Most US utilities still bill customers in kW.

However if the customer has a poor power factor, the kVA load can be substantially higher. This causes the utility to
install larger equipment and incur higher losses in the process of delivering power to the customer.
Some utilities bill in kVA. This encourages customers to add power factor correction devices to improve the overall power factor of their equipment.
Capacitors are the most common way to improve the power factor.
In the conventional method of electricity metering, the active energy (kWh) is measured. And the tariff is fixed by most of the utilities (duly authorized by the regulatory
authority) for active energy consumed. Static capacitors are insisted along with inductive loads to improve the power factor to a specified value. For HT/EHT consumers,
penalty is imposed for maintaining the average power factor below a minimum specified value which is 0.9 in KSEB. Incentives are given for improving the average power
factor above the specified value up to unity. In kWh metering and tariff system, if penalty is not imposed, the consumers are less bothered to maintain their load power
factor close to unity.
When the power factor of the load falls below unity or below a specified value (say 0.9), the apparent energy (kVAh) delivered to the load increases for the same active
energy (kWh) delivered. kVAh delivered with poor power factor will be greater than the kVAh delivered with unity power factor for same kWh delivered. This means the
supplier has to maintain an additional installed capacity (kVA) due to poor power factor of the load maintained by the consumers. Working with poor power factor of the
load leads to an increased power loss (I x I x Z) in the supply system as the current drawn through the supply system with poor power factor of the load will be higher than
the current drawn through the supply system with unity power factor of the load for same kWh delivered.
If the tariff is fixed for active energy measured, the supplier has to meet the loss in the supply system due to this additional current drawn due to the poor power factor of
the load maintained by the consumers. Or regulatory measures have to be initiated upon the consumers who do not maintain the power factor of the load at unity or a
specified value. Imposing penalty to 100% consumers who create this burden, by identifying them through special tasks, are not practical.
If kVAh (apparent energy) metering is employed, automatically it becomes the responsibility of the consumer to maintain the quality of the load by improving its power
factor. Or the consumers automatically pay themselves for the additional burden due to poor power factor of the load maintained by them. In kVAh billing system as the
electricity bills conceive this additional burden for 100% consumers who create it, no separate penalty need to be imposed. Or such burden created by one consumer will
not appear as an indirect liability to other consumers.
The tariff can be restructured in kVAh metering system for getting the same amount of bill in kWh metering system, for a consumer who maintains the quality of load. One
unit of active energy (1 kWh) sold at Rs. 1.00 in kWh metering system to a consumer who maintains the load power factor at 0.9 is equivalent to one unit of apparent
energy (1 kVAh) sold at 90 paise in kVAh metering system to the same consumer. In the latter, the consumer becomes conscious to keep the power factor (PF) at 0.9 or
better.
In kVAh tariff, working the load with poor power factor will cost more for a consumer on account of increased kVAh for the same kWh output as kVAh=kWh/PF.

There are as many billing methodologies as there are number of Utilities. Some of the billing methodologies are simple while
others are not very easily comprehensible and very complicated.
There are many factors considered by the Utilities while they design their billing strategy. Some of the factors that are
considered by the Utilities are listed below:
1. Cost per unit of electricity generated (Normally Rs./kWh, /kWh, /kWh, $/kWh). It can either be fixed rate or can be
variable. The variable nature can be in the nature of quantity or time of use. The quantity difference can be either in the form
of slab or block price. In slab price the quantity of consumption is broken up into various slabs and each slab is priced at
different rates. In block price, the pricing is done for the entire quantity based on the block the consumption has reached. In
the time of use pricing, the 24 hour period may be divided into several slots and the consumption during each slot is billed at
different rates. It is to be noted that the prices do not change intraday. Another option is to have real time pricing mechanism,
by which the prices keep changing during pre-defined intervals.

2.

Cost per unit of Reactive energy generated, in a few cases (Normally Rs./kVAhr, /kVAhr, /kVAhr, $/kVAhr).

3.

Cost per unit of Real energy generated, in a few cases (Normally Rs./kVAh, /kVAh, /kVAh, $/kVAh).

4.

Power factor penalty / incentive

5. Fuel Adjustment charges to account for the variation of cost of fuel used for power generation (Normally Rs./kWh, /kWh,
/kWh, $/kWh). This is to accommodate the change in price of the fuel. This is more applicable to utilities which depend on
external sources for their fuel requirement. Sometimes utilities which procure power from external sources also levy the fuel
adjustment charges.

6. Capacity charge to account for the capital expenditure incurred due to setting up of the power plants (Normally Rs./kW,
/kW, /kW, $/kW or Rs./MW, /MW, /MW, $/MW or Rs./kVA, /kVA, /kVA, $/kVA or Rs./MVA, /MVA, /MVA, $/MVA) to
reflect the interest and depreciation

7. Transmission and distribution charges (can be a fixed rate irrespective of consumption or Rs./kWh, /kWh, /kWh,
$/kWh). This charge has to accommodate two charges namely the transmission and distribution infrastructure charge and the
other for the losses incurred during transmission and distribution.

8. Meter operation, maintenance and reading charges. It could be a fixed charge based on the meter technology which will
determine how the meter is maintained and read. With the advent of Smart Meters the concept of physically reading the meter
would become obsolete, except in special circumstances

9. Billing and collection charges. As of now we can say that there are no utilities which levy such a charge. But definitely
there is a cost associated with it, which is normally bundled with other charges.

10.Surcharges to accommodate Carbon tax, if any.

11.Discounts to accommodate feed-in tariff (consumers own generation)

12.Discounts on account of subsidies given to the consumers. It can be per unit of consumption or fixed charge.

13.Arrears, if any

14.Taxes, if any
The Utility industry is present in various forms. At one end there are very big vertically integrated Utilities taking care of
all operations right from fuel purchase, generation, transmission & distribution, meter reading, billing, collection etc. And
at the other end there are utilities which are very much fragmented with operations such as generation, transmission &
distribution taken care of by different entities. In both cases, mostly the end consumer gets a single bill, encompassing
all the costs. In the fragmented scenario, called as deregulated or unbundled scenario, there will be a sizable intercompany data exchanges calling for sophisticated computing resources. At present, the general trend is more towards
unbundling and deregulation, due to not so satisfactory performance of vertically integrated utilities. It is yet to be seen
whether deregulation is for better or worse. There is a mixed opinion. Market forces are coming into play in the Utility
sector.
In case of vertically integrated utilities, there can be two ways to bill the customers. One is to club all the costs to a per
unit price landed at the customer end. And the other way is to mention separately and bill separately. The former is very
simple from the point of customer to evaluate; whereas the latter is more transparent. In case of unbundled utility
scenario, there is a generally a need to specify all the charges separately.
Further in the unbundled scenario, there will be intercompany billing such as
1.

Generation Company billing the Supplier Companies

2. Transmission and distribution companies billing the Generation companies for transmission and distribution
charges. In scenarios where there are transmission and distribution companies are separate, the transmission
companies bill the generation company the wheeling charges. The distribution company will bill the suppliers for
wheeling charges.
3. If there are metering companies also available then metering company would bill the supplier for the
consumer meter read like payment per consumer meter read.
Transmission and Distribution is a natural monopoly because of the geographical constraint. However there can be scenarios
where there will be two or more transmission companies involved before the electricity reaches the consumer, making the
intercompany exchanges complex. Similarly there can be two or more distributors also involved. These scenarios arise due to
phased development of network in the geographical areas. Also in cases where the generator and supplier are located at very
far apart and their links, cutting across the networks of several transmission and distribution companies, wheeling bills will be
generated by different companies against the generator / supplier.
The transmission and distribution charges can either be fixed charge irrespective of the location of the consumer and the
generator. Or it can be based on the distance between the consumer and the generator.
From the above it can be inferred that electricity billing strategy is left to the imagination of the Utilities and their regulators,
sometimes making it very complex for the understanding of the end consumer. With deregulation and the entry of competitive
retail players tariff war has been set and retailers have become very innovative in their tariff resulting in the consumers
overwhelmed with the multitude of tariffs to choose from.
It is felt that there is a need to simplify the business of billing electricity consumption which a common consumer can
understand. A suggested approach is given below. It will involve both commercial and policy level changes.
The first step is to do away with multiple components that are used for billing and just a single parameter for billing, namely
energy consumption. Most of the utilities world over use active power consumption, namely kWh, with an assumption the
power factor as 0.8 to 0.9. This practice is followed because of technological restrictions due to the availability of only Ferranti
Electromechanical Energy Meters, which can measure only active energy. The present trend in the utilities is to replace all the
electromechanical meters with Electronic Static Meters which have several advantages compared to the electromechanical
meters. It is to be noted that static meters can measure all types of energy namely, active, reactive and real or apparent
energy. Ideally billing needs to be done based on the real or apparent energy and not on active energy only, because
generation cost is based on real energy. With the billing in kWh, there is no incentive for the consumers to have high power
factor. If kVAh billing is introduced then it would even prompt the manufacturers of electricity consuming equipments with high
power factor, leading to the production and use of more energy efficient equipment.
All the power plants need to arrive at a Levelised Cost of Generation (LCG) which will incorporate all the costs taking into
account Levelised Capital cost, O&M Cost, Capacity Factor, etc. and arrive at Cost / kVAh. The pricing / kVAh may also include a
positive inflation adjusted return to attract investments and for sustainability. The grid operator can further mark up a cost to
include the Levelised grid charges, meter reading charges, etc
Let us consider a simplified scenario. We will take 8 power generation plants with their LCG in the range of 1 to 8. We will also
consider 8 consumers who are willing to pay a price of 1 to 8 based on the firmness of supply, that is, the consumer who is
willing to pay 8/kVAh will get the most un-interrupted power supply. Now the question arises, how to connect the consumers to
the grid and how to manage their connectivity. In every grid there is a desired frequency level, say 50 Hz or 60 Hz with an
accepted variation of say, +/-2 Hz. We shall consider the 50 Hz case, with an assumption that the accepted range is 48 to 52
Hz . It is to be remembered the frequency is the indirect measurement of load on the grid with the lower frequency indicating
over load and higher frequency under load. One of the most important role of the grid operators is to maintain the frequency
around 50 Hz. The following table and diagram illustrates how the consumers can be matched to the generators:

Levelised Cost Frequency range Consumer Price

of Generation
at which the
generation plant
and consumer
will be
connected to

the grid

1 to 8

48.01 to 48.50

1 to 7

48.51 to 49.00

7 to 8

1 to 6

49.01 to 49.50

6 to 8

1 to 5

49.51 to 50.00

5 to 8

1 to 4

50.01 to 50.50

4 to 8

1 to 3

50.51 to 51.00

3 to 8

1 to 2

51.01 to 51.50

2 to 8

51.51 to 52.00

1 to 8

The above table and diagram is a very simplified for illustrative purpose only. It only gives an idea how the concept works. For
example when the prevailing frequency is between 49 and 49.5, the generators having LCG 1 to 6/kVAh and consumers having
Consumer price of 6 to 8/ kVAh would be connected to the grid. When the frequency falls between 48.5 and 49 the generators
having LCG 1 to 7/kVAh and consumers having Consumer price of 7 to 8/ kVAh would be connected to the grid.
With this set-up, we are linking the commercial pricing to frequency of the grid.
Now let us see how the supply side and demand side management takes place in the system. In the system we have to
introduce a frequency based relay at the point of connection. The relay will make and break the connection depending on the
frequency. The ultimate result is that the pricing is based on the firmness of the supply. The firmness of supply is derived from
the generation of electricity from plants having high LCG.
To explain the concept better let us take a simple household scenario. A family of 4 with parents and two school going children.
In the month of March the children are having their examination. Assume they are at present in the in the frequency band of
49.50 to 49.99, which means their per unit is charged at 5/kVAh. To ensure uninterrupted supply during examination they can
make an application to the utility to change their pricing to 8/kVAh. The utility can change the setting of the frequency relay to
the under frequency cut-off of 48 Hz. By paying a higher price supply to the family is more firm, during the examination
period. In the month of April when the exams are over the family do not require that much firm power. Then they can request
the utility to bring back their tariff to 5/kVAh or at any desired price. The utility can make a suitable change in the underfrequency relay to reflect the pricing.

Let us take another example of agriculture pumpsets, which require low tariff but is very flexible for demand side
management. So they can be set for a pricing of 1/ kVAh and the pumpset will run at least cost during non-peak hours.
The advantages of this method lies in its simplicity at all levels, both technical and commercial. We do not require very
sophisticated instrumentation to achieve Time of Use / Real Time Pricing. A simple frequency based relay would suffice. Both
demand side and supply side management are easily managed in a transparent way. The tariff and billing becomes very easy
for the customers to follow.
Now let us see some of the issues that may raise when this is followed. Let us take the example of Railways. They require
uninterrupted power, naturally leading to a price that is the highest. Being a public service we may expect it to be billed at a
subsidised rate at a low tariff. Same is the case with essential services like hospitals, public places, etc. So we may have to set
them at low frequency but billed at low tariff.
Another situation is the case of power generation from high cost generators whose generation cannot be controlled like wind,
solar, etc. In such cases we have to keep them at high frequency settings even though they are high cost generators.
This system will also be highly useful to take care of consumers who have very poor credit ratings and those who have already
have huge payment arrears due. Such consumers can be put on low tariff with high frequency settings.
This is a simple extension of Availability Based Tariff (ABT) which is already prevalent in India. ABT is a system of billing of
unscheduled consumption and generation of bulk consumers and generators to maintain grid discipline. In reality, both
consumption and generation cannot be accurately predicted. This system automatically takes care of this uncertainty, with
price of electricity directly linked to the firmness of supply. The system helps to achieve targeted and voluntary load shedding
instead of forced load shedding as is presently done presently during peak consumption / low generation times.
As we can see that in the above method that the entire consumption is billed at a single price, which for some utilities /
consumers may seem a little unfair. This has got an advantage that the metering requirement very simple with a single register
to register the kVAh consumption. Another disadvantage is that of automatic disconnection, causing inconvenience, especially
when the system frequency is volatile. There is an alternative to this set-up but it necessitates a little complexity in the
metering.
The set-up would require a multi-register meter. The frequency based relay would be required to be inbuilt in the meter itself.
Each register needs to be configured to record the consumption during different frequencies. The consumption recorded by
different registers can be billed at different prices. The consumers can have a simple frequency meter display at a conveniently
visible location in their premises so that they can decide when they can consume or not to consume. Also wherever possible,
frequency based programmable appliances can be used by the consumers, to see to that they are operating only when the
frequency is appropriate.
In both the methods we can see that there is a margin available for profit. The consumption done by the consumers are billed
based on the frequency whereas the generators are paid for the energy generated based on their levelised cost of generation.
The advantage of this approach is that we require a very simple infrastructure in comparison to the interval meters which
involves voluminous meter reading data transfer requirement and complex billing involving huge computational requirement to
implement the Real Time Pricing.
Both the methodologies described above leaves a scope for profit margin for the utilities. Let us assume a scenario where the
frequency is in the lower band, say 48.5. At that point of time the payments that need to be made to the generators are based
on their LCG, wheras the payments that would be realised from the end consumers would be based on the pricing
corresponding to the highly priced frequency of 48.5. This profit margin can be used for funding the maintenance of the grid
and related infrastructure including meters. At the higher frequency band, say 51.5, the power plants having high LCG are cutoff from the grid, creating a no loss no gain system.
The multi-register meters have helped us to take care of the demand side inconvenience of consumers getting disconnected
from the grid. Similarly we need to see how the inconvenience caused to the generators due to getting disconnected from the
grid can be handled. The nature of electricity is that it cannot be stored easily. So each power plant have to find their own
suitable method to store the energy generated during non-peak hours. They have find out whether methods such as pumped
storage system are suitable for them. Or they can also find some local applications wherein they can utilise the excess energy.
As such it is the generators with high LCG face this problem on a larger scale, hence it is better if they try to adopt technology
which would enable quick start / stop operation.

DRIVING CHANGE
For CAER, driving the kVAh innovation was not easy. It had to
sacrifice its parent meter manufacturing company BEM Ltd.,
that was entirely dependant on its main customer - the erstwhile
GEB. This utility took exception to the fact that a meter
manufacturing unit, or a vendor, was teaching it how to reduce
its losses. Even these days, CAER is still facing resistance for the
kVAh implementation in Gujarat, even when it is offering services
free of cost. We find this to be an irony considering that many of
the northern states, such as Punjab, are anxious to implement
kVAh metering and are taking help of consultants at a high cost
to advise it on this new and alien concept.

Figure 2. The first kVAh bill delivered by electric utility -MGVCL

CAER was keen to make kVAh metering in Gujarat a success, and

when it observed that, even after 10 years, MGVCL utility was not
eager to execute the pilot project and apply the kVAh tariff with

25% discount to comply with the GERC directives [5,6], it

resorted to new ways to ensure that it happens. First, the author,
joined as a principal of a newly set up womens engineering
college, ICCT, the 1st such college in Gujarat. He educated the
1st year undergraduates through seminars. These girls
dispatched post-cards to GERC impressing upon them the need to
reduce line losses through kVAh metering. Next, on 27th August
2010, (birthday of late Shri. H. M. Patel [ex Finance Minister /
Chairman, BEM], Urja Month, Swarnim Gujarat Year), in the
Seminar Room of ICCT, these girl students hosted a function,
during which, in the presence of Member (Technical), GERC, they
ensured that the 1st kVAh bill worldwide for Street Lighting was
delivered by MGVCL to Anand Municipality (see Figure 2). History
was made. The engineering girl students even dedicated the kVAh
concept to the nation (see Figure 3). This is a brief glimpse of
how CAER achieved success after 14 years of persistent efforts.
Of course, it goes without saying that the country could have
saved over Rs. 1 trillion in terms of line losses, if the utilities had
not resisted its implementation fifteen years ago.

Figure 3. Plaques distributed while kVAh was dedicated to the Nation.

1.2 Searching for the Right Implementation

It would not be inappropriate to mention here, that currently,
kVAh tariffs and metering are in place in Uttar Pradesh,
Uttaranchal, Himachal, Chattisgarh, J&K, Delhi, and Gujarat. And
we are proud to state that India has been the first country to take
such a bold step, and even developed countries such as US are
still waking up to this new age efficiency move.
CAERs pioneering efforts have been directly or indirectly behind
these kVAh implementations. Yet, with an exception of Gujarat,
all other implementations are of cosmetic nature and we do not
expect the results of those loss reduction initiatives to be at all
impressive, due to reasons given below:
On its web page[7], South Asia Forum for Infrastructure
Regulation (SAFIR), has put in focus, the Uttar Pradesh Electric
Regulatory Commission (UPERC), for the best practices followed
by it, and in particular, the introduction of kVAh billing for high
voltage consumers and for loads above 50 kW in non-domestic
(LMV2) and institutions (LMV4) categories in 2001-02. However,
we at CAER, have always intended kVAh metering for use in the
LT sector that do not currently have PF based tariff, and we
strongly believe that it has been wrongly implemented to replace
an already well planned multi-part HT tariff in Uttar Pradesh.
The Delhi ERC (DERC), in its tariff schedule for the year 2006-07
for the Non-Domestic LT (NDLT1) Category, has charged 487
paise per kVAh instead of 535 paise per kWh. This means that the
consumer would be paying more under the new tariff if his/her PF
is less than 0.91. The kVAh tariff was therefore considered one
that penalizes the consumers. It is, therefore, not surprising, that
there has also been a lot of hue and cry about inflated bills in a
few parts of our country due to implementation of kVAh metering
[8].
There is a lot of fuzziness associated with the term Apparent
Energy. Apparently (pun intended!), this parameter means
different things to different people. For some, it simply replaces
measurement of active energy and power factor. For others, it
could be a replacement for active and reactive energies. There

were technical articles that offered up to six different definitions

for Apparent Energy [9] to add to the confusion already created.
To complicate matters even further, the official documents
published by the Ministry of Power[10] and the Regulators[ 11]
had erroneous or misleading interpretations. We had shown in
[12], why apparent energy is a scalar and cannot be computed as
a vector sum.
In this paper, we again refocus on the correct definition for
Apparent Energy and justify why it cannot be defined any other
way. More importantly, we will show that the measurements of
kVAh and PF as taken by the electric utilities are incorrect in the
current scenario of non-sinusoidal currents.

2. Objectives
The basic premise behind the kVAh tariff system is: when every
other commodity is charged on the basis of cost to deliver - why
not electricity? The electrical tariff system currently in use
worldwide is flawed, unfair, and inefficient due to the wrong
choice for unit of electrical energy measurement worldwide,
namely, kilo-Watt-hour or kWh (unit of active energy), for over a
century.
Till the 1980s, the major cause of concern for kWh based tariff
was inductive loads. To counter excessive current drawl,
particularly in the HT sector, a Power Factor (PF) based penalty
was levied while the measurements continued to be taken on the
kWh unit. However, over the past 30 years, the nature of the load
has changed considerably. Power electronics has proliferated most
of the electrical appliances, ranging from personal computers,
LED and fluorescent lamps, adjustable speed drives, to arc and
induction furnaces. The current waveforms are no longer
sinusoidal due to the presence of harmonics (higher frequency
components). These harmonic currents are not only responsible
for high line losses but are also a major nuisance factor. They
cause damage to the sensitive appliances connected at
the neighbours premises as both share the same utility power
distribution lines. Even mal-operation of utilities protection
system may result due to flow of harmonic currents.

In [13], we have shown how kVAh tariff would enable a fair

distribution of financial burden to be applied to improve the
quality of electric service under such a scenario.

2.1 VA Labelling
The starting point for the new kVAh system is labelling. All
appliances are required to change the labelling scheme from Watt
(W) to Volt-Ampere (VA). Figure 4 shows the image of one such
appliance, namely an AC adaptor that displays a step taken in the
right direction. Its label displays consumption in VA and not in W.
Moreover, only the basic electrical parameters are displayed for
the input and output namely voltage and current.

Figure 4. The VA Labeling (courtesy Olympus Imaging Corp.)

2.2 Definition of Apparent Energy

In the year 1996, after conducting experiments using microcontrollers, CAER identified that apparent energy need not be
computed in the same manner as it was done using electromechanical meters. It took the first bold step of computing
apparent power S in Volt-Ampere (VA) as a product of the RMS
values of voltage and current and successfully implemented it in
low cost apparent energy meters.

Later, in the year 2010, we accessed two important tools, listed

below, using which, we have re-affirmed that our choice of
definition for kVAh and the algorithm for its computation (that we
had implemented in 1996) are both correct.
(a) The IEEE Standard 1459 2010 released by the IEEE Power and
Energy Society (PES)[14] that has updated definitions for power
quantities for non-sinusoidal environment.
(b) The release of the Energy Metering Chip the EM773 by NXP
Semiconductors[15]. This chip had an inbuilt metrology engine
that would compute the various electrical parameters as per the
new IEEE 1459-2010.
What is noteworthy is that the IEEE PES took care to avoid
confusion, by deciding not to add any new units. The same units
watts (W) for instantaneous and active powers, voltamperes(VA) for apparent power and var for non-active powers
were used to distinctly separate the three major types of power
[14]. The IEEE PES has simply offered new definitions to give
guidance with respect to the quantities that should be measured
or monitored for revenue purposes, engineering economic
decisions and determination of major harmonic polluters (all of
which find relevance here).
They have also been careful not to tread on the matters related
to energy billing and tariffs and agree that there is no general
power theory yet available that can provide a base for these
matters. This has placed the responsibility of tariffs squarely on
the tariff regulatory authorities.

3. Outputs of the EM773 Metrology

Engine
The outputs of the Metrology Engine within the EM773 [15], in
accordance to IEEE Std. 1459-2010, are described in this section.
These outputs are considered to be valid for sinusoidal as well as
non-sinusoidal voltages and currents.

3.1 Voltage (V), Current (I)

The root-mean-square (rms) voltage V in Volt (V), and rms

current I in Ampere (A), respectively, are measured according to:

In this formula, k is the index of the internal voltage (v) or

current (i) samples inside the Metrology Engine and T is the
sample period of the Metrology Engine. For the EM773, the
product kT= 1 second.

3.2 Apparent Power: S

The apparent power S in Volt-Ampere (VA), which is the main
focus of this paper, is measured as the product of the RMS
voltage and RMS current.

For a constant line power loss, and a constant load rms voltage V,
the apparent power is the maximum active power that can be
transmitted through the line. In other words, maximising the
amount of energy transmitted while keeping the thermal stress of
the line constant.

3.3 Active Power: P

The active power P in Watt (W) is measured according to

3.4 Power Factor: PF

The power factor PF is the ratio of active power over apparent
power. It is dimensionless.

PF can be interpreted as the ratio between the energy

transmitted to the load over the maximum energy that could
have been transmitted provided the line losses are kept the
same. It is clear, therefore, that maximum utilization of the line
occurs when P = S, and hence PF can also be considered to be
a utilization factor indicator.

3.5 Non-active Power: N

The non-active power N in Volt-Ampere-reactive (var) is
computed as

The following additional outputs of the Metrology Engine in EM773

are considered to be valid for sinusoidal or non-sinusoidal
currents but only for sinusoidal voltages. In other words,
according to IEEE Std 1459-2010, these calculations are valid if
the voltage waveform has significantly lower distortion (THDV <
0.05) than the current waveform (THDI > 0.4).
In such cases, the fundamental active power (P1) approximately
equals the active power (P) described above.

3.6 Fundamental Reactive Power: Q1

The fundamental reactive power, Q1, in Volt-Ampere-reactive
(var) is measured according to

In this formula, k is the index of the fundamental voltage

samples v1 and fundamental current samples i1 inside the
Metrology Engine and T is the sample period of the Metrology
Engine.

3.7 Fundamental Apparent Power: S1

The fundamental apparent power S1 in Volt-Ampere (VA) is
measured according to

3.8 Fundamental Power Factor: PF1

The dimensionless parameter, fundamental power factor, denoted
as PF1, is measured as the ratio between fundamental active
power P1 and fundamental apparent power S1

3.9 Non-fundamental Apparent Power: SN

The non-fundamental apparent power SN in Volt-Ampere (VA) is
measured according to

3.10 Current Total Harmonic Distortion: THDI

This dimensionless parameter is measured in the EM773 using
the approximation formula below, which is accurate within 1% for
voltages with THDV < 0.05 and for currents with THDI > 0.4. For
values outside this range its an indicative approximation.

For the same condition, namely THDV < 5% and THDI > 40%, the
following expression holds.

3.11 Analysis

What is noteworthy is the sequence in which the various

parameters are measured. The most fundamental parameters are
computed in the beginning (Sub-section 3.1) while the most
complex derived parameters at the end. The computation of
apparent power, S, takes place early (in Sub-section 3.2) and its
accuracy is much higher than that of a derived parameter, say
ofTHDI, computed last in Subsection 3.10. The EM773 claims
accuracies of 1% for S and 5% for THDI respectively.
The second important observation is that all the meters
manufactured these days have been measuring fundamental
reactive power Q1 and using it to compute apparent power. Hence
the quantities they are recording are actually S1 and PF1;
not S and PF, respectively.
In the case of three phase unbalanced circuit, the IEEE PES has
coined the term Effective Apparent Power (VA), Se, which
assumes a virtual balanced circuit that has exactly the same line
power losses as the actual unbalanced circuit. The definition of an
effective line current Ie also follows from this equivalence and was
suggested by Emanuel [14]. Thus,
. One may recall that,
in case of single phase, rms current, I, is also
called effective current, Ie.

3. Conclusions
We have shown true apparent power S to be a product of
two rms quantities, and hence a scalar quantity and why,
unlike fundamental apparent power S1, it cannot be computed as
a vector sum of active and reactive power. It is in everyones
interest, and particularly in the interest of technical loss
reduction, that we promote a single definition of apparent power
or energy. The definition that is obtained from first principles and
given in Subsection 3.2 should only be considered as the right
one.
Thanks to the semiconductor companies, who have promoted low
cost metering chips like the EM773 that record true apparent
power, the utilities are less averse to the idea of using kVAh as a

unit for metering and tariff purposes. The benefits of using kVAh
as a tariff unit are numerous and the utilities that have adopted it
are already started reaping the benefits of this new tariff.
Our request to the utilities is, however, to introduce the kVAh
tariff as an optional, and not a mandatory, tariff. Further, that the
utilities should have a change of heart, and offer a larger discount
to the kVAh tariff for the consumers in general, and domestic
consumers in particular, during the introductory phase, since their
role is vital to the technical loss reduction exercise. Utilities
should share a larger portion of the benefits of technical loss
reduction to the consumers, as the same is achieved through
their active role and participation such as while choosing more
efficient appliances from the market often at a higher price. The
consumers should not feel that they are being burdened twice.
This is key to the success of kVAh metering.
Dedication: We dedicate this work to Late Shri. Narasinha

Govind Kamat
. Born on February 12, 1926, he
graduated from Pune University with BE (Mech/Elec) Hons. Using
his expertise in reviving sick units, he successfully revived Baroda
Electric Meters Ltd. but later had to sacrifice it for the cause of
kVAh metering. We owe the kVAh concept and the R&D unit Centre for Apparent Energy Research to him.

References:
1.

Peter Fairley. Direct-Current Networks Gain Ground, IEEE Spectrum

2011. page 12.

February

2.

Kamat V. N. On the Implementation of an Appropriate Tariff System for Better

Energy Management in rural and Urban Areas, in the proceedings of the 2nd
International R&D Conference on Water and Energy, organized by Central Board
of Irrigation and Power, Malcha Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi 110 021, at
Vadodara, 21-24 October 1997, Energy Volume 1, ed. C.V.J. Varma, pp. 329-335

3.

GERC Tariff Order against Case 19/1999 dated 10th October 2000 filed by Gujarat
Electricity Board in 1999, Section 9.6.7. on Apparent Energy Meters, pp. 104105, Tariff Order on page 155, Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission,
Ahmedabad, India (www.gercin.org).

4.

Kamat V. N. Smart Street Lights with VAh tariff triggering an Electrical

Revolution, Lighting India, published by Chary Publications, 311, Raikar
Chambers, Govandi (E), Mumbai, 400 088, Vol. 5, No. 2, March-April 2010, pp.
20-28.

5.

GERC Tariff Order against Case 994/2010 dated 31st March 2010 filed by Madhya
Gujarat Vij Company Limited for Annual Performance Review for FY 2009-10 &
Aggregate Revenue Requirement for FY 2010-11. Objection and Analysis on page
27, Tariff Order on pp. 159-160.

6.

Kamat V. N. Implementation of GERCs Apparent Energy Tariff the Street

Lighting Revolution, Electrical India, published by Chary Publications, 311, Raikar
Chambers, Govandi (E), Mumbai, 400 088, Vol. 50, No. 7, July 2010, pp. 44-58.

7.

South Asia Forum for Infrastructure Regulation (SAFIR) Section - Regulator in

Focus, from the website of SAFIR, www.safirasia.org/safir/others/RiF/rif.asp.

8.

Tribune News Service, Meter reading method faulty: Mukhi, The Tribune, Online
edition, Chandigarh, India, Friday, December 9,
2005, www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20051209/delhi.htm

9.

Ashok V. Hattangady, KVAh Metering Basics, from the website of Conzerv

Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore,
India, www.conzerv.com/PDF/Articles/kVAHmetering.pdf.

10. Specifications for A.C. Static Electrical Energy Meters, Technical Report No. 88,
Central Board of Irrigation and Power, Malcha Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi
-110021, Revised July 1996.
11. Working Group Report on Metering Issues, Forum of Regulators, Sectt: C/o
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) 3rd Floor, Chanderlok Building,
36 Janpath, New Delhi, August 2009, www.forumofregulators.gov.in .
12. Kamat V. N. Can Apparent Energy be Computed as a Vector Sum of Active and
Reactive Energies, Electrical India, published by Chary Publications, 14 Sidh
Prasad, Pestom Sagar Road, 3 Tilak Nagar P. O., Chembur, Mumbai, 400 089, Vol.
39, No. 23. December 15th, 1999, pp. 11-17.
13. Kamat V. N. Apparent Energy Measurement - Solution to Inductive Load,
Harmonics, and Switching Load Problems, Electrical India, published by Chary
Publications, 14 Sidh Prasad, Pestom Sagar Road, 3 Tilak Nagar P. O., Chembur,
Mumbai, 400 089, Vol. 40, No. 13. July 15, 2000, pp. 8-17.
14. IEEE Std 1459-2010 IEEE Standard Definitions for the Measurement of Electric
Power Quantities Under Sinusoidal, Nonsinusoidal, Balanced, or Unbalanced
Conditions, (by the Power System Instrumentation and Measurements Committee
of the IEEE Power & Energy Society. Approved 2 February 2010 by IEEE-SA
Standards Board).

15. NXP Semiconductors Energy Metering Chip - EM773 User Manual - UM10415:
Rev. 1, 10th September 2010 Chapter 16: EM773 Metrology Engine, Section 16.5
Output Defns. http://www.nxp.com.

Billing on kVAh for the first time Worldwide and to

Dedicate the kVAh Concept to the Nation
It is a very historic moment. A novel Tariff concept,
initiated for the 1st time Worldwide, to reduce technical
losses and save energy to the tune of Rs. 1 crore/hour has
borne fruit.
(This concept was recommended by the Expert Committee
set up by the Ministry of Power, Govt. of India, but failed
to bear fruit due to non co-operation of the erstwhile GEB
a decade back.)
The students of
ICCT
Engineering
College
are
hosting
to 'Commemorate the Billing on kVAh for the 1st time
Worldwide' and to 'Dedicate the kVAh Concept to the
Nation' The local electric utility - MGVCL will be presenting the
Bill toAnand Municipality, as per the Directives of the Electric
Regulatory Commission, GERC, on 27th August 2010 between
3:00 P.M. to 6:00 PM.
Invitation card link: www.icct.in/kvah/pdf/INVITE_100805.pdf
Thanks and regards, Dr. Vithal N. Kamat, Principal,
Centre for Apparent Energy Research, CAER, an R&D unit of
Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. has experimented with and proposed
an Electrical Tariff System based on a new Apparent Energy
unit (kVAh) that would REDUCE LINE LOSSES and save an
estimated 2.2 BILLION Units of ELECTRICAL ENERGY per annum
(Savings of Rs. 1,100 Crores/annum) in Gujarat alone. The SIMPLE
tariff is a POWERFUL ENABLER and has the potential to trigger
an ELECTRICAL REVOLUTION by motivating consumers to OPT
for energy EFFICIENT electrical appliances and, thereby, to SAVE
in Electricity Bills. It also encourages MANUFACTURERS to develop
and promote energy EFFICIENT appliances. Important aspects are
- PROJECT COST is NIL, and it is WIN-WIN (BOTH ELECTRIC
UTILITIES and CONSUMERS BENEFIT).
On March 31, 2010, in a landmark judgment, at the behest of
CAER, the Honable Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission
(GERC) has offered the new kVAh Tariff (with a 25% DISCOUNT)

for Pilot implementation in ANAND for the FIRST TIME

WORLDWIDE. Under the supervision of Honable Anand District
Collector, and the co-operation of Madhya Gujarat Vij Company
Ltd. (MGVCL) and Anand Municipality, CAER has successfully
implemented the APPARENT ENERGY Pilot Project for Street
Lighting sector in Anand.
To mark this historic event in the Swarnim Gujarat year,
on 27th August 2010, the Students of ICCT Engg. College in
association
with CAER,
are
organizing a
short COLLOQUIUM cum CEREMONY
to deliver
st
the 1 ELECTRICITY BILL based on kVAh.
We invite you on this very auspicious occasion to
commemorate
the Billing
on kVAh for
the 1st time
Worldwide and to Dedicate the kVAh Concept to the
Nation.
Venue : Room A 301, Admin Building
Date : Friday, 27th August 2010, Time : 3:00 PM to 6:00
PM
Some of the dignitaries who will grace this occasion are:
Shri. Pravinbhai Patel, Member (Technical), GERC, Chief
Guest
Shri. R. N. Joshi, Anand Collector and District
Magistrate, Guest of Honour
Shri. P. H. Rana, Director (Technical), GUVNL, Guest
of Honour