Full-Requirements vs. Shaped Commercial Energy Supply

Translate the labels into hourly obligations

A full-requirements arrangement may cover the account’s actual load within stated terms, with the supplier managing some shaping risk. The contract can still contain exclusions, bandwidth, material-change provisions or component pass-throughs. Treat the name as a starting question rather than a promise that every possible quantity is covered at one price.

A shaped purchase may define different quantities across hours, days or seasons to resemble expected consumption. Deviations from that shape can create additional purchases or surplus settlement. Ask for the schedule, units, time zone, holiday treatment and settlement reference. A profile that matched last year can become unsuitable after an operating change.

Evaluate the quality of the load forecast

Use interval data where available and identify unusual closures, maintenance or expansions. An annual kWh total alone does not reveal when energy is needed. Two facilities with identical annual use can have different hourly profiles and therefore different exposure under the same shaped schedule.

Document what happens if the forecast is wrong. A new production shift, a long shutdown or weather-driven cooling can affect residual quantities. Determine whether load can be updated, at what price and by what deadline. Compare these rules with the full-requirements option’s treatment of similar changes, rather than evaluating only a nominal energy rate.

Hypothetical shape-mismatch example

Assume a simplified contracted shape covers 80,000 kWh at $0.08 during a period, but actual consumption is 100,000 kWh. If the uncovered 20,000 kWh settles at an invented $0.14, modeled energy cost is $6,400 plus $2,800, or $9,200. A hypothetical requirements price of $0.09 costs $9,000 for the same total use, subject to its own terms.

If actual load instead falls below the shaped purchase, excess energy must be treated under the contract’s surplus rule; it cannot automatically be valued at the fixed purchase rate. This example omits hourly variation, losses and separate charges. It shows why a low priced block is not the same as a low final cost.

Ask for a common settlement demonstration

Request both proposals against the same representative load file, including a changed-load case. List commodity, capacity, network and other components and identify which side bears forecast risk. Preserve the sample calculations with the final agreement so invoice staff understand why billed quantities may differ from the original schedule.

A business with stable operations and staff able to reconcile residual settlements may assess shaped structures differently from one with uncertain occupancy or limited procurement resources. The choice is about the contract’s actual risk allocation and the business’s ability to manage it. No generic shaped or full-requirements label can establish the better future outcome without that account-level analysis.

Questions & answers