SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Transactive”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 415 records · Page 23

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2018

Final Report on Community Solar Design Models for Consumer, Industry, & Utility Success

Since the inception of the first community solar program in 2006, a number of different utility, solar industry and consumer driven community solar program models have emerged across the country with varying regulatory and solar market frameworks behind them. There is little consistency in how programs are administered, participant benefits are assigned, and customers are charged for participation. Further, while it is regularly speculated that community solar programs meet the needs of customers, no such consumer research has been completed against different community solar program models. This collaborative research effort addressed three primary issues: Program design models are numerous and evolving, with varying degrees of applicability across different state policy, utility regulatory, and solar market types. The agents, transaction methods, and accruing costs and benefits are highly variable and largely built on anecdotally successful model evolution. ‘Community solar’ (shared/group solar, solar gardens, etc.) has become a catch-all concept that means different things to different stakeholders, limiting constructive program development and growth. Everything from green pricing programs to remote net metering to metering aggregation has been framed as community solar. Consumer research on individual concepts and program models has been done, but no comprehensive and comparative market research on the broader design models and attributes has been performed. SEPA’s collaborative research effort on Community Solar Design Models for Consumer, Industry, & Utility Success is premised on the principle that greater standardization of community solar models and better understanding of consumer interests are key underpinnings of increased community solar deployment. Utilizing a cross-sectional multi-stakeholder working group, as well as focus groups and surveys, webinars, targeted outreach, and other tools, this project aims to expand the community solar knowledge base, facilitate information exchange, identify opportunities for standardization and improvement, determine what consumers’ interests are and how best to message to them, promote the research results within the solar and utility industries, and advance key opportunities for strategic deployment plans for community solar. A summary of these key takeaways/lessons learned during the grant period include: Siting of system should be evaluated up-front in the process Engage stakeholders collaboratively and early to help ensure the best chance for a successful program IT/billing departments must have a seat at the design table Establish upfront target objectives with respect to residential and commercial program access levels helps ensure program success Balance trade-offs to manage utility and developer risk with customer participation carefully to optimize pricing and sizing the program offering Over the course of the 42 month grant period, SEPA and its project team conducted a series of activities all designed to accelerate the number and size of community solar programs across the country. These activities included: Community Solar Program Design Models (2 reports) – SEPA, in collaboration with its projects team, the Coalition for Community Solar Access, and over 60 administrators of actual community solar programs, developed two reports providing hard data on the developments of community solar. These reports touched on program performance, quantity and type of programs, and program design steps, among other aspects. The reports collectively received over 2000 unique downloads. Market Research Report – SEPA, in collaboration with The Shelton Group, conducted a series of national surveys and focus groups to identify what customers were looking for in a community solar offering. The resulting report, “What the Community Solar Customer Wants”, received over 1,000 unique downloads. Technical Assistance Projects – SEPA supported 8 organizations who were pursuing community solar programs. Based on this support, over 5.7 MWs of new solar capacity have been developed. Technical Assistance Case Studies – SEPA developed two case studies detailing the technical assistance work in Fremont, NE Department of Utilities and the public power arm of Minster Ohio. These two reports have received 1,002 unique downloads. Webinar – SEPA hosted two webinars on community solar which collectively received 743 participants. The webinars focused on disseminating the findings of the research conducted under this project, as well as the research conducted in separate solar market pathways projects. Community Solar Design Workshops – 120 registrants learned about the trends in community solar and participated a business case exercise to design their own programs.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Power Hardware-in-the-Loop Testing of Distribution Solid State Transformers

Savannah River National Laboratory and Resilient Power Systems have developed a utility grade solid state transformer and are planning on deploying it for testing in January 2018. The solid state transformer is the next generation solution to implementation of distributed energy resources such as solar and batteries. They can directly connect the solar and battery systems to DC ports and rout power between these DC ports and load ports. The solid state transformer can revolutionize current grid modernization initiatives by supplying grid support and building support services at the edge of the grid. These services consist of volt-VAR optimization, power factor correction, voltage regulation, frequency regulation, fault current support, demand side management, DC bus for AC/DC capable houses, and power routing between multiple ports for transactive control. For this fiscal year a test plan for testing the SST capabilities was develop. Along with the FPGA controls for the SST output ports. These controls will allow for any waveform to be produced by each port of the SST. Finally, a hybrid distribution SST was tested at the eGRID resulting in medium voltage testing experience for SRNL engineering team. DOE is currently engaged, through the Building Technology Office and Infrastructure Security and Energy Restoration in future work building from this project.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2018

Financial and Operational Bundling Strategies for Sustainable Micro-Grid Business Models

One of the biggest barriers to the scale up of mini-grids in Sub Sahara Africa ('SSA') is access to finance. While there are plenty of government and donor-led initiatives, private investment in the mini-grid sector has been slow to take off because of the high level of risk to reward and the relatively high transaction costs compared to larger grid-tied projects. Specific challenges for mini-grids include policy and regulatory risk, a lack of proven business models, and uncertainty about demand and the ability and willingness of customers to pay. Bundling or aggregation of mini-grids is one potential solution to these challenges. At its simplest, bundling means combining projects or different aspects of projects (eg. financial, operational and service) into a portfolio to create economies of scale (eg. lower costs, mitigation of risks, reaching an investment size that is attractive to more financiers.) There are two main types of bundling: Operational bundling - aggregation of similar projects (eg. similar business model, geographical area, technology or customer type) in order to reduce development and operating costs, - Financial bundling - aggregation of projects into a portfolio in order to attract more private investors through the larger ticket size and portfolio de-risking. This report looks at the different mini-grid business and financing models, and the opportunities and challenges around financial bundling. It looks at techniques for bundling through donors and national governments such as tenders, auctions and results based financing. It considers financial pooling mechanisms, including funds for mini-grid growth and end user financing, and financial products for de-risking mini-grid investments. Finally, there are three developer case studies of financial bundling of mini-grids.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Best Practices for Operation and Maintenance of Photovoltaic and Energy Storage Systems; 3rd Edition

The goal of this guide is to reduce the cost and improve the effectiveness of operations and maintenance (O&M) for photovoltaic (PV) systems and combined PV and energy storage systems. Reported O&M costs vary widely based on the requirements of the system and the nature of the O&M contract, but a more standardized approach to planning and delivering O&M has the potential to both decrease costs and make those costs more predictable over time. This guide encourages adoption of best practices to reduce the cost of O&M and improve the performance of fielded systems, but it also enhances financing of new projects by making cost more predictable and mitigating performance risk. This guide also includes technical improvement opportunities in the design of systems and in specification of equipment because high-quality system deployment improves lifetime project performance and energy production while reducing, or at least optimizing, costs to deliver an O&M program. This guide provides recommendations that increase the effectiveness of O&M services; reduce O&M costs, improve solar asset transparency for investors and rating agencies; provide an industry framework for quality management; and reduce transaction costs.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2019

Value Accrual to Customers, Installers, and Financiers in Third-Party Owned Solar PV Markets

Beyond the Federal Investment Tax Credit, the two primary financial incentives provided by residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems are electricity bill savings and state and local government incentives. Using transaction-level data on third-party owned systems from 2012-2015, we estimate how value associated with these incentives are passed along the installer-financier-consumer supply chain in the third-party owned market. Our analysis finds evidence of financial incentive pass-through to system prices and customer payments with respect to both types of incentives. Moreover, we document differences in the levels of pass-through for different contract types: total pass-through to customer payments for both types of incentives is greater for PPAs than for UFOs. We find some evidence that pass-through rates to customer payments for PPAs change with market concentration. Finally, we illustrate that the magnitude of estimated pass-through changes for PPAs if we account for simultaneity between system prices and customer payments.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2017

Optimizing Microgrid Energy Delivery Under High Uncertainty

One of the largest transitions in the power system today is the shift to a more sustainable and resilient power system. This is being driven by public opinion, changes in regulatory policies, and advancements in smart grid technologies. The most noticeable changes taking place is the integration of distributed energy sources (DERs); this study uses the term DER in the most general way as a resource that can be manipulated to alter energy delivery and flow in the transmission and distribution networks. Also, here it is preferred to focus on energy as the true need while power is a function of the equipment rating. As such, wind and solar, demand that can be manipulated, electric vehicles, electric energy storage, thermal storage, and storage in water system are all considered DERs. These additions to the distribution system are evolving the operation of distribution feeders into microgrids- communication, computing, and control-enabled resources that produce, transport, and utilize energy in a manner that provides cost, reliability, and resilience benefits. As this evolution progresses, the planning and operational management (scheduling and control) must explicitly include the consideration of risk. The management of system risk is currently in the purview of the utility and will likely remain so in the future. However, as each microgrid, as well as federation of microgrids, sees autonomy in order to provide maximum benefits to their constituents, they must assume responsibility to manage their internal risk. The primary scope of this study is the scheduling of resources in a distribution feeder(s) operating as microgrids. The study explores a distribution algorithm to develop the transactive schedule for the DERs, to minimize cost and risk over a time horizon, and an initial laboratory-scale to conduct implementation on distributed hardware. Results from case studies are presented that show that solutions derived by the distributed algorithm are valid. This study also discusses the continuing work on the expansion of: 1) the distributed algorithm from a deterministic to stochastic optimization formulation, and 2) implementation of the distributed algorithm into real-time simulation within the Power System laboratory at New Mexico State University (NMSU) and expanding to the Southwest Technology Development Institute located at NMSU where actual solar, energy storage, and demand response resources are installed.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Smart technologies enable homes to be efficient and interactive with the grid

Oak Ridge National Laboratory researchers compare two different approaches to test how advanced, energy-efficient building technologies such as smart thermostats, heat pump water heaters, and advanced heat pump HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) can be optimized within a home and connected at a neighborhood-scale load to a community microgrid in the Alabama Power Smart Neighborhood located in Hoover. Working with Southern Company and Alabama Power, ORNL researchers are pioneering that future where smart homes and smart neighborhoods can benefit both homeowners and utilities, by reducing energy consumption by 44% and peak demand by 34%.This project is one of two neighborhoods in the U.S Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Connected Neighborhood project, supported by Building Technologies Office , where ORNL researchers leverages DOE investment in micro-grids and responsive, flexible building loads research to improve grid reliability – a goal of DOE’s Grid-interactive Efficient Buildings (GEB) Initiative. Researchers control the neighborhood and microgrid to enable utilities achieve their desired load and cost profiles while ensuring the comfort of homeowners in the Smart Neighborhood. This transactive control approach maximizes the utilization of technical resources of the microgrid and controllable loads, while reducing costs for both the homeowners and Alabama Power. These tests partially seek to determine a more precise range of tolerance with respect to occupant comfort as researchers work to facilitate customer acceptance and perception of new building technologies that enable energy savings.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2017

Electric Grid Market-Control Structure

Markets and controls are frequently portrayed as being polar opposites, incompatible alternative paradigms, or even competing philosophies for organizing the activities of large complex systems. In the electricity industry in the US prior to the 1990s, the dominant organizational structure was the vertically-integrated utility, characterized by a well-defined geographic and electrical service territory and the ownership or control of most generating facilities, a transmission network, local distribution systems and a monopoly over retail electric service for most if not all of the end-users in the territory. A vertically-integrated utility, many of which still exist today, operates mostly on controls with very little scope for markets or market transactions.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Comparing Offshore Wind Energy Procurement and Project Revenue Sources Across U.S. States

The pace of offshore wind energy procurement in the United States has rapidly accelerated in recent years. U.S. states along the Atlantic Coast have set procurement goals for offshore wind energy to meet renewable portfolio standards and serve state policy needs. By the end of 2019, projects with a total capacity of 6.4 gigawatts (GW) had established long-term contracts (or equivalent regulatory requirements) with utility off-takers. The prices established in these contracts since 2017 have been well below expectations from many industry observers, prompting stakeholders to compare price levels across U.S. states and globally. However, comparing procurement prices across projects and jurisdictions is often challenging because of differences in project parameters, support regimes, supply chains, and the applicable tax and regulatory environment. These characteristics provide critical context for understanding project revenue streams, delivery obligations, and risk allocation, which need to be accounted for when comparing across different projects. In combination, variation in these characteristics between projects results in measurable differences in project costs and revenues and, consequently, in different offer bids. In this report, we systematically analyze offshore wind energy support regimes across U.S. states. Because offshore wind energy procurement prices from U.S. projects are often compared not only among states but also with European tenders, this report also provides an overview of support regimes and taxonomy used in European offshore wind markets. The content of this report was derived from a literature review, primarily regulatory filings and summary reports, and 16 interviews with leading industry experts from state agencies, energy sector consultancies, and law practices. The comparison between U.S. states focuses on several dimensions, including statutory authority, solicitation procedures, procurement goals and awards, and the structuring of physical and transactional delivery of energy services.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices

Federal facilities are increasingly adopting automation and connecting to the Internet creating an energy-internet-of-things environment that converges operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT). Today's buildings increasingly weave together networked sensors and cyber and physical systems that enable data to be collected, aggregated, exchanged, stored and monetized in new ways. Building technological advances have created new energy technology, services, markets and value creation opportunities (e.g. transactive energy, two-way grid communications, machine learning, and increased use of renewable and distributed energy resources). But as larger data sets are being exchanged at faster speeds between an increasing number of OT systems, it becomes more difficult to protect the security of the data lifecycle and the physical equipment it interacts with. These challenges are especially difficult to overcome because the economic and environmental gain (interoperability, big data, social networks and ubiquitous information sharing) are driving these prominent trends in the digital age. Often cybersecurity is an afterthought. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) funded the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop various cybersecurity tools, trainings, and reports to aid federal facility managers – and other building owners and operators – in better applying frameworks and lessons learned from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), risk management framework (RMF), DOE’s cybersecurity capability maturity model (C2M2), and a wide variety of industry best practices and guidance documents (i.e., NIST 800 series, Department of Defense United Facilities Criteria). This set of tools, collectively known as the FEMP Facility-Related Control System Cyber Toolkit (FRCS Cyber Toolkit)2, is focused on cybersecurity concerns from facility-related control systems and other operational technology (OT), such as industrial control systems (ICS). The FRCS Cyber Toolkit can be applied across six of the sixteen critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security, including government facilities, healthcare and public health, commercial facilities (e.g., public assembly, offices, lodging), financial services (e.g., banking and insurance), emergency services (e.g., fire and police stations), and information technology. With increasingly converged IT and OT systems, it is crucial to address OT cybersecurity considerations and assess how the seam of these two systems could impact the overall cybersecurity posture of a facility. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of the best possible method to use FRCS Cyber Toolkit (section 2.0) and distilled cybersecurity best practices for the federal facilities to address growing non-linear cyber threats (section 3.0). Recommendations in this document are aggregated from several NIST and other documents (see Appendix A for additional details).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Voluntary Renewable Energy Procurement Programs in Regulated Utility Markets

Multinational corporations are increasingly purchasing renewable energy (RE) to fulfill international commitments, reduce supply chain emissions, limit environmental impact, and secure stable and affordable electricity. The potential scale of global corporate RE purchasing has been estimated to be nearly 100 GW and growing; however, many markets still lack supportive enabling environments for corporations to access RE through on-site project development or private sector transactions. Even where allowed by law, on-site generation may be insufficient due to space and technical constraints, introducing additional challenges. Utility green pricing and utility green tariff programs backed by renewable energy certificates (RECs), referred to as utility green procurement programs (GPPs) in this report, offer powerful market-based solutions to utilities, regulators, and policymakers to provide corporate and other consumers with RE product options while generating revenue to support RE development. As RE markets expand around the globe, GPPs have proven to be effective mechanisms in market regimes, ranging from fully integrated state-owned utilities to broadly liberalized power markets. GPPs utilize RECs, which are a type of energy attribute certificate and closely resemble guarantees of origin, to track and ultimately monetize RE attributes that corporations and other buyers must procure to demonstrate progress against their RE commitments and make public claims of RE use. Time-tested and transparent REC accounting mechanisms provide market confidence, while at the same time offering flexibility to utilities, regulators, and customers for a range of applications. RECs are used in all types of electricity market structures, as indicated in Figure 1, but REC-based program designs and supporting components differ depending on the type of market. Liberalized markets allow for customers to contract directly with generators for electricity and RECs, while traditionally regulated markets with vertically integrated utility structures may have greater restrictions on generation asset ownership and electricity sales. RE markets can be further defined as being either mandatory or voluntary. Mandatory markets require suppliers to deliver specified amounts of RE to grid customers, such as under a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), while voluntary markets involve no legal mandates, but demand is driven by self-imposed customer goals.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2017

U.S. Solar Market Value Report: Further Evidence that Solar Adds Value to Real Estate

Solar photovoltaic systems provide cost savings to the property owner in terms of avoided electricity costs that accrue over the system lifetime. From an investment standpoint, the equipment and the value of the energy generated can potentially increase the underlying property value. This first-of-a-kind study presents real market data collected from real estate appraisers using the PV Value® tool to develop a market value for solar as part of a property sale or refinance. Aggregated results at the state level are discussed for California, Arizona and Massachusetts, using 2015 and 2016 data where appraisers used the income capitalization approach to develop a market value for solar. Additional data collection using future transaction data could reveal market-specific trends and insights at the zip code, city and metropolitan statistical area (MSA) levels.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Bringing Home Energy Information to Real Estate: A Toolkit

This report collects the results of DOE’s Better Buildings Home Energy Information Accelerator, a collaborative effort focused on expanding the availability and use of reliable home energy information at relevant points in residential real estate transactions. It features guidance and informational resources for energy program administrators and efficiency leaders, REALTORS ® , appraisers, lenders, and homeowners.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2021

Power System Resilience Metrics Augmentation for Critical Load Prioritization

One of the major goals of new grid operation regimes, such as transactive energy systems (TESs), is to make the power grid more resilient to withstand natural or man-made disasters and potential reliability events, and to continue to serve the maximum number of its customers. But it is a well-known fact to system operators that not all customers are the same. This implies that any discussion of TESs’ impacts on the resilience of the power system should consider the needs of its critical customers (such as the power system operation centers, fire and police stations, and hospitals) over those of other customers. When evaluating the resilience of the system, bonus points must be awarded to any system that could maintain its power supply to critical customers during a disturbance that may cause an outage. This report discusses critical infrastructure (CI) as found in the literature and then categorizes it based on the field to which the operations belong (such as human life/safety-related, operations management, necessary city operation, industrial customers, etc.). Each of these CI categories is further divided into types of critical customers (e.g., the human life/safety-related category has different types of customers like hospitals, fire and police stations, etc.). The entire demand of each of the critical customer types is not categorized as critical load (CL); instead, only a portion of the total load of these critical customers is characterized as critical load. This is done based on the categories of equipment, the function of which is crucial in the operation of the overall facility. CL categorization is performed to provide the ratio of the critical load portion to the overall load , so that it can serve as a parameter in the resilience evaluation of the grid through a metrics-based approach. Such categorization is important as it helps to augment the existing quantifiable resilience metrics with CL categorization. The metrics for a power system need to not only consider how well a system performed during a disturbance event, but also how it reduced strain and supplied power to its CLs. The first step in this process is characterize CLs in the system. After CL characterization, the next step is the inclusion of these loads in the resilience metrics. To that end, in this report weight-based augmentation of resilience metrics is proposed, where certain customers (the ones that are categorized as critical) are assigned higher weights than others. Though an overview of assigning weights to customers is discussed, there is no one-size-fits-all approach for every power system. The decisions made about assigning such weights to customers vary greatly from one operator to another, based on their unique systems and the current and predicted states of critical customers. This decision-making can include the type of disturbance event, which might only affect certain parts of the system. In general, analyzing critical customers before an event helps understand system vulnerabilities. It also helps in planning and conducting operations during the event, evaluating system performance after the event, and supporting better planning for future events. An alternative to the current practices of managing the grid for outages is an innovative TES, which has the potential to provide a platform for including distributed energy resources for managing CLs. This report also describes how TES qualities can help (1) to maintain power supply to critical customers for uninterrupted operations and (2) to restore lost power supply to the critical customers rapidly.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Modeling the Functional Forms of Grid Disturbances

This report introduces a functional form that may be used to quantitatively predict the impacts of new grid tools and changing system qualities on the likelihoods, durations, and depths of various grid disturbances. Each disturbance scenario is modeled to have three component stages—avoidance, reactance and recovery, which together parametrically estimate one disturbance’s impacts. The modeled scenario is then placed and replicated within an analysis period to represent the likelihood or frequency of the scenario and its consequent impacts. Whereas analysts have struggled to define and apply metrics for grid resilience, the functional form introduced by this report shares units of measurement with accepted grid-status measures (e.g., numbers of customers currently experiencing a service outage). Furthermore, the integrated and averaged functional form over an analysis period provides a meaningful normalized performance metric (e.g., customer outage minutes per year) that is ultimately independent of the duration of the period of. The approach may be applied similarly regardless of the severity or frequency of the disturbances that are being analyzed. Because metrics can be chosen to be identical in both the hypothetical future and the actual historical past, the historical past eventually becomes the test of the future predictions, at least in a statistical sense. The authors originally developed this approach to facilitate analysis of the effects of transactive energy (TE) systems effects on electric power grid resilience. TE systems invite energy suppliers and consumers to actively collaborate toward the discovery of, and their responses to, the locational value of energy. The findings from this process are often embodied as energy prices, the dynamics of which indicate the locational value of energy and can further represent important grid service needs. While some academic papers claim to quantify the value of a specific TE system design toward grid resilience, the answer, in general, has been elusive. Not only do multiple and conflicting definitions of resilience and reliability exist, but countless TE systems are being invented. We conclude the following: (1) The ideal analysis should harmonize rather than differentiate resilience and reliability. Therefore, this report uses the more general term disturbance whenever the overloaded terms resilience and reliability can be avoided. (2) The effectiveness of TE systems must be mapped to underlying qualities of a TE system, thereby avoiding presumptions that every TE design offers similar advantages. The authors seek to evaluate the parametric effects of TE system qualities (e.g., spatial granularity, granularity of time steps, length of future prediction horizon) on avoiding, reacting to, and recovering from grid disturbances. Furthermore, any advantages (or disadvantages) must be fairly compared with the many alternative tools, systems, and strategies that might offer comparable benefits.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2017

First Look Fund - An Early-Stage Aligned Intermediary to Enhance the Flow of Private Capital into Energy Companies (Final Technical Report)

The technologies required to advance society into a cleaner, better future will come from a broad range of scientific disciplines including materials science, chemistry, physics, and biology. The innovations will rely on scientific breakthroughs rather than software innovation and can be referred to as “hardtech.” These new technology developments will have vast implications across most industrial sectors: energy, materials, manufacturing, electronics, life sciences, etc. The majority of these scientific breakthroughs will be produced and developed by startup companies, which are best suited for high-risk, early-stage development work. However, a large funding gap exists between lab-scale scientific research of the startup world and industrial-scale commercialization. Activate Global, Inc (Activate), a 501(c)3 nonprofit, fills one part of this gap with the Activate Fellowship program1.To fully bridge the gap between lab and market, additional and aligned capital sources are needed. Through this project, Activate’s goals were: Research the recent history (2005-2015) of hardtech investing to discover the driving forces behind positive and negative outcomes from the viewpoint of investors.; Create a database of “technology pathways” categorized by specific technology areas and showing what technology milestones would be needed to be attractive to a partner or acquirer and what resources were available to achieve those goals.; Build a financial model supported by the data acquired that would show attractive returns were possible in early-stage hardtech investing.; Create an investment thesis around the financial model to show how attractive returns could be achieved in an early-stage hardtech-focused fund.; Publish a paper with a qualitative comparative analysis to help investors better understand driving factors of outcomes.; Share these findings with asset managers not currently investing in early-stage hardtech to attract partners to execute the investment strategy.; Implement the investment strategy and begin investing in early-stage hardtech companies through a new vehicle: First Look Fund. Through this research, Activate created a database of nearly 200 hardtech companies that exited via an M&A transaction between 2005 and 2015. Much of the data Activate obtained was nonpublic information and therefore, the database was anonymized. Activate also created the technology pathways database to help new early-stage hardtech companies define milestones, technology objectives and potential resources. Activate created a financial model with a legal structure showing that market-rate returns were possible, created an investment thesis around that model, and then shared these findings with potential partners. Finally, Activate’s research was used to publish a paper with Stanford on driving factors behind financial outcomes that will help investors better guide their portfolios. While Activate was not able to launch the First Look Fund during the project timeline, mostly due to the fallout from COVID-19 (global economic shocks decreasing interest in first time funds, inability to meet potential investors in person), the research has created enough interest for Activate to continue pursuing the goals of the project, showing the potential feasibility of the endeavor. Regardless of Activate’s ability to execute on the investment strategy, the resulting research has been downloaded, viewed, and referenced by investors and becomes another tool to encourage investment in the early-stage hardtech space.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices Version 2.0

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2021

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices Version 2.0

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗