Thumbnail
Access Restriction
Open

Author Deegan, J. F.
Source United States Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Content type Text
Language English
Subject Keyword ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY ♦ ELECTRIC UTILITIES ♦ PLANNING ♦ RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ♦ MANAGEMENT ♦ PUBLIC UTILITIES ♦ Energy Planning & Policy- Economics- (1992-) ♦ Energy Planning & Policy- Electric Power
Abstract Policy makers should appreciate that prevailing tests for determining the relative attractiveness of resource measures are only tools for decision making and yield no automatic solutions. It is more important to focus on deciding what is the appropriate role for each of the players in resource policy decisions. Whether to apply the total resource cost (TRC) or the rate impact measure (RIM) test has become a staple of debate in integrated resource planning and least-cost planning circles. Advotates often claim that one test is better than the other in an overall sense and that serious policy decisions whether to pursue a particular demand-side management program should hinge on which side a decision maker takes in this ongoing debate. The practical truth is more mundane. There is no general solution, and the right answer depends on the specific situation. There is, however, a correct way to apply these tests to the evaluation of a DSM program. More importantly, there are correct roles for everyone to follow in the application of these tests. The author has not seen these properly defined as yet, perhaps because the topic is so new. The purpose of this article is to put forth a first try at doing so.
ISSN 10406190
Educational Use Research
Learning Resource Type Article
Publisher Date 1993-11-01
Publisher Place United States
Journal Electricity Journal
Volume Number 6
Issue Number 9


Open content in new tab

   Open content in new tab