China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Broadband Networks
Published in Naoaki Yamanaka, High-Performance Backbone Network Technology, 2020
The major advantage of flat rate charging is its simplicity leading to lower network operating costs. A weakness is its inherent unfairness, a light user having to pay as much as a heavy user. The level of the flat rate charge excludes potential users having a lower, though positive, evaluation of the value of using the network. Flat rate schemes are also open to abuse by resale of access capacity. A more immediate problem is the absence of restraint inherent in this charging scheme which may be said to contribute to the present state of congestion of the Internet.
Smart Home Appliances’ Scheduling by Two-Stage Optimization with Real-Time Price Model
Published in Electric Power Components and Systems, 2023
Govind Rai Goyal, Shelly Vadhera
Tables 3 and 4 give cost of monthly bill for power consumption before and after optimal scheduling, respectively. In this case study, cost of electricity bill before optimization is calculated with flat rate tariff, and mean values of DA-RTP and HA-RTP pricings. From the Table 3, it can be observed that electricity bill cost is lesser with DA-RTP and HA-RTP pricings in comparison of flat rate tariff by 8.28% and 9.97%, respectively, on an average for all the seven households. It shows that the use of real-time pricing can be resulted into cost saving and this saving may be increased with the optimal scheduling of household appliances. Optimal results given in Table 3 illustrates that rescheduling of smart home appliances with DA-RTP and HA-RTP further reduces the monthly bill cost for all the households by 21.47% and 23.50%, respectively, in comparison of flat rate tariff.
Irrigation development and equity implications: the case of India
Published in International Journal of Water Resources Development, 2022
Philip Kuriachen, A. Suresh, K. S. Aditya, P. Venkatesh, Biswajit Sen, Sharath S. Yeligar
In India, several state utilities (particularly electricity boards) provide power for agricultural purposes, either free of cost or at a flat rate. The shift from a metered power supply to a flat-rate system has led to an increase in tube wells. In the short run, this led to equity gains to small and marginal farmers (Mukherji, 2008; Shah et al., 2006). However, recent studies indicate that in the long run, large farmers with greater resource base have been the principal beneficiaries (Janakarajan & Moench, 2006; Kumar & Saleth, 2018; Mukherjee & Biswas, 2016). Under flat-rate pricing, the marginal cost of extraction of water is zero and results in overexploitation of the resource (Kumar, 2007; Kumar et al., 2011; Kumar & Singh, 2001). Under the flat-rate system, the implicit cost of groundwater extraction is higher for small and marginal farmers. Hence, the principal beneficiaries of flat rate pricing have been large farmers (Kumar & Saleth, 2018; Nagaraj et al., 2003). However, some have argued that a flat-rate system facilitates the expansion of groundwater markets and ensures equitable access (Shah & Raju, 1988). However, the case for groundwater markets stands largely disputed. We examine the role of groundwater markets in the subsequent section.
Contributions to sustainable bioenergy systems design, planning and operations
Published in IISE Transactions, 2021
The opportunity to use biomass to meet our needs for energy and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (from burning of fossil fuels), were main motivations for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy to develop policies, such as the renewable fuel standards and Production Tax Credit (PTC), which stimulate production of bioenergy and its consumption for commercial and personal use. The work by Khademi and Ekşioğlu focuses on PTC, a federal incentive that provides financial support to power plants that cofire biomass. This is a flat rate per megawatt-hour of renewable electricity generated and is provided for the first 10 years of a plant’s operations. Khademi and Ekşioğlu show that the current structure of the PTC (flat rate) prioritizes large-scale plants, as they can displace more coal with biomass and take advantage of the economies of scale. The ethics of this disproportionate allocation of taxpayers’ money motivated their work, which identifies two designs of the PTC that focus on fair allocation of resources. The proposed flexible tax credit provides a plant-specific tax credit rate based on plant capacity, with small-size plants receiving a higher tax credit than large-size plants. Such an approach leads to increased renewable electricity generated since it motivates smaller plants to participate.