Ok, kiitos selvennyksestä! Katselin myös tuolta artikkelin englanninkielisestä versiosta ja tämä taitaa osua hyvin tähän tapaukseen (vaikka tuesta ei olekaan kyse):

Subsidy

Conversely, deadweight loss can also arise from consumers buying more of a product than they otherwise would based on their marginal benefit and the cost of production. For example, if in the same nail market the government provided a $0.03 subsidy for every nail produced, the subsidy would reduce the market price of each nail to $0.07, even though production actually still costs $0.10 per nail. Consumers with a marginal benefit of between $0.07 and $0.10 per nail would then buy nails, even though their benefit is less than the real production cost of $0.10. The difference between the cost of production and the purchase price then creates the “deadweight loss” to society.

Eli sähkön hinnan tilanteeseen sovitettuna, kuluttajat eivät saa samaa määrää “hyötyä” tuosta halvenneesta hinnasta kuin mitä tuottajat joutuvat siitä maksamaan. Jotakuinkin näin?