Integration of DER Program: Utility Economics & Practices ... · PDF file• Better understand DER markets ... •Increased complexity and cost of utility planning and grid balancing

© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

Nadav Enbar, Steven Coley, Jeff Roark

EPRI

PDU Fall Advisory Meeting

September 20, 2016

Integration of DER Program:

Utility Economics & Practices

P174D Tech Transfer

2© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

Agenda / Objectives

P174D research activities

– Meter-based Connecters for DER

– Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Locational PV Deployment

– Time and Locational Value of DER: Methods & Applications

– Examining Utility Fixed and Variable Cost Pathways with Increasing DER

A Look Ahead: Proposed 2017 Portfolio

Member Exchange & Discussion


PS174D: Business Impacts and Practices

Objective

Examine economic and business

implications of PV adoption; Explore

utility strategies, use cases,

applications, that support DER.

Value

• Better understand DER markets in the context of utility distribution

• Access lessons learned and analysis of innovative solar business models

• Acquire case study results on PV technical and economic performance

• Discern high penetration PV contexts and mitigation techniques from multiple stakeholder perspectives

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

$2.50

$3.00

$3.50

$4.00

$4.50

$5.00

Tota

l In

itia

l Co

sts

($/W

)

Energy Value ($/kWh)

10 years

5 years

15 years

20 yearsPaybackPeriod

Less Economic

More Econmic

2045

Leverage & Coordination

• Energy Storage (P94), Technology

Assessment/Integrated Portfolio Planning

(P178), Renewable Generation (P193); NREL,

SEPA and RMI; EPRI Integrated Grid initiative


2016 PS174D Deliverables

174.008 - Utility Practices, Markets, and Use Cases

Deliverable Title Report Type / Delivery Product ID

Utility DER Business Practices

- Meter-based Connecters for DER

- Structures that Maximize the Potential of Microgrids1

White Paper x 2

Delivery: Q3, Q4

3002008203

3002008205

Solar PV Market Update – Volumes 17 & 182

- Frontline Solar Industry Analyses

Newsletter / Email Alerts

Delivery: Q2, Q4

3002008460

3002008210

Understanding PV Market Potential for Distribution Planning3 White Paper

Delivery: Q43002008202

174.009 - Economic Analysis of Business Impacts and Opportunities

Comparing the Cost-Benefit of Guided vs. Unguided PV

Deployment on Distribution4

Tech Update


Examining the Effects of Customer-Sited Solar + Storage on

Distribution5

Tech Update (PPT+Webcast)


Examining Utility Fixed and Variable Cost Pathways with

Increasing DER Growth

White paper


Jointly-published with:1 SEPA2 P193

3 P174A + P178B4 P174A5 P174A + P94


Nadav Enbar

Principal Project Manager

Meter-based

Connecters for DER


Meter-based Connecters for DER

Behind-the-meter PV challenges the traditional utility business model

• Revenue erosion, cross-subsidization/equity issues, customer satisfaction

• Increased complexity and cost of utility planning and grid balancing efforts

o Inability to “see” variable production of distributed PV presents grid reliability concerns

Meter collars for PV as a contributing solution

• Provide a standardized method for interconnecting DER at reduced cost by

eliminating BOS components and wiring upgrades

• Offer visibility into PV system performance across a distributed fleet

• With “smarts” (and regulatory approval), enable remote command/control

Potentially facilitate development of a utility solar services model that supports

more economic PV deployment and enhanced grid reliability

Objective: Examine meter adapters as utility strategy for safely/cost effectively

interconnecting DER systems while laying groundwork for future opportunities.


What Is a Meter Collar for DER?

• A device inserted between residential

utility electrical meter and the meter

socket that creates a new interface

between the meter and socket

• Additional space created by extending the

meter connection further away from the

socket can be used to install other

devices for the utility benefit

• Remote disconnect

• Receive power line carrier signals

• Facilitate distributed generation

Example Meter Adapter Installations

Sources: Global Power Products and ConnectDER

• Appropriate for

1. New construction

2. Upgrade from 100/150a to 200a panel


Upfront Cost Savings

Meter collars bypass a home’s

distribution panel, reduce

wiring/materials of service panel

upgrade, eliminate AC disconnect

o Lowers overall cost of residential PV

system install by ~5-10%

Only commercially available “smart”

adapter also eliminates need for

production meter, transfer switches,

communications boxesTypical Residential Solar PV Installation

Source: ConnectDER

Conventional Meter Collar

Panel Upgrade ~$2,500$400-1,300, plus ITC rebate

Underground Service Upgrade ~$10,000

Labor Multiple people Single person

Install Time 4-6 weeks 1 week

Avg. Customer Outage 6 hours 10 minutes


Future Potential: Smart Functionality

• Smart functionality adds

metering, monitoring,

and management

capabilities for the local

utility

• With regulatory approval

potentially enables

greater grid reliability

and other utility

business opportunities

o Remote disconnect and

control, altered inverter

settings, tariff-based

signals, etc.

o PV, stationary storage,

EVs, load mgmt., etc.

SMART ConnectDER Scheme

Source: ConnectDER


Case Studies

Company ConnectDER SDG&EGlobal Power

ProductsSolarCity

Product(s)Simple ConnectDER

Smart ConnectDER

Renewable Meter

AdapterGenerLink

Meter Socket

Adapter

Price Point$400 - SIMPLE

$850 - SMART*$1,326 $400-800 < $400

Voltage 120/240 Volts** 120/240 Volts 120/240 Volts 120/240 Volts

Max Power 15 kW 11.5 kW 10 kW TBD

Over Current

Rating

15-45A, 5A

increments;

50A-80A, 10A

increments

48A 40A TBD

Parallel DER

OperationYes Yes No Yes

UL Approved Yes Yes Yes Yes

Auto Transfer

SwitchNo No Yes No

Warranty 10 years Lifetime 1-15 years TBD

Cum Installs 4,500 3,800 40,000 0

Notes:

* A "gen 2" Smart ConnectDER, scheduled for release in 2H16, is anticipated to have a cheaper, as yet undisclosed, price point.

**The Smart ConnectDER will support 208 V service drops by the latter half of 2016.


Utility Business Model Examples / Options

• Developed to help manage PV customers

• Sells to developers/customers as contractual

option during application process

• Provides lifetime warranty (SDG&E owns

device)

• Benefits

• Improved customer relations

• Streamlined interconnection

• Supported CA enviro goals

• Enhanced grid safety

• Avoided costs

• May seek CPUC approval to license/sell device

• May add “smarts”; RMA a proof-of-concept

SDG&E’s Renewable Meter Adapter (RMA)

RMA Installation

Source: SDG&E


Utility Business Model Examples / Options

• Sells Simple and Smart ConnectDER

devices to utilities and installers

o Utilities can install equipment themselves

or resell to certified installers.

o Meter collars can be used as source for

additional revenue (Green Mtn Power)

• “Smarts” provide utilities with a

dedicated beachhead into managing

DER assets

o Short-term: roll out tied exclusive to utility-

owned PV

o Longer-term: with permission, alter

settings of customer-owned PV assets

ConnectDER Installation

Source: ConnectDER

ConnectDER


A Look Ahead: Potential Utility Meter Adapter

Deployment Models

Model Definition

AuthorizeAllow 3rd parties to sell direct to customers or installers; coordinate

installations required. Optionally retain rights to data access.

ResellPurchase direct from manufacturer, resell to customers as service or

asset. Optionally retain ownership of asset, rights to data access.

Hybrid

Offer for service fee; with regulatory approval, rate-base the

balance. Retain ownership and data, optionally provide 3rd party

data access.

Rate Base

With regulatory approval, mandate deployment and rate-base full

cost. Retain ownership and data, optionally provide 3rd party data

access.

Sources: ConnectDER, EPRI


Challenges

• Regulatory

o Approval for utility visibility into customer-owned PV production

profile, remote control and altered settings of distributed PV

assets, etc.

• Design hurdles – form

factor constraints that

come with added

functionality

• UL certification/listing

• Non-proprietary

communication pathways

• Utility metering approval


Questions, Comments, Feedback?


Steven ColeySenior Project Engineer

Assessing the Costs and

Benefits of Guided vs.

Unguided Solar

Deployment on

Distribution Feeders


Why is understanding the locational value of PV important?

Reduce system integration costs– Utilize existing investment in grid infrastructure

– Reduce (or defer) future infrastructure investments

Inform locational guidance strategies– What deployment types are “optimal”? (Location?

Concentration?)

– Are the costs of a guidance program worth the potential benefits of guided deployment?

Inform regulation and legal considerations– Whose costs and whose benefits?

Focus research on most promising areas


Learning Objectives

1. Identify the monetary impacts of PV to

the distribution system

2. Determine KEY considerations that

drive PV’s locational value

3. Recognize actionable steps to quantify

the locational value of PV in your

territory


A case study approach to assessing the costs and

benefits of guided vs unguided PV deployment

Studies show PV hosting capacity

is location specific

Model “case study” scenarios

portraying two general outlooks:

“guided” vs. “unguided” PV

deployment on 4 feeders (2

Southern, 2 TVA)

– Outcomes inform guidance programs

(i.e. community solar & tailored

incentives)

Convert technical impacts into

economic impacts

Difference in net value between

guided and unguided scenarios

informs locational guidance

strategies

Hosting capacity is defined as the

amount of DER that can be

accommodated without adversely

impacting power quality or reliability

beyond acceptable limits.


Focus of today’s presentation

An Integrated Grid Cost Benefit FrameworkContains both bulk system and distribution system elements

Hosting Energy

Capacity

Distribution System

Bulk System

Customer or

Owner

Cost/Benefits

Societal

Costs/Benefits

Benefit-CostScenario Definition

DER

Adoption

Market

Conditions

Resource

Adequacy

Flexibility

Operational Practices & Simulation

Transmission

Performance

Transmission

Expansion

System

Cost

Changes

Reliability

System

Assumptions


Modeling & Analysis

Outputs

Economic Analysis

Outputs

Capacity upgrade

deferral ($)

Capital costs for

integration ($)

Change in O&M

expenses and

shortened asset life($)

Distribution Losses &

Energy Consumption

(kWh)

Distribution

(¢/kWhgen)

Energy Purchases

(marginal - ¢/kWh)

Capacity requirement

(load shape changes)

Voltage regulation

Operations of regulators,

switched capacitors,

& tap changers

Protection

Capacity upgrades

Investment

Deferral

(¢/kWhgen)

Energy

(¢/kWhgen)

Combine Using Common Metrics

(i.e. Normalize to PV Energy

Production & Levelize over 20 yrs)

Mitigation

(¢/kWhgen)

Cost-Benefit Analysis ConsiderationsLearning Objective 1: Monetary impacts of PV to the distribution system


Sensitivity Factors Considered


Group Discussion (2 or 3 people)Take 2 minutes to discuss the following questions

In this study, which factor do you think will have the most significant impact on distribution system value?

– Feeder Characteristic (Feeder CC, R, MV, or HM)

– Location (Guided vs. Unguided Deployment)

– PV Penetration (High vs. Low)

– Scale (Rooftop vs. Centralized)

– I don’t know (It depends is the real answer and I just don’t like to pick…)

What other factors/considerations would have a significant impact on the distribution system value?


Example Total Net Distribution ValueFeeder HM: Moderate PV, Unguided, Rooftop vs. Base Case (no PV)

Note: The full distribution cost would also include an assessment

of the value of transformer deferral due to peak demand reduction.


Comparison Between Guided and Unguided Cases

Use Case Description Comparison

Roof vs. Roof

(RvR)

Simulated use case in which guides distributed

rooftop PV deployment to optimal areas on a

distribution feeder, compared to unguided

deployment of distributed rooftop PV.

Unguided rooftop

vs.

Guided rooftop

Centralized vs.

Roof

(CvR)

Simulated use case in which distributed PV is

directed to optimal rooftop locations on a distribution

feeder, compared to unguided deployment of

centralized PV systems.

Unguided

centralized

vs.

Guided rooftop

Roof vs.

Centralized

(RvC)

Simulated use case in which the deployment of

centralized PV system(s) is directed in optimal areas

of a distribution feeder, compared to deployment of

randomly distributed rooftop PV.

Unguided rooftop

Vs.

Guided centralized

Centralized vs.

Centralized

(CvC)

Simulated use case in which the deployment of

centralized PV system(s) is directed in optimal

areas, rather than compared to the deployment of

randomly located centralized PV systems.

Unguided

centralized

Vs.

Guided centralized


Net Distribution System Cost (+) and Benefit (-) by PV

Penetration for 4 Guidance Use Cases on 4 Feeders


Insights from ResultsLearning Objective 2: KEY considerations that drive PV’s locational value

Guided vs. Unguided Deployment

– Few scenarios result in significant savings.

– Feeder characteristic appears to be a major factor.

– Guiding strategies could be ineffective.

Centralized vs. Distributed Deployment

– PV concentration was not observed to be a major factor

High vs. Low PV Growth

– The impact of PV penetration on distribution value is case

specific


ConclusionsLearning Objective 3: Steps to quantify the locational value of PV

Identify feeder-specific issues that can be solved with solar– This is likely to be the most effective way to develop a locational

deployment strategy that can increase the net distribution system value of distributed solar PV

Determine feeder-specific PV hosting capacity

To increase the locational value of PV, focus on areas with mid-day peak loads and limited remaining head room

Additional research is needed to study the capacity contribution that PV provides to the distribution system

Detailed energy analysis at the distribution system is not a high priority


Questions, Comments, Feedback?


Jeffrey D. Roark

Technical Executive

Time and Locational

Value of Distributed

Energy Resources:

Methods & Applications


California and New York Taking Progressive Actions

“The IOUs are required to define

locational benefits and

optimal locations for DER,

moving the IOUs towards

a more full integration of DER into

their distribution system planning,

operations,

and investment.

– CA PUC Code 769, Aug 2014

“The more efficient system

will be designed and operated

to make optimal use of cleaner

and more efficient generation

technologies and will encourage

substantial increases in

deployment of these

technologies... DER will

become integral tools in the

planning, management and

operation of the electric system. – NY REV, Feb 2015


EPRI’s Study: “Time and Locational Value of DER:

Methods and Applications”

Used the EPRI Benefit-Cost Framework

– Objective, reproducible

– Assesses impacts of interconnected DER

– Estimates value/cost to society

Two DER Interconnection Scenarios

– DER only to meet all load growth

– DER at customer discretion

Actual Systems

– Studied 10-year period to align

with distribution planning timeframe

– Actual performance data for baseline

Asks whether DER can economically replace or avoid

investments otherwise needed to accommodate growth.

Note: Companion study conducted by Sue Tierney, The Analysis Group. “The Value of “DER” to “D”:

The Role of Distributed Energy Resources in Supporting Local Electric Distribution Reliability.”


Mesh Network System

(Con Edison)Flexible Radial System

(SCE)

The Scenarios:

Mesh Network vs. Radial Topologies

Two very different systems demonstrate the methodology.


Time and Locational Value

of Distributed Energy Resources

Thanks to Con Edison

for the use of the following materials.


Con EdisonElectric Distribution System

• NYC Metro Area

• 40% of the NY State electric peak

87% network

13% radial


121 24 Hours

kW

T&D deferral with DER – Considering peak-day load profiles

Current Demand

Forecasted Demand

Network Capacity Expansion

Current Network Capacity

Traditional Approach

• Expand infrastructure to keep up with load growth

Time


Thousands of customer-sited

solutions

T&D deferral with DER – Considering peak day load profiles

• Assemble a portfolio of DER technologies to shave peak.

• Peak load duration matters.

The Brooklyn-Queens Demand Management Program (BQDM) is securing

41 MW of customer-sited DER to defer T&D investment beyond 2025.

Brooklyn

Queens

BQDM Area

Current Network Capacity

DER Portfolio Approach

121 24 Hours

kW

Current Demand

Forecasted Demand

Time


Study assembled DER portfolio based on technology,

customer, and system load-curve characteristics

Illustrative BQDM Example

1 A

2 A

3 A

4 A

5 A

6 A

7 A

8 A

9 A

10 A

11 A

12 P

1 P

2 P

3 P

4 P

5 P

6 P

7 P

8 P

9 P

10 P

11 P

12 A

Expected/Typical Hourly Profile

Hour

Ending

Peak-Load

RiskSolar PV

Energy

Efficiency

Energy

Storage

Energy

Efficiency

DRPV

CHP

Fuel CellStorage

Con Edison Case Study Portfolio

Time


Neighboring

transformer

Neighboring

transformer

Overloaded

Transformer

Network systems present challenges when

targeting DER to address specific distribution violations

Network System:

Multi-directional Power Flows

Locational SensitivityOverloaded

Transformer

A DER energy disperses

from point A.

Radial System:

Unidirectional Power Flows

B

C

A

BC

DER energy directly

reduces transformer flow

whether at A, B, or C.

Effectiveness degrades

with distance.

Distance

∆Flow

Location


EPRI modeling reveals significant locational

sensitivity in the local distribution system

340 kW

Network

Transformer

a

b

a b

DE

R c

ap

acity (

kW

)

NYCOverload – 63 kVA

In the network, DER portfolios must be

tightly situated near distribution asset

to be effective

Overload – 63 kVA

153 kW

Location


Modeling and

Analysis Outputs

Economic

Analysis Outputs

Capacity upgrade

deferral ($)

Capital costs for

integration ($)

Change in O&M

expenses ($) and

shortened asset life

Distribution energy

losses (kW, kWh)

Distribution

($/kWhgen)

Distribution losses

(marginal – $/kWh)

Capacity requirement

(load shape changes)

Voltage regulation

Switched capacitor, tap

changer and regulator

operations

Protection

Capacity upgrades

Capacity

Deferral

($/kWhgen)

System

Losses

($/kWhgen)

Cost Normalized to

DER Energy Production

Mitigation

($/kWhgen)

Benefit/Cost Analysis Considerations: Normalizing

Earlier studies of the cost of DER accommodation

normalized cost over DER Energy Production.


Evaluating alternative distribution plans w/DER

Modeling Assumptions

and Outputs

Economic

Analysis Outputs

Distribution-system/feeder

Energy growth

Load shape

One of:

10-year distribution

upgrade plans to satisfy

voltage, capacity, and

protection constraints

Load Cost

($/kWhgrth)

Incre-

mental

Cost to

Serve

Growth

in Load

($/kWhgrth)

Cost Normalized to

Load Energy Growth

Accom-

modation

($/kWhgrth)

Cost of serving load growth:

• Energy cost (load and losses)

• Capacity cost

• Carbon cost

Cost of distribution upgrades:

• Asset ownership costs(revenue requirements)

• O&M costs

Cost and value of DER:

• Equipment cost

(Utility procurement)

• Net energy value

• Loss-reduction value

• Carbon-reduction value

• Avoided capacity value

10-year DER plans to

satisfy voltage, capacity,

and protection

constraints

Bulk-system characteristics

LMP & Carbon cost rates

Capacity cost rates

In this study we estimated the cost to serve growth.


EPRI study compared costs to meet load growth

using BCA criteria: Traditional T&D vs DER portfolio

Cost to Meet Load Growth –

Traditional Utility Solution

Cost to Meet Load Growth – DER SolutionIn

cre

me

nta

l C

ost

(ce

nts

/kW

h)

Inc

rem

en

tal C

os

t (c

en

ts/k

Wh

)

Systematic application to DER value leads to comparable results

for supporting policy and operations planning.

Location


Time and Location Value of DER: Conclusions from Study

Comprehensive, consistent, and

transparent methods are necessary.

It is hard to generalize the net

benefits of DER as an alternative

to conventional grid.

Time and locational impacts are

key determinants in valuing DER.

It takes a portfolio of DER to meet

system and customer needs and

defer traditional assets cost-

effectively.


Jeff Roark

Technical Executive

Steven Coley

Sr. Project Engineer

Examining Utility Fixed

and Variable Cost

Pathways with

Increasing DER Growth


Examining Utility Fixed and Variable Cost Pathways

with Increasing DER Growth

Assessment of utility fixed and variable costs, the factors which affect those costs,

changes in utility costs over time, and observations about avoidable cost differences

among different types of utilities.

Scope

• Illustrate the range in fixed and variable

cost components for a variety of U.S.

utilities using publicly available data.

• Discuss impacts of market structures

on cost characteristics that affect

DER benefit-cost studies.

Value

• Perspective on the economics of

DER adoption that can inform

grid integration benefit-cost studies.

Delivery Type / Date

• White paper, Q3

Source: FERC Form 1 filings

Dist

Xmsn

A&G

Fixed Gen Variable Cost

0 5 10 15 20 25

Utility 1

Utility 2

Utility 3

Utility 4

Utility 5

Utility 6

Utility 7

Utility 8

Utility 9

Utility 10

Utility 11

Utility 12

Utility 13

Utility 14

Utility 15

Utility 16

Utility 17

Utility 18

Utility 19

Utility 20

Utility 21

Utility 22

Utility 23

Utility 24

Components of Fixed and Variable Cost, ȼ/kWh

Distribution Transmission A&G Fixed Generation Variable Production Cost

Illustrative

Results

Variable CostsFixed Costs


Research Questions

• How have capital expenditures on G, T, & D

changed over time in the U.S. relative

to growth in sales and demand?

• What factors influence a utility’s

fixed vs. variable cost mix?

• What types of costs are fixed?

What types of costs are variable?

What types of costs are avoidable?

How does this change by utility type?

What is the range of utility

fixed costs as a percent of

total costs for different U.S.

utilities and how has this

changed over time?

Illustrative Results


Factors Affecting a Utility’s Fixed vs. Variable Cost Mix

Definition: Variable cost = varies with “output”

Under this cost-accounting definition,

– Variable cost for a utility is almost totally fuel cost or purchased power.

This is not “opex” versus “capex.”*

– Generation/supply decisions directly tradeoff fixed and variable costs;

other decisions don’t.

By this definition, everything that is not variable is fixed cost.

Utilities had different paths through history:

Planning alternatives and economics varied from region to region:

Fuel Costs (affected by availability, transportation)

Load shape: Peak Demand and Load Factor

Terrain, environmental sensitivity/constraints

– In reality, economic landscapes shift: optimal mix is a moving target.

Each utility’s composition of cost is a legacy of decisions past

and world/industry events, such as market restructuring.* capex = capital expenditures, opex = operating cost, or O&M


How fixed is fixed cost?

Revenue requirements for existing assets are fixed,

but decline in time by depreciation.

– Other utility costs are subject to change in time.

Revenue requirements for planned assets can be altered

by changing plans.

– Avoidable Cost: Cost that a utility or its customers can avoid paying

– Deferrable Cost: Cost that can be temporary avoided

In benefit/cost analysis, avoided and deferred costs

are often important sources of value.

Avoided energy costs are often a valuable component,

but what “energy cost” includes depends on the kind of utility

and the market structure under study.


In the1990s and 2000s, structured competitive markets

formed. Generation was divested.

Now we have:

– Vertically integrated utilities

– T&D, distribution companies

– Hybrid utilities (in markets,

but retaining some generation)

– Independent power producers

Fixed costs in competitive markets

– Independent power producers have fixed and variable costs, too.

Plants compete with each other for contributions to their fixed cost.

– Market energy prices include these contributions to fixed costs.

To consumers, these are variable and “avoidable” costs.

– This affects the economics of DER in these areas.

Fixed and variable cost breakdown for 10 utilities

FIXED Cost VARIABLE

Cost

Integrated Systems vs. Competitive Market Systems

Source: IOU FERC Form 1 and EIA filings


Comparison of Fixed Cost Treatment by Utility Type

What costs are avoidable?

Integrated Utility Generation Independent Power Producer

Conditions /

Obligations

Invested for

Obligation to Serve

Invested without obligations unless

contractual. Obligations may be short

term

Capital investmentInvestment “affected with

the public interest”

Capital risked in hope

of investor returns

Recovery of

investmentExpected, arguably a right Expected, but fully at risk

Treatment if

stranded

(cost not

recoverable)

Regulators may

allow stranded-cost recovery.

Often a negotiated result.

Stressed assets are either sold at a

loss (and recapitalized) or plant is

shuttered. May get going-forward

cost*

if needed for reliability (RMR)

Treatment in

customer / societal

economic analysis

Unavoidable fixed cost,

including return at cost of capital

Avoidable to customers, if not

contracted. May be included in

societal analysis.


Questions?


Nadav Enbar


A Look Ahead:

Proposed 2017

Portfolio


A Look Back: Research Roadmap

2011

2015

Utility Solar Business Models

PV Market Trends / Analysis

PV Grid Integration

PV Plant Performance

PV O&M

White paper

strategies

Case studies

PVROM

PV Plant Monitoring &

Analysis

Variability & performance

• 1-10MW

• 10-20MW

• 20MW+

Economics of PV

variability

To P193

To P193

Hi Pen PV

Definition & framework

Case studies

Integrated Grid CBA

• Feeder

• System-wide

Market Adoption

Econ adoption

tool

Adoption primer

PV price parity

USBM

Framework

Case studies

Utility-TPO partnership

PV ownership

NEM reform

Smart inverter roll out & readiness

PV Mkt Update

PV CAPEX / OPEX

Policy / Regulatory

analysis

Standards

Q&A

Tech spotlight


The Way Forward

2016 Beyond

Utility DER Business Models

PV Market Trends / Analysis

DER Grid Integration

Value

Conceptual, Predominately Qualitative, Case Studies

Impact Analyses (CBA), Forecasting, Strategic Planning

Data Driven, Qual/Quant Analyses, Perspectives


2017 PS174D Deliverables Proposed

Deliverable Title (Official) Report Type

Utility DER Business Practices – Topics TBD White Paper x 2

Solar PV Market Update – Volumes 19 & 20 Newsletter / Alerts

CBA Guidebook for an Integrated Grid Technical Update

Long-term Forecasting of DER Adoption and Application of Distribution

PlanningTechnical Update

Costs & Benefits of Distributed vs. Centralized PV Technical Update

Costs & Benefits of Smart Inverter on the Distribution System Technical Update

Changing Marginal Value of PV as Deployment Increases Technical Update

• PV Adoption Forecasting Tool (software)

• Is There a Reduced Risk Threshold for PV?

• DER price parity analysis under rate reform

scenarios

• The Grid Impacts of End-Use DER

• Case Study: Incorporating PV Adoption

Forecasting into Distribution Plananing

• Valuation and strategic adoption of mid-life

PV assets


Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity

Nadav Enbar


303.551.5208

[email protected]

Thank You

Steven Coley

Sr. Project Engineer

615.542.2882

[email protected]

Jeff Roark

Principal Technical Leader

650.855.8783

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]




Appendix


DER Proceedings are Proliferating in More Than

20 States


Example: Selected Studies of Average Net Solar Value

Colorado (2013)

Source: e-Lab 2013 Solar Study (a collection of several studies by others).

Methodologies and results vary significantly.

Austin Energy (2012)

New Jersey/

Pennsylvania (2012)

California (2012)


Overview of Distribution Planning Process

Develop Forecast

Determine Capacity

Requirements

Evaluate Alternatives

Establish baseline assumptions:

Future load growth and loading profiles

DER growth

Distribution deployment plans

Assess distribution requirements:

Meet projected load and DER growth

Maintain safety and reliability for end users

Address grid needs:

Traditional utility solutions

DER solutions

Process identifies projected distribution capacity

deficiencies and plans to address projected deficiencies.


Immediate applications for the insights and methodologies

Value of DER

proceeding

NY PSC

Case

15-E-0751

Formulating Distributed System Implementation Plans

(DSIP) – future “Non-wires Alternatives” projects

DER compensation reform – “LMP+D”,

where “D” varies by location

Documents

Integration of DER Program: Utility Economics & Practices ... · PDF file• Better understand DER markets ... •Increased complexity and cost of utility planning and grid balancing