The only ad with prices that I remember from 50 years ago was AT&T’s offering of a three minute coast to coast telephone call for $1.00. With the inflation that we have seen over the last 50 years, one would expect that a coast to coast call would now be at least $10.00 for three minutes. Instead, most telephone bills show a monthly service fee and no itemization for individual calls. Automation has allowed the telephone companies to do away with most telephone operators, which was a significant portion of the variable cost of making long distance telephone calls. The principal cost is now the investment in the wires, which doesn’t change with the number of calls that are carried. So, most carriers now charge a monthly fee and little or no charge per call. Perhaps it is time for the electric industry to go that way?
The restructuring of the electric industry has generally separated the distribution wires function from the generation and transmission function for most customers of investor owned electric utilities. This restructuring puts such electricity customers into the same position as their counterpart customers of municipally and cooperatively owned utilities. Municipally and cooperative owned utilities have generally been distribution only utilities, buying generation and transmission services from others, instead of being vertically integrated like most investor owned electric utilities.
The restructuring of the electric industry has resulted in most customers being served by a distribution company which has very little variable cost, much like the telephone companies. A significant distinction is that telephone lines handle one call at a time. The telephone line is either in use or is not in use. In contrast, electric utilities provide a continuously variable service. The customer may be taking 10 watts (a small light bulb) or 10 kilowatts (running the A/C, water heater, and stove at the same time), or any amount in between. The telephone company has the wires to serve the customer’s demand, whenever that call occurs. The electric distribution company similarly has the wires to serve the customer’s demand, whenever that demand occurs. While the telephone company will have customers on a binary basis (they are either a customer or are not a customer), the electric distribution customer serves its customers on a continuous basis (they might be very small customers who never use more than 10 watts or a very large customer that might use up to 100 MW.)
The binary basis of telephony customers allows the telephone companies to charge their customers a specific amount on a monthly. The continuous nature of the size of electric services suggests that electric distribution companies charge their customers a price based on the size of the electric service used by the customer. For commercial and industrial customers, electric utilities have long included in their tariffs a demand charge that depends on the maximum power that the customer used during the billing period. Typically such demand charges will be based on the average consumption for some 15 minute period.
Cost has been a significant factor that limited the use of demand charges to commercial and industrial customers. Demand meters are more costly to manufacture, in that they do more than just accumulate the amount of energy that goes through the meter. Demand meters are more expensive to read, in that the meter reader has to note two quantities and has to manually reset the demand register. These two cost factors are lesser issues in regard to determining residential demand now that the industry has moved significantly to Advanced Meter Reading (AMR) and to Advanced Meter Infrastructure (AMI), both of which automatically collect consumption data, including for 15 minute intervals.
Historically residential demand charges was thought to produce an insignificant shift of revenue among residential customers. The reasoning was that, though residential customers are different in size, they have a similar load pattern. A customer using 1,000 KWH a month would have ten times the demand as a customer using 100 KWH a month. Implementing a demand charge that collected an amount equal to 20% of the energy revenue collected from the larger customer would also collect an amount equal to 20% of the energy revenue collected from the smaller customer. There would be no revenue shift among these residential customer, at least for consumption. However, the utility would have had to install more expensive meters, which would have increased the monthly customer charge of both customers without providing a significant benefit to the utility or to the customers.
The move to AMR and AMI has reduced the cost of determining the demand for residential customers. Now the cost of determining metered demand is not an issue in differentiating between customers with different consumption patterns. Customers who should be paying a demand charge equal to 30% of their energy payments can be distinguished from customers who should be paying a demand charge that is only 10% of their energy payments. Further, on site generation has changed the paradigm that residential customers have similar load patterns, so that now the industry knows that there are the 30% customers versus the 10% customers and can bill them appropriately. Indeed, for houses with sufficient on-site generation, the revenue from the demand charge could be several times the revenue from the energy charge, especially when the energy charge vanishes for a net zero home.
The growth in AMR and AMI along with the growth in residential on-site generation makes this an appropriate time for restructuring residential tariffs to include a demand charge to collect the cost of the distribution utility owning the power lines. The energy charge should continue to collect the cost of generation and transmission, though the energy charge should be time differentiated to reflect the real time value of generation and transmission, as well as the associated energy losses.
 The creation of Independent System Operators (ISOs) is alleged to have brought competition to the generation sector of the electric industry. However, many distributed generators, such as roof top solar, do not experience the real time market prices set by their local ISO. This distorts the market for distributed generation.
 The creation of ISOs is also alleged to have brought competition to the transmission market. But ISOs compensate many transmission lines on a cost of service basis, through a monthly fee, though they charge geographically differentiated prices based on line losses and line congestion and generally don’t compensate for loop flow or parallel path flows, such as PJM imposes on TVA and on the Southern Company, both of which have lines in parallel to PJM>
 Telephone customers occasionally receive a business signal, indicating that the called party is using his/her phone. More rarely, customers will receive a circuits business signal, indicating that intermediate wires are in full use, not that the called party is using his/her phone.
 Demand charges come in a variety of forms including contract demand, thermal demand, and ratcheted demands, a distinction beyond the scope of this discussion.
 AMI is generally distinguished from AMR in that AMI generally includes the ability to communicate both ways, from the meter to the utility and from the utility to the meter/customer location. The ability to communicate from the utility to the meter allows the utility to control devices that the customer has opted to put under the utility’s control such as electric water heaters, air conditioning compressors, and swimming pool pumps and heaters.