflows with enormous potentials in natural resources. A survey from the African Development Bank (ADB) shows that around 39% of total energy consumed in sub-Saharan Africa is imported against 19% of world average (African Development Bank Group, 2006) Moreover, sub-Saharan Africa has got the world lowest electrification rate with only 26% International Energy Agency (IEA) (2006) and Wolde-Rufael (2009). Especially in West Africa, just as agricultural raw products, energetic resources are very abundant and they should have been contributing to the improvement of people’s well-being. Among those resources we can quote petrol, naturalgas, an excellent potential in hydraulic, solar and wind-powered energies. That is what is called mix-energetic.
It is assumed that the end-users’ electricity demands can be described as triangular fuzzy sets. Over the three plan- ning periods (each one has 5 years), the demand amounts are (50, 70, 96), (85, 112, 147) and (135, 170, 200) × 10 3 GWh, respectively. The peak load demands are considered as deterministic, being 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 GW in three periods, respectively. Totally, five energy sources (i.e., coal, naturalgas, hydropower, wind, solar and nuclear) are used for power generation. Over three planning periods, the supplied costs of coal are 2.5, 3 and 3.5 (×10 3 $/TJ), re- spectively; those for naturalgas are 5, 5.5 and 6 (×10 3 $/TJ), respectively; those for electricity are 900, 1000 and 1100 (×10 3 $/GWh), respectively. In order to meet the increasing energy demand from the end-users, capacity expansions of energy-supply facilities are necessary. Based on Li et al. (2010), the existing capacities of the coal-fired, gas-fired, hydropower, wind power, solar power and nuclear power conversion technologies are set as 10, 2.2, 2.8, 0, 0, 0 (GW), respectively. Other related parameters associated with the expansion options are listed in Table 1.