One Bill or Two? Decoding Utility, Supplier and Dual Energy Billing

Energy bills can be confusing. Between utilities, third-party suppliers, distribution charges, supply rates, and line-item adjustments, it’s not always clear who you’re paying or what you’re paying for.

In deregulated markets, billing structure plays an important role in how your energy program operates. Whether you receive one bill or multiple, the format impacts administrative workload, transparency, and in some cases, cash flow.

Here’s a simple breakdown of the three most common billing structures: utility consolidated billing, supplier consolidated billing and dual billing.

Utility Consolidated Billing

Utility consolidated billing (UCB) is the most common structure in deregulated electricity and natural gas markets.

In a UCB system, the utility company provides a single bill that includes charges for both energy delivery and supply. This approach simplifies the billing process for consumers, offering clear benefits in terms of customer service, payment processing, and market transparency.

Even if you select a third-party supplier for the commodity portion, the utility still handles the billing and collects payment. The utility then remits the supply portion to your chosen supplier.

For commercial real estate owners and portfolio operators, this structure offers simplicity. There is one invoice, one payment, and no need to reconcile multiple statements. Operationally, it reduces administrative burden—especially for companies managing dozens or hundreds of meters.

Supplier Consolidated Billing

Supplier Consolidated Billing (SCB) is a billing method where the energy supplier issues a single bill that includes both supply and delivery charges. The supplier collects payment and then remits the delivery portion back to the utility. This billing structure is less common in many large commercial accounts.

This approach enhances the customer relationship for suppliers, simplifies billing for consumers and provides a cohesive customer service experience. Some organizations prefer SCB because it can streamline communication around supply-related questions or adjustments. However, availability depends on the utility territory and supplier capabilities. Not all utilities allow supplier consolidated billing, and not all suppliers offer it.

From a strategic standpoint, the billing format does not change the underlying energy procurement strategy—but it can affect internal processes, invoice management workflows and reporting.

Dual Billing

Dual billing means exactly what it sounds like: two separate bills. Consumers receive separate bills for delivery services from the utility and supply charges from the energy supplier.

This structure requires customers to manage and pay two separate invoices each billing cycle. This approach provides greater transparency in billing but may be less convenient for consumers who must manage two separate invoices which could cause missed payments.

Some companies prefer the visibility that comes from seeing supply and delivery broken out entirely. In certain markets, dual billing may be the only available option.

Bottom Line

Billing structure does not change the physical delivery of energy. The same utility maintains the infrastructure, and power or gas still flows the same way regardless of supplier choice.

For large energy users and commercial real estate owners managing multiple assets, billing structure should align with operational preferences. Simplicity often reduces friction, centralization reduces errors and clarity reduces confusion when reviewing spend.