Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Utility Regulation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

State Engagement in Electric Distribution System Planning

Electric distribution system planning is focused on assessing needed physical and operational changes to the local grid to maintain safe, reliable, and affordable service. While electric utilities have always engaged in this activity, the planning horizon has typically been short and involvement by state utility regulators minimal. Safety, reliability, and affordability remain top objectives for deeper state engagement in longer-term distribution system planning. Other drivers are proposed utility investments to replace aging infrastructure and modernize grids, opportunities to improve distribution system efficiency, enabling consumers to have greater control over energy costs and sources, and integrating higher levels of distributed energy resources (DERs) such as rooftop solar, distributed energy storage, and price-responsive demand. This report provides a snapshot of current state engagement in distribution system planning: •Part 1 describes activities in states that have adopted some elements of integrated distribution system planning and analysis (see Figure 1): New York, California, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Minnesota. It summarizes their impetus for early action, stated goals, regulatory requirements, additional state activities related to distribution system planning, and next steps. •Part 2 covers a broader array of state approaches throughout the country. For example, some of these states have long-standing distribution reliability and performance codes, requiring regulated utilities to report regularly on poor-performing circuits and propose investments for improvements. Other states require regulated utilities to make filings related to proposed grid modernization investments. A growing number of states are beginning to consider comprehensive distribution system planning processes. As this report highlights, approaches vary significantly from state to state, in part stemming from differences in electricity market structure. States can learn from each other and tailor successful approaches to their unique circumstances. Reviewing the broad range of legislative and public utility commission activities described in this report is a useful starting point.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

EV Charging Infrastructure Energization An Overview of Approaches for Simplifying and Accelerating Timelines to Processing EV Charging Load Service Requests

The United States has seen significant growth in electric vehicle (EV) adoption, leading to increased demand for EV charging infrastructure. Over the past decade, EV charging infrastructure site developers, site hosts, and electric distribution utilities have navigated the process to integrate chargers onto the electric grid. Site developers and site hosts have raised the alarm that the integration process for high-powered EV charging projects does not meet the needs of the EV market for timeliness or cost. High-powered charging stations typically require a load service request or an agreement with the local utility to connect to the grid. The process of energizing a new high-powered charging site can be complex and time-consuming, often taking up to 2 years. This timeline is the result of current utility energization processes having been designed for construction projects that take longer to build (i.e., buildings). The specific challenges stem from various factors, including compartmentalization in application processes, the integration of EV charging process approvals with other distributed energy resources (DERs), and the need to ensure grid reliability. The energization process needs to evolve to meet the growing demand for high-powered EV charging. This white paper compiles information gathered through various conversations with key stakeholders, including utilities, utility regulators, EV charging operators, site developers, and authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) as well as through an extensive literature review. This document identifies the challenges and provides potential solutions to streamline the process of connecting EV charging infrastructure to the power grid in the United States, serving as a starting point for future conversations around these solutions. The solutions noted in this white paper require collaborative efforts among utilities, regulators, and EV charging infrastructure developers to streamline the grid connection process for EV charging infrastructure. They are broadly organized into four areas: 1. Increase data access and transparency: Develop automated load service request tools, integrate hosting capacity and load service request analyses, incorporate EV adoption forecasts, and provide transparency on the processing queue. 2. Improve energization processes and timing: Create fast-track options based on prescreening criteria, provide flexibility or phased approvals in the load service request/interconnection process, build internal knowledge within utilities about EV charging technologies, and provide standardized workforce training. 3. Promote economic efficiency: Right size distribution components to accurately reflect the load requirements of EV charging infrastructure, make proactive investments in grid infrastructure based on EV adoption forecasts and growth projections, and consider energy equity and environmental justice factors such as equitable access to EV charging when planning infrastructure. 4. Improve grid reliability and resilience: Use load management/power control systems (PCS) at EV charging stations, adopt and implement harmonized standards for communication protocols and information models between the EV charging and grid control infrastructure, and address cybersecurity considerations by implementing robust security measures and standards for EV charging infrastructure—with particular emphasis on clarifying the security requirements for the interface to the grid. The objective of the solutions proposed in this white paper is to accelerate the timeline and decrease costs associated with connecting EV charging infrastructure to the grid. Electric utilities, utility regulators, EV charging infrastructure developers, and site hosts will first need to understand which solutions are available in their service territory, and if warranted, which combination of solutions would support their specific needs. Through the successful implementations of solutions at scale detailed here, industry will demonstrate a new and innovative ecosystem where timely deployment and energization of EV charging infrastructure with greater grid resiliency and reliability is a reality.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

The Value of Resilience for Distributed Energy Resources: An Overview of Current Analytical Practices

Recent extreme weather events, natural disasters, and cyber incursions have brought the vulnerability of the electric system into sharp focus. These events have demonstrated that planning for long-duration power interruptions caused by high-impact, low-probability events will require new approaches to power system resilience above and beyond previous hardening efforts. At the same time, the rapid growth and declining costs of distributed energy resources (DERs) such as microgrids, solar photovoltaics, and batteries have introduced new technology options for energy resilience. Consequently, state policymakers across the country have established electricity resilience policies and programs, with several states focusing specifically on resilient DERs as part of clean energy programs and grid modernization efforts. Although it is clear that DERs offer resilience benefits, it is unclear how to determine the value of those benefits. Identifying appropriate methodologies to calculate the value of resilience will be an important step toward ensuring that resilient DERs are considered alongside alternatives and integrated into future energy infrastructure and investment planning efforts. This paper reviews current practices for calculating the value of resilience with a focus on valuing resilient DERs installed within the distribution system. It examines both regulatory decision-making and non-regulatory cost-benefit analyses in order to determine if, and how, a value of resilience was calculated and applied. The paper is designed to address questions that utility regulators have identified as being of interest: (1) Have regulators identified and utilized a value of resilience in regulatory decisions related to resilient DERs? (2) Is the value of resilience being used to analyze resilient DERs in venues other than regulatory proceedings? (3) What are the different methods to value energy resilience? (4) What are the pros and cons of different methods used to value resilience? (5) Can regulators adopt or improve value of resilience methods to support their decisions?

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Potential State Regulatory Pathways to Facilitate Low-Carbon Fuels

States and the federal government are increasingly engaged in the challenges around decarbonizing the electric grid. In particular, regulators, consumers, stakeholders, and utilities recognize the need to carefully consider the role natural gas will play in a decarbonized future. A variety of technology and policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with natural gas use are available, including energy efficiency programs, demand reduction tools, strategic electrification, and strategies to reduce emissions from natural gas production, transportation, and consumption. Low-carbon fuels – mainly renewable natural gas (RNG) and clean hydrogen – are being considered an important component of decarbonization goals. RNG and hydrogen may be able to meaningfully reduce emissions from processes independent of geologic natural gas, displacing emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Although RNG and hydrogen are not cost-competitive today with geologic natural gas and are smaller in scale and potential than other decarbonization options, they can be explored as potential critical tools to decarbonize sectors that are difficult to electrify or shift off of natural gas entirely, such as air travel, industrial processes, maritime transport, long-distance trucking, space heating on cold days, and railroads (Nadel, 2022). The role of this report is to provide informational context for state utility regulators to understand the impacts of and challenges associated with broader integration of low-carbon fuels, followed by examples of state regulatory actions taken to date to facilitate the development of low-carbon fuels. Setting clear guidance to calculate the environmental benefits of low-carbon fuels and continuing federal and state investments in research and development to reduce costs relative to fossil fuels will be important steps to take to signal the desire to grow the market for these fuels. State public utility commissions may play a key role in setting regulatory frameworks for low-carbon fuels and ensuring that ratepayer funds, if utilized, are done so to further the public interest. This report is intended to summarize decisions that states have made to date on low-carbon fuels. In the spirit of understanding the current market and sharing information, this report provides success stories, and lessons learned across states as regulators implement varying strategies to achieve decarbonization objectives while maintaining their focus on affordability, safety, and reliability of the energy system. The report begins with an introduction of the role of natural gas in the U.S. economy (Section I) and background information on natural gas use, decarbonization, and low-carbon fuels (Section II). Next, the report describes the current market by discussing the scale of current production, emissions intensity, resource potential, and costs of low-carbon fuels compared to geologic natural gas (Section III). Following these sections, the report describes four strategies states have employed to facilitate low-carbon fuels: opening exploratory dockets, approving voluntary tariffs for customers, approving interconnection tariffs for producers, and considering portfolio-wide procurement targets (Section IV). This section lists states that have taken actions in each category, citing utility filings, commission decisions, stakeholder comments, and other relevant sources. Finally, the report concludes with suggested questions regulators may wish to consider regarding low-carbon fuels, in the interest of preparing to make decisions in the future (Section V). These questions include: Are there existing regulatory or technical barriers to voluntary purchases of low-carbon fuels? Can customers work with utilities to procure low-carbon fuels; are producers able to interconnect projects without significant barriers to entry? Should the infrastructure and/or commodity costs of low-carbon fuels be socialized among all ratepayers, or borne solely by the large commercial and industrial (C&I) customers currently driving the market? Should regulated natural gas and/or electric utilities own and operate low-carbon fuel production? How should regulators consider the unique decarbonization potential of low-carbon fuels, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors, in decision-making? Is additional direction or clarity from state policymakers needed? What no-regrets approaches can help facilitate both near-term RNG development and long-term development of hydrogen and other zero-carbon fuels? We collectively wish to express our gratitude to the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, for supporting this report and other technical assistance resources for state regulators on natural gas topics. State regulators operate under a variety of policy environments, and states have vastly different types of energy resources, infrastructure, and customers. While there is no optimal regulatory, policy, or technological solution that will be successful in every state, state regulators can benefit by exchanging lessons learned with their peers across the country. We look forward to continued engagement with our fellow commissioners, commission staff, NARUC, the U.S. Department of Energy, and other stakeholders to develop sound regulation in the public interest.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Regulatory Mechanisms to Enable Investments in Electric Utility Resilience

In 2019, Sandia National Laboratories contracted Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) to research the integration of community and electric utility resilience investment planning as part of the Designing Resilient Communities: A Consequence-Based Approach for Grid Investment (DRC) project. Synapse produced a series of reports to explore the challenges and opportunities in several key areas, including benefit-cost analysis, performance metrics, microgrids, and regulatory mechanisms to promote investments in electric system resilience. This report focuses on regulatory mechanisms to improve resilience. Regulatory mechanisms that improve resilience are approaches that electric utility regulators can use to align utility, customer, and third-party investments with regulatory, ratepayer, community, and other important stakeholder interests and priorities for resilience. Cost-of-service regulation may fail to provide utilities with adequate guidance or incentives regarding community priorities for infrastructure hardening and disaster recovery. The application of other types of regulatory mechanisms to resilience investments can help. This report: characterizes regulatory objective as they apply to resilience; identifies several regulatory mechanisms that are used or can be adapted to improve the resilience of the electric system--including performance-based regulation, integrated planning, tariffs and programs to leverage private investment, alternative lines of business for utilities, enhanced cost recovery, and securitization; provides a case study of each regulatory mechanism; summarizes findings across the case studies; and suggests how these regulatory mechanisms might be improved and applied to resilience moving forward. In this report, we assess the effectiveness of a range of utility regulatory mechanisms at evaluating and prioritizing utility investments in grid resilience. First, we characterize regulatory objectives which underly all regulatory mechanisms. We then describe seven types of regulatory mechanisms that can be used to improve resilience--including performance-based regulation, integrated planning, tariffs and programs to leverage private investment, alternative lines of business for utilities, enhanced cost recovery, and securitization--and provide a case study for each one. We summarize our findings on the extent to which these regulatory mechanisms have supported resilience to date. We conclude with suggestions on how these regulatory mechanisms might be improved and applied to resilience moving forward.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Energy Storage Policy Summaries for the Global Energy Storage Database

This report includes energy storage policy analysis from six states: Arizona, California, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Mexico, and New York. These summaries offer prototypes for summaries that will subsequently be prepared for all 50 states (and territories). There is presently a shortage of comprehensive energy storage policy analysis that public utility regulators can call upon to inform policymaking in their own jurisdictions. The state policy summaries that will be offered publicly on the Global Energy Storage Database (GESDB) will include analysis on the executive directives, legislation, regulations pertaining to energy storage that have been adopted by an individual state, along with perspective on the remaining policy issues pertaining to storage that a state will be likely to address in the future. It is anticipated that public utility regulators in particular will find the database to be a useful resource in benchmarking policy approaches critical to the continued development of an energy storage marketplace in the U.S., including policy approaches specific to storage and renewables procurement targets, interconnection standards, valuation of energy storage, rate reform and tariff design specific to energy storage, consideration of multiple uses for storage at the distribution level, and potential revisions to existing state net metering programs to accommodate an expected growth of energy storage technologies.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Deliberate Design: Creating Electricity Rates with Purpose

Today’s electricity rates often are legacy designs that do not reflect the dynamics of an evolving power grid or align with current policy objectives. Four steps will assist utilities, regulators, and industry stakeholders in modernizing outdated electricity rate designs. 1. Understand the context for rate design change: The power system is changing at a pace that the industry has not experienced for decades. It is essential to understand the implications of these changes so rates can evolve to remain consistent with changes to the underlying cost profile, customer preferences, and power system requirements. 2. Establish ratemaking objectives: Rates can do more than recover utility costs. They can be a tool for promoting desired outcomes such as improved energy affordability, flexible and efficient electricity consumption, or promoting technology adoption. First, these objectives must be clearly defined and prioritized. 3. Account for tradeoffs when designing new rates: Rate design is the art of balancing tradeoffs. It is essential to understand these tradeoffs when designing new rates, particularly if the rates are being used as a tool for accomplishing policy objectives that extend beyond the basic goal of cost reflectivity. 4. Transition to the new rates with a plan: The move to well-designed rates requires a transition plan. This will ensure that rate design changes do not happen in isolation and are consistent with a long-term, holistic vision. The report, published as an interactive web tool for which the content can be separately downloaded as a standalone document, is intended to allow state energy regulators, utility rates staff, and other industry stakeholders with an interest in rate design to selectively “drill down” on content that is relevant to their interests and situation.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Electricity Rate Designs for Large Loads: Evolving Practices and Opportunities

Electricity demand from large load customers such as data centers is projected to grow significantly in the near term. While data centers play an important role in advancing technology innovation and economic growth in the United States, data center energy needs present challenges and opportunities for electricity supply and infrastructure. This technical brief serves as a foundation for the discussion of issues and sharing of perspectives among utilities, regulators, large load customers, and other stakeholders. As utilities and regulators explore rate structures to address growing data center electricity demand, several issues have emerged: -Fair allocation of electricity system costs to large-load customers without unfair shifting of costs to other customers -Appropriate mitigation of the financial risks associated with stranded assets from underutilized utility system investments -Mitigation of operational and resource adequacy risks if electricity demand exceeds supply -Appropriate risk-sharing in commercializing newer electricity technologies such as advanced geothermal, small modular reactors, and long duration energy storage -Accommodating the diverse needs of large-load customers, such as having the option to match electricity consumption with output from carbon-free resources or using onsite generation to provide system capacity The technical brief also identifies key design elements that aim to address these issues and uses leading examples from pending and approved rate structures, agreements, and special contracts to ground the elements in practice.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Preliminary Modeling of Chloride Deposition on Spent Nuclear Fuel Canisters in Dry Storage Relevant to Stress Corrosion Cracking

This study presents a method that can be used to gain information relevant to determining the corrosion risk for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) canisters during extended dry storage. Currently, it is known that stainless steel canisters are susceptible to chloride-induced stress corrosion cracking (CISCC). However, the rate of CISCC degradation and the likelihood that it could lead to a through-wall crack is unknown. This study uses well-developed computational fluid dynamics and particle-tracking tools and applies them to SNF storage to determine the rate of deposition on canisters. The deposition rate is determined for a vertical canister system and a horizontal canister system, at various decay heat rates with a uniform particle size distribution, ranging from 0.25 to 25 µm, used as an input. In all cases, most of the dust entering the overpack passed through without depositing. Most of what was retained in the overpack was deposited on overpack surfaces (e.g., inlet and outlet vents); only a small fraction was deposited on the canister itself. These results are provided for generalized canister systems with a generalized input; as such, this paper is intended to demonstrate the technique. This study is a part of an ongoing effort funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Nuclear Energy Office of Spent Fuel Waste Science and Technology, which is tasked with doing research relevant to developing a sound technical basis for ensuring the safe extended storage and subsequent transport of SNF. This work is being presented to demonstrate a potentially useful technique for SNF canister vendors, utilities, regulators, and stakeholders to utilize and further develop for their own designs and site-specific studies.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Considerations for Resilience Guidelines for Clean Energy Plans: For the Oregon Public Utility Commission and Oregon Electricity Stakeholders

This document summarizes relevant approaches, research, models, and national examples for state utility regulators tasked with developing utility guidelines for risk-based resiliency planning. In 2021, the Oregon Legislature enacted a 100 percent clean electricity by 2040 standard that requires the Oregon Public Utility Commission (PUC) to oversee utility planning for aggressive clean energy deployment through Clean Energy Plans (House Bill 2021, Sec. 4). In addition to meeting emissions reductions targets, Clean Energy Plans must also: "Include a risk-based examination of resiliency opportunities that includes costs, consequences, outcomes, and benefits based on reasonable and prudent industry resiliency standards and guidelines established by the Public Utility Commission." This report will support the Oregon Public Utility Commission in developing resilience guidelines. Other state public utility commissions may also benefit from this research.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Research Needs and New Capabilities for Retail Electricity Rate Analysis

Retail electricity rates are at the center of supply- and demand-side changes in future power systems and influence system costs and DER adoption decisions, all with important implications for system reliability, resiliency, and energy affordability. Building on decades of research experience and analytical insights at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the report identifies key near-term analysis questions, enhancements to existing capabilities, and longer-term new capabilities to provide actionable insights for electricity system decision-makers, including state utility regulators, electric and gas utilities, ratepayer advocates, and DER solution providers.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Grid Reliability and U.S. Coal Fleet Attributes: Considerations for State Regulators

This briefing paper provides state utility regulators with a comprehensive and current understanding of the reliability attributes of coal as a generation resource, potential reliability impacts associated with near-term coal plant retirements, and possible mitigation strategies to ensure a stable and resilient energy system.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Concept of Operations: National Technology Test Bed Network for Water Resource Recovery

There is an urgency to advancing wastewater technologies due to aging water infrastructure and emerging regulations. A crosscutting working group proposes a conceptual design for a test bed network to understand and evaluate wastewater technologies to drive acceptance and deployment of new technologies to enhance performance. The working group includes contributors from the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. National Science Foundation, and the Water Research Foundation (formerly known as the Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). Upgrading today's aging wastewater treatment infrastructure to a new generation of water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) requires the development and deployment of innovative technologies. The path to technology adoption depends on expensive, time consuming, and often repetitive cycles of testing and validation. Existing water resource recovery technology testing facilities (e.g., test beds) are underutilized and cannot, by themselves, broaden technology uptake. It has been proposed that technology adoption could be accelerated by a network linking these test facilities with innovators, manufacturers, utilities, regulators, policymakers, and educators. This document proposes a structure for a National Test bed Network (TBN) for water resource recovery. The concepts for its operation are explored herein. This document identifies drivers to launch a TBN and critical needs for successful implementation of the network. An important driver to technology implementation at WRRFs is the relationship between local utilities and state regulators. The TBN could provide access to validated performance data and facilitate deployment. To link the stakeholders and accelerate deployment, the TBN will require standards for methods, data quality, data management, and data security. These standards will enable validation of performance and will expand the “toolbox” that utilities and regulators could consider. Design, set up, and launch of this toolbox is beyond the scope of operations of utilities and regulators and will likely require external support to achieve full operation. Herein, a pathway is proposed to achieve this full operation. This document defines the function of a WRRF TBN. It also proposes a structure for the TBN to achieve its stated goals and mission. Finally, this document summarizes findings from several sources, including a series of workshops about the TBN concept, operators of test beds in ancillary industries, and discussions with regulators and permitting agencies. A description of this work was published in the peer-reviewed literature (Mihelcic 2017).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Bridging the Gap on Data and Analysis for Distribution System Planning: Information That Utilities Can Provide Regulators, State Energy Offices and Other Stakeholders

Electric utilities conduct planning annually to ensure their distribution system meets technical standards, policies, and regulations; addresses forecasted grid conditions; satisfies customer needs; and advances utility priorities. The plan identifies grid deficiencies, analyzes potential solutions, and prioritizes capital investments and other expenditures. About 20 U.S. states and jurisdictions require regulated utilities to file some type of distribution system plan with the public utility commission for review. Requirements for sharing distribution system data and analyses vary widely, from few specific requirements to a detailed list of information that must be provided. While utilities conduct extensive analysis to develop distribution system plans, in most jurisdictions regulators and stakeholders do not know what data are available and how the utility uses the data in planning and investing. This report aims to bridge the gap by increasing understanding of the types of data and analyses utilities employ to develop distribution system plans and how the information affects their decision-making. The report describes information that states and stakeholders can ask for related to 11 data categories: -Forecasting loads and distributed energy resources (DERs) -Scenario analysis -Worst-performing circuits -Asset management strategy -Hosting capacity analysis -Value of DERs -Grid needs assessment -Cost-effectiveness framework for investments -Distribution system investment strategy and implementation -Geotargeted programs -Non-wires alternatives procurements.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Navigating United States Standards and Regulation for Digital Energy Systems

This report provides an analysis of the U.S. standards and regulatory landscape for digital energy systems, focusing on cybersecurity, safety, and reliability requirements. It examines the interplay between federal mandates, state regulations, voluntary industry standards, and utility-specific policies, highlighting critical gaps between compliance and real-world risk mitigation. While NERC CIP standards enforce cybersecurity for Bulk Electric System assets, distribution-level infrastructure and emerging technologies often fall outside mandatory oversight, creating vulnerabilities. The report identifies systemic challenges such as reliance on self-attestation, uneven state adoption of safety codes, and lagging standards for advanced technologies like battery energy storage and inverter-based resources. Through a detailed gap analysis, it underscores the urgency of proactive risk-based approaches, independent verification, and strategic engagement with state and federal entities. Recommendations include adopting tiered security frameworks, strengthening procurement practices, and addressing emerging technology risks to ensure resilient and secure digital energy infrastructure. This guidance is intended for utilities, regulators, and stakeholders navigating compliance obligations and seeking to enhance cybersecurity and safety beyond minimum standards.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Customer bill impacts of energy efficiency and net-metered photovoltaic system investments

We report utility regulators and policymakers are concerned about potential increases in retail rates driven by energy efficiency (EE) programs and distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, which may adversely affect utility customers that do not invest in these technologies (i.e., non-participants) and more so than those that do (i.e., participants). We assess customer bill impacts of illustrative EE programs and net-metered PV systems for a prototypical northeast utility. We find that the timing of customer EE or PV investments matters and that modest energy savings may fail to yield financial benefits sufficient to offset concomitant increases in retail rates.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

“It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit”: Creating Alignment between Cities and Utility Energy Efficiency Programs

Cities are significantly acting as market catalysts to encourage and require building owners to improve energy performance. Yet, cities implementing building performance policies that require actions like audits or re-tuning may experience conflicts with their regulated utilities’ efficiency programs, which depend on energy savings being additional—not attributable to market adoption or preexisting laws. These utility programs preclude free ridership, meaning that the energy savings should be achieved by someone who otherwise would not have acted in the absence of the incentive or rebate. Utilities may decline to offer incentives where cities require particular actions, in turn dissuading cities from enacting ordinances that would lead to further efficiency improvements. This regulatory challenge impedes what could otherwise be a shared goal of improving energy efficiency. Finding solutions that allow city ordinances and utility programs to coexist is vital as cities are taking climate and energy matters into their own hands. Cities and utilities have so far navigated this problem informally. One potential approach is to apply established models from the world of energy codes, where some state regulators have permitted utilities to earn energy savings credit from supporting adoption of energy codes, or from improving code compliance. We consider how this approach and other frameworks could be applied to building performance policies. More specifically, this paper lays out a theory for how utilities can collaborate with local partners to drive deeper energy savings, with oversight from regulators, and examines the question of attributing the savings between the city and utility.

Crandall, Kelly↗