Suggested Citation:
Leighty, Wayne and Alan Meier (2010) Short-term Electricity Conservation in Juneau, Alaska: Technology and Behavioral Change in Persistence. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, Research Report UCD-ITS-RR-10-26

An avalanche destroyed part of the main hydroelectric transmission line to Juneau, Alaska on April 16, 2008. Backup generators were able to replace the lost capacity but the use of diesel fuel for generation caused electricity prices to increase 500 percent for a 45-day period. Response to this electricity “crisis” included electricity conservation that began within 2 days of the event and reduced electricity use by 25% over the period of supply disruption relative to the same period in 2007. Conservation of about 8% relative to 2007 persisted after the transmission line was repaired and electricity rates returned to normal. A second avalanche on January 9, 2009 damaged the same section of transmission line and caused a second supply disruption, albeit lesser in duration (19 days) and magnitude of price increase (200 percent). This time observed conservation during the disruption was less (12% relative to 2007) while persistent conservation after the event increased by two percentage points to 10% relative to 2007.

We conducted a survey of residential consumers after the second avalanche to investigate the actions taken in response to these supply disruptions. Results showed an average of 10 conservation actions taken in each household, with major changes in lighting, space heating, fuel switching, and water and appliance use accounting for the observed aggregate conservation. Conservation began in anticipation of a complex price signal, and persisted after the disruption through both installed technology and new habits. Although past experience with short-term electricity supply shortfalls had suggested demand reduction of 3% within a few days and 20% in a few months was possible, it now appears feasible to cut electricity demand by 25% or more in only a few days without adverse economic consequences in some circumstances. A process of disruption inducing trial that leads to formation of new habits is apparent in persistent behavior change that complements technological change in explaining persistent conservation.

The prime motivator of a price signal may be relative, with doubling of price in the second supply disruption motivating relatively little conservation because it followed closely after the 500% price increase during the first disruption. But repeated supply disruptions may induce larger investments in technology retrofit since consumers believe preparation for the next event will pay off, which delivers increased persistent conservation. Since the impact of specific actions on overall electricity savings is a function of the effectiveness of the action and the number of people who choose to take the action each day, both factors should be considered when selecting which activities to suggest in public outreach campaigns. A method for prioritizing conservation actions for promotion according to the impact in electricity savings as a function of popularity, persistence and effectiveness is proposed.

A complete framework for the dynamics of electricity use before, during and after a supply disruption is proposed, with factors that pertain to the rate of change in electricity conservation at the start and end of the disruption proposed as complements to the conventional use of short-term price elasticity of demand to explain the magnitude of conservation.