1. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (with David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner) 3 Sep 2014, Behave Energy Conference 2014, Oxford, UK @mikefsway

2. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Flat price Time of Use Direct Load Control More personal control? Less personal control? MediatedConsented Demand Side Response (DSR): “change in electricity consumption patterns in response to a signal” 1 – e.g. price, volume, direct. 1 Element Energy 2012, p9 No signal

3. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Focus groups identified different motivations for control: spending comfort timing autonomy “A second major concern for consumers is an anticipated loss of control … many consumers do not like the idea that the energy utility has control over the devices” Mert, W., Consumer Acceptance of Smart Appliances D 5.5 of WP 5 report from Smart-A project, 2008.

4. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Method Extended Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989) with control constructs; developed attitude scale (see paper). Populus online survey of main/joint electricity bill payers (representative GB, quotas for age/ gender/region) yielded 1961 responses. Included above scale plus questions on trust, privacy, ‘trilemma’ concerns, home occupancy times, demographics. Simple random allocation into five experimental groups.

5. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Interventions All include ‘smart’ thermostat allowing remote monitoring/operation by consumers, and framed as if offered by the respondent’s electricity supplier. Fixed time of use (10p/14p/30p per unit at fixed times) Fixed time of use + automation to operate at least cost Variable time of use (10p/14p/30p per unit at unpredictable times, with notification a day in advance) Variable time of use + automation to operate at least cost Direct load control (12p per unit flat rate, electricity supplier can cycle heating off and on when high demand, only small effect on temperature, unlimited overrides) (see bit.ly/DSRplans for full plan details)

6. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Direct load control Fixed TOU Fixed TOU + auto Variable TOU Variable TOU + auto Direct load control Fixed TOU Fixed TOU + auto Variable TOU Variable TOU + auto Somewhat agree Strongly agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree ATTITUDE I think this plan is a good idea INTENTION If it was offered to me now, I would sign up to this plan Direct load control (DLC) option most acceptable, variable time of use (TOU) least. The principle of external control could be acceptable to many people. KEY FINDINGS

7. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Direct load control Fixed TOU Fixed TOU + auto Variable TOU Variable TOU + auto SPENDING With this plan I would be in charge of my spending on electricity Time of use (TOU) tariffs comparable to DLC on control over spending, but not reflected in acceptance Variable TOU least popular, but automation option is more attractive; automation not clearly preferred for fixed TOU KEY FINDINGS Direct load control Fixed TOU Fixed TOU + auto Variable TOU Variable TOU + auto AUTONOMY With this plan I would have enough control over my life

8. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Direct load control Fixed TOU Fixed TOU + auto Variable TOU Variable TOU + auto EASE OF USE I would find this plan easy to use Direct load control Fixed TOU Fixed TOU + auto Variable TOU Variable TOU + auto USEFULNESS I could see myself saving money with this plan KEY FINDINGS DLC and fixed TOU seen as comparatively easy to use, variable TOUs more difficult. Of the TOU tariffs, variable with automation seen as having biggest savings potential.

9. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK Conclusions GB may be quite open to idea of DSR: almost half have positive attitude towards it, a quarter would consider signing up. DLC may be, in principle, an acceptable option for many people. Seen as easy to use and giving most control over timing, comfort and autonomy – at least in this form. Important to promote automation for variable TOU; maybe not so important for fixed TOU? More to come: trust, privacy, ‘trilemma’ concerns, home occupancy times, demographics.

10. A survey experiment measuring people’s perceived control in domestic demand side response Michael J Fell (co-authors David Shipworth, Cliff Elwell, Gesche M Huebner), 3 Sep 2014, Behave Conference 2014, Oxford, UK michael.fell.11@ucl.ac.uk @mikefsway www.lolo.ac.uk This work has been supported by: EPSRC support for the London-Loughborough Centre for Doctoral Research in Energy Demand, grant number EP/H009612/1 Smart Energy GB References Davis, F D. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.” MIS Quarterly 13, no. 3 (1989): 319–40. Mert, W., 2008. Consumer Acceptance of Smart Appliances D 5.5 of WP 5 report from Smart-A project. Element Energy, 2012. Demand side response in the non-domestic sector, Available at: http://www.element-energy.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Demand-Side- Response-in-the-non-domestic-sector.pdf [Accessed December 4, 2013].