California Energy Storage Alliance

California Energy Storage AllianceSuccessful AB 2514 Procurement Target Evaluation

Janice Lin, Co-Founder & Executive DirectorJanuary 14, 2013

Confidential

CESA – Strength Through Diversity & Collaboration

2

Steering Committee

General Members

Confidential

Now is a historic time reminiscent of 1970 ….

3

In 1970, a computer was many times more expensive than a typewriter.

An evaluation based solely upon typing documents would say that a computer was not worth the money.

As we know, the capabilities of the computer were much greater.

Investment in computers brought about huge gains for those who saw the capabilities.

-or-

Confidential

Computers have diverse and interconnected benefits

4

Computer Benefits

Personal Productivity

Accuracy & Speed: Word Processing & Other Tasks

Multiple Abilities: Software

Expansion, Improvement

Mobility: Teleworking, Travel, Task

Diversity

Network Effects

Increased Collaboration: Data Sharing & Real-Time Work

Individual Potential: Info

Access & Transparency

Exponential Growth: System

Learning & Improvement

Energy storage can also enable diverse benefits throughout the electric power system.

Confidential

Introduction and Context

5

What are we considering?» Setting thoughtful goals for an electric utility energy storage

procurement portfolio.

Why are we considering goals?» Allow us to proactively move toward true grid optimization by

fully taking advantage of current technological and financial benefits of energy storage.

» Accelerate realization of these benefits by advancing “network effects” made possible by energy storage, such as system reliability and renewable integration.

Confidential

AB 2514

6

Assembly Bill 2514 created the focus and forum to consider an energy storage procurement portfolio:

Procurement goals should be implemented if they are cost-effective and commercially available.

» We think that this proceeding will very likely show energy storage to be cost-effective in many ways today, if all benefits are considered.

» Many existing procurement-related rules and policies are roadblocks to fully realizing all benefits of energy storage.

» Reasonable and justifiable procurement goals are a good option that can fulfill the vision of AB 2514.

Confidential

Key Question #1

7

When do procurement goals make sense?

Confidential


8

Procurement goals for a technology class make sense when:

1. All benefits are not monetized through existing rules and policies, but un-captured benefits demonstrate the technology’s cost-effectiveness.

2. Widespread deployment creates net benefits for society and ratepayers.

3. Increasing scale improves cost-effectiveness compared to business-as-usual alternatives.

4. The inertia of business-as-usual procurement must be overcome.

5. Near-term inaction will risk incurring substantial lost opportunity costs.

Confidential

1: Benefits are not fully monetized

9

Many of these benefits cannot be properly compensated at this time. Benefits span multiple procurement mechanisms and jurisdictions, often with unclear connecting pathways.System/Market ServicesElectric Energy Time-Shift (Arbitrage)Frequency Response (Inertia)Frequency Regulation UpFrequency Regulation DownRampingReal-Time Energy BalancingSynchronous Reserve (Spin)Non-Synchronous Reserve (Non-Spin)Black Start

Capacity/Forward ProductsSystem Electric Supply CapacityLocal Electric Supply CapacityResource Adequacy

Generation ProductsIntermittent Resource Integration (Ramp/Voltage Support)VER/PV Shifting, Voltage Sag, Rapid Demand SupportSupply Firming

Transmission/DistributionPeak Shaving: Load ShiftTransmission Peak Capacity Support (Deferral)Transmission OperationTransmission Congestion ReliefDistribution Peak Capacity Support (Deferral)Distribution Operation (Voltage/VAR Support)

Additional Grid BenefitsFaster Build TimeReduced EmissionsReduced Fossil Fuel UseIncreased efficiency of installed generatorsIncreased Integration of RenewablesGrid ReliabilityModularity/Incremental BuildMobilityFlexibility of PurposeOptionalityLocational FlexibilityMulti-Site Aggregation

KEYCurrently CompensatedLikely to be Compensated SoonUnable to Receive Compensation

Confidential

2. Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers

Fossil Fuel

Base Load Generation

Oversized Transmission Grid

Oversized Distribution Grid

Peaking & Regulation

Fossil delivery infrastructure

Built for load and generation peaks that occur only a few times per year

Massive fossil fuel storage and delivery required

Current Grid InfrastructureStrategic: buffers level generation and

loadResult: more efficient & reliable

electrical system

Future Grid Infrastructure

Renewable and Traditional Generation

Storage-OptimizedRegulation & Transmission

Storage-OptimizedDistribution

On-site renewables+ storage

» Environmental and health benefits: reduced fuel use and emissions, local air quality improvement.

» Increased system reliability and power quality.

» Improved grid robustness in disaster situations

» Better planning: more renewables integration, less land use impacts, portfolio diversification.

» California economic growth: in-state leadership in an expanding energy storage industry.

» Improved utilization of existing assets.

10

Confidential

3: Scale increases cost-effectiveness

11

Benefits of investment in other industries – renewable energy cost curves» Other renewable energy

industries have seen great cost reductions through R&D and increased scale.

» Energy storage is just reaching scale to the point of large cost improvements – we should support it to maturity and achieve related benefits.

IPCC 2011

Confidential

4: Inertia must be overcome

12

Existing rules and procurement are oriented toward traditional generation and do not encourage innovation:

» Existing long term purchase agreements do not allow for ROI commensurate with benefits, and do not encourage use of new technologies and business arrangements.

» Grid structure and long-term procurement planning are inflexible and unaccommodating of transformation.

» Insufficient consideration is given to status quo risks: fuel price/availability, system reliability, environmental externalities, planning restrictions etc.

» Ancillary resource capacity minimum requirements are excessive.

Confidential

5: Near-term inaction has substantial risks

13

Under business as usual, the 33% RPS will not reduce GHGs

We are procuring capacity now for 2018. Those generators will last for 30+ years.

Our decisions today affect the grid for the next half-century.

Procuring only fossil resources exposes ratepayers to considerable fuel risk

DOE EIA natural gas price projections have historically underestimated trends.

Confidential


14

Procurement goals for a technology class make sense when:

1. All benefits are not monetized through existing rules and policies, but un-captured benefits demonstrate the technology’s cost effectiveness.

2. Widespread deployment creates net benefits for society and ratepayers.

3. Increasing scale improves cost effectiveness compared to business-as-usual alternatives.

4. The inertia of business-as-usual procurement must be overcome.5. Near-term inaction will risk incurring substantial lost opportunity costs.

Conclusion: procurement goals for energy storage should be set now; to help realize a robust, reliable, sustainable grid of the future

Confidential

Key Question #2

15

How should goals be established?

Confidential

Criteria

16

Optimum goals should be based upon the following criteria» Sufficient scale to provide network benefits.» Consistency over time -- provide time to allow the market to invest. Policy cannot be changed in short run.» Sufficient volume to spur investment that will reduce cost.» Sufficient volume to overcome existing barriers.» Sufficient deployment over time to allow the technology to stand on its own in the long term.» Sufficient deployment to avoid the lost opportunity costs of inaction.» Deployment in all areas where energy storage makes sense: transmission, distribution, behind the meter.» Simplicity and clarity:

» Allow stakeholders to see a clear goal to direct investment.» Allow utilities to determine where energy storage can be deployed to greatest advantage in their

systems.

Fundamental criteria: similar or superior benefit-to-cost when compared to other viable alternativesOR when societal benefits are both 1) significant and 2) challenging to internalize.

Confidential

California’s RPS represents a successful example

17

» Renewable generation capacity alone has increased by 77% since the RPS began in 2004.

» Prior to the RPS, capacity only increased by 33% over the previous 8 years.

» California now generates almost 12% of all energy needs from renewable resources.

» In contrast: » Vermont has a voluntary

RPS generates <1%» Mississippi has no RPS

and generates .01%

19971999

20012003

20052007

20092011

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000 Solar and Wind Generation in California*

GW

h

EIA 2012

2004-2011: 77% Growth

after RPS

1997-2004: 33% Growth before RPS

Confidential

An appropriate portfolio

18

Specific goals for energy storage have been suggested already“The amount of regulation and imbalance energy dispatched in real time, without storage and using existing control systems to maintain system performance, within acceptable limits during morning and evening ramp hours for 33 percent renewable cases in 2020 was 4,800 MW.”

“By comparison, 1,200 MW of storage added to the baseline 400 MW of regulation provided superior results...”

KEMA 2010

33% RPS Regulation

Options

Conventional: 4800 MW Needed

Storage: 1200 MW, Superior

Results

Confidential

Goal Options

19

Option 1: Statewide Mandate

Option 2: Directed procurement, specific to end uses

Option 3: Market Tests/Pilots

Option 4: Do nothing

Confidential

An appropriate goal structure: CESA’s Recommendation

20

Map goals to Energy Storage Rulemaking Scenarios.

Allow utilities to deploy energy storage to greatest advantage within their systems, while diversifying their investments.

Smarter California grid

Distributed storage for local

applications

Demand-side management applications

Limited duration storage for

ancillary services

Bulk energy storage

Confidential

CESA recommends a parallel path forward

21

Option 1: Statewide Mandate

Option 2: Directed procurement, specific to end usesDetails in following slides

Option 3: Market Tests/Pilotse.g. 50 MW in Current LTPP Proposed Decision

Option 4: Do nothing

Confidential

Optimum goal setting methodology

22

Use Case Application Key Driver2015 Goal (%)

2020 Goal (%)

Transmission Connected Energy Storage

Bulk Storage Peak Capacity TBD TBDAncillary Services Regulation Market TBD TBDOn-Site Generation Generation TBD TBDVER Sited VERs TBD TBD

Distribution Level Energy Storage

Distributed Peaker Peak Capacity TBD TBDDistribution @ Substation Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD TBDCommunity Energy Storage Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD TBD

Demand Side Energy Storage

Customer Bill Management Retail Load TBD TBDBehind the Meter Utility Controlled Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD TBDPermanent Load Shifting Peak Capacity TBD TBDEV Charging EV Charging Stations TBD TBD

1. Structure goals around previously identified use cases.• Creates appropriate and effective goals for each end use• Accounts for different storage types needed to serve different use cases

2. Determine the key driver based upon the primary benefit. 3. Use cases which share a key driver will compete for the same goal.4. Next Step: generate percentage-based goals based upon cost effectiveness and feasibility.

Goals should be set for 2015 and 2020 per AB2514.

Confidential

Goal ‘Examples’

23

Use Case Application Key DriverDriver (MW)

2015 Goal (%)

2015 Goal (MW)

2020 Goal (%)

2020 Goal (MW)

Transmission Connected Energy Storage

Bulk Storage Peak Capacity 61,1551 1% 611 5% 3057

Ancillary Services Regulation Market TBD TBD

On-Site Generation Generation TBD TBD

VER Sited VERs TBD TBD

Distribution Level Energy Storage

Distributed Peaker Peak Capacity 61,1551 1% 611 5% 3057Distribution @ Substation

Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD TBD

Community Energy Storage


Demand Side Energy Storage

Customer Bill Management Retail Load 50,5622 1% 553 3% 1659

Behind the Meter Utility Controlled


Permanent Load Shifting Peak Capacity TBD TBD

EV Charging EV Charging Stations TBD TBD

1. 2020 Net Supply, CPUC 2. 2020 Managed Demand Net Load CPUC

Confidential

CESA Supports Near Term Market Tests and LTPP Phase 1 PD

24

Market tests of selected applications should commence Q1, 2013 consistent with LTPP Phase 1 Proposed Decision

- “At least 50 MW must be procured from energy storage resources” (for the LA basin) - “Energy storage should be considered along with preferred resources”

Additional near term market tests should be ordered by Q3, 2013 to round out storage portfolio use case experience in California

Confidential25

Recommended Process and Timeline

Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May-Jun Jul-Aug

Step 3a: Set Goals

Discuss and set preliminary goals for cost-effective Applications

Step 5 – Commission issues Final Decision implementing procurement recommendations

Sep-Oct

Step 2: Conduct Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Each Application Commission and stakeholders conduct cost-effectiveness analysis.

Step 3b: Pilot Evaluation

Applications that do not pass the cost-effectiveness threshold are evaluated for potential pilot procurement based on key criteria such as market transformation, changing market dynamics that will affect future cost-effectiveness, and as yet unforeseen value to California.

Step 4 – Commission issues Proposed Decision outlining procurement recommendations

Commission adopts procurement recommendations based upon the results of Step 3a and Step 3b.

Step 1: Set Cost-Effectiveness Methodology

Decide which methodology is most appropriate for each application

Step 1a: Commence Market TestsApprove LTPP Phase 1 PDApprove SDG&E General Rate Case

Confidential

Policy options – Cost-Effective Goals are not Sufficient

26

Multiple energy storage pathways to a cleaner grid:» Goals maintain strong focus and direction: support grid

transformation and expand developer confidence.» Richer, more granular transparent pricing for energy, capacity and

ancillary services reflecting full value and service delivered.» Procurement rules and policies that empower utilities to deploy

energy storage with benefit-to-cost that is comparable or superior to alternatives.

» Establish proxy values for societal benefits that utilities can use for benefit-cost valuations.

Confidential

Optimum Portfolio Selection

27

This portfolio represents a good fit with the right criteria.» Sufficient scale to provide network benefits.» Consistency over time -- provide time to allow the market to invest. Policy cannot be changed in short run.» Sufficient volume to spur investment that will reduce cost.» Sufficient volume to overcome existing barriers.» Sufficient deployment over time to allow the technology to stand on its own in the long term.» Sufficient deployment to avoid the lost opportunity costs of inaction.» Deployment in all areas where energy storage makes sense: transmission, distribution, behind the meter.» Simplicity and clarity:

» Allow stakeholders to see a clear goal to direct investment.» Allow utilities to determine where energy storage can be deployed to greatest advantage in their

systems.

Fundamental criteria: similar or superior benefit-to-cost when compared to other viable alternativesOR when societal benefits are both 1) significant and 2) challenging to internalize.

Confidential

Appendix

28

»About CESA

»Goal Reference Slides

»References

Confidential29

California Energy Storage Alliance: Overview

CESA Mission and Membership

The California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA) is a membership-based advocacy group committed to advancing the role of energy storage in the electric power sector through policy, education, outreach, and research.

Our membership includes technology manufacturers, project developers, systems integrators, consulting firms, and other clean tech industry leaders.

We are technology and business model-neutral, and are supported solely by the contributions and coordinated activities of our members.

Confidential30


Ongoing Involvement in CPUC Proceedings

CESA is an active participant in CPUC proceedings. We advocate for a reliable, environmentally-friendly, and balanced grid that incorporates energy storage at multiple levels. We are involved in the following proceedings, among others:

» Demand Response (DR) and Permanent Load Shifting (PLS)» Interconnection Rulemaking» Long-Term Procurement Planning (LTPP)» Renewables Integration» Resource Adequacy» RPS Content Categories» Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP)

Confidential31


Long-Term Procurement Planning Involvement

CESA has been advocating for energy storage in LTPP processes since June 2010

» June 2010: Long-term procurement policy» July 2010: Renewable resource planning» Sep-Oct 2010: Renewable integration modeling» Jan 2011: Planning assumptions & modeling issues» April 2012: Scoping memorandum» Jun 2012: Planning standards» Jun-Sep 2012: LTPP Track 1 (local reliability)» Oct 2012: Storage workshop» Oct 2012: Loading Order Comments

Confidential

Appendix

32

»About CESA


»References

Confidential

Procurement Goals Should be Measured in MW

33

MW procurement goals are ideal for several reasons:

» The grid is composed of various assets with set generation, transmission, and consumption capacities. Procurement goals should be based around this common measurement metric.

» MW metrics allow for recognized manufacturing targets and related production/infrastructure investments for storage companies.

» As Storage Technology becomes less expensive, capacity-based procurement goals will lead to lower overall costs.

» Output time frames can be application-specific (i.e. frequency regulation can require 15 minute capabilities, while demand-side-management can be measured in hours) without converting overall goals to MWh, which can be problematic.

Confidential

Improved Generator Efficiency

34

Example: Gas Turbines and Thermal Energy Storage

Effects of Inlet Air Temperature on Gas Turbine Power Output

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

105%

110%

40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Inlet Air Temperature, degrees (F)

% o

f Rat

ed C

apac

ity

RECOVERED POWER

GT POWER OUTPUT

ADDITIONAL POWER

ISO TURBINE RATING

» Gas turbines run at higher power output levels at ideal inlet air temperature.

» Because of this, on a hot day the gas turbine loses output and operates less efficiently. Demand is highest during these hot weather conditions.

» Thermal energy storage can use cold water to control turbine air temperature, increasing output and efficiency – especially when it’s needed most.

Source: TAS Energy

Confidential

Improved Generator Efficiency

35

» Smoothing from regulation services reduces needed operating reserves & ramping capability.

» Individual generators can run at higher capacity factor, stabilize generation, and increase efficiency.

Source: E&I Consulting

Example: Greater System Efficiency from Optimized Generation

Confidential

Richer Spectrum of Benefits Over Time

36

» A system which starts out providing one set of benefits may provide other benefits over its lifetime. This is especially true for flexible energy storage systems.

» This transition can happen gradually or quickly to best suit the needs of the grid

» This increasing spectrum of benefits reduces the risk of deploying a storage asset on the grid and provides long term value for ratepayers.

System Benefits: Year 10 • Frequency Response• Ramping• Intermittent Resource Integration

(Ramp/Voltage Support)• VER/PV Shifting, Voltage Sag, Rapid

Demand Support• Supply Firming• Transmission Operation

System Benefits: Year 1• Electric Energy Time-Shift• Frequency Regulation Up• Frequency Regulation Down• Synchronous Reserve (Spin)• Non-Synchronous Reserve (Non-Spin)• Black Start

Confidential

Increased Capacity Value

37

Energy storage combined with solar increases the electricity supply capacity value as much as 80%.

Mills 2012

Confidential

2: Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers

38

Energy Storage reduces greenhouse gas emissions

Eyer 2010

» Storage reduces GHG emissions by helping generation run more efficiently.

» Fewer startups» Reduced partial load operation» Reduced output variability» More generation when ambient

temperature is lower

» Offsets need for peaking generation.

» Facilitates the widespread integration of renewables.

Confidential


39

Network Effects: widespread energy storage can help enable increased use of renewable energy in California

“Use of storage also avoids greenhouse gas emissions increases associated with scheduling combustion turbines ‘on’ strictly for regulation and ramping duty.”

“The measurement of the relative effectiveness of storage to a combustion turbine demonstrates that, depending upon system conditions and other factors, a 30 to 50 MW storage device is as effective as a 100 MW CT used for regulation and ramping purposes.”

“The 3,000 to 4,000 MW of storage which could be used to address renewables management requires a ramp rate capacity of 5 to 10 MW/second, or 0 to full power charging / discharging in 5 minutes. This equals or exceeds the ramping capabilities of most conventional generating units, and particularly the larger combustion turbines. Smaller combustion turbines in the California ISO database can meet this ramp rate requirement, but there are insufficient quantities of such units to provide the required 3,000 to 4,000 MW of fast ramping.”

KEMA 2010

Confidential


40

Reduced Risk: energy storage can diversify our portfolio

Karpinski 2012

» Energy storage is a key component of a new, diverse, and cleaner grid.

» Energy Storage facilitates the introduction of new generation and T&D technology, diversifying the grid and reducing dependency and vulnerability to disruption.

» Especially important with price and availability risk of conventional fuels.

Confidential


41

Reliability» Example: Energy storage reduces

output uncertainty attributable to wind forecast errors.

» Technology-specific benefits: flywheel or battery spinning reserves free up generators, distributed energy storage provides local backup reliability.

» Extends to entire grid: system reliability through load following, demand side management, etc.

Denholm 2008

Forecast Error for Wind

Confidential


42

» California economic growth: in-state leadership in an expanding energy storage industry.

» Environmental and health benefits: reduced fuel use and emissions (per kWh), local air quality improvement.

» Better planning: more renewables integration, less land use impacts.

» Improved cost-of-service, power quality, and reliability for consumers.

Additional Social Benefits

Confidential


43

Benefits of investment in other industries – renewable energy cost curves» Other renewable energy

industries have seen great cost reductions through R&D and increased scale.

» Energy storage is just reaching scale to the point of large cost improvements – we should support it to maturity and achieve related benefits.

IPCC 2011

Confidential


44

Cost curve of solar versus natural gas plants

» Solar is becoming cost-competitive with gas and coal.

» Installed energy storage cost reductions are likely as economies of scale in manufacturing, project scope, and integration are achieved

» As fuel costs rise, the relative benefits of energy storage will further accelerate to the point of grid parity with key peaking and ancillary services resources. 1366 Technologies, 2011

Solar Cost Reductions – Time & Scale

Confidential


45

Example: Published anticipated cost curve of Li Ion

2012 2015 2020$0.00

$200.00 $400.00 $600.00 $800.00

$1,000.00 $1,200.00 $1,400.00 $1,600.00 $1,800.00 $2,000.00

NEDO/DOE 2010 Price projec-tions

Price

» We are already seeing accelerating price reductions for many forms of storage.

» DOE outlines potential for ten-fold improvements for Li-ion in only ten years.

» Li ion cost reductions are being fueled by volume purchases for EV’s.

» Some technologies are becoming cost-competitive even sooner. Japan New Energy and Industrial Technology Development

Organization (NEDO) and DOE, 2010

Confidential

4: Inertia must be overcome

46

Existing rules and procurement are oriented toward traditional generation.A few potential changes in California would help enable energy storage development:

» Ancillary resource capacity minimum requirements should be lower.

» Long-term payment mechanisms for fast response regulation and similar services.

» 30-60 minute continuous energy requirement should be reduced or eliminated.

» CAISO’s Energy Management System (EMS) should accommodate negative power dispatch, thus accommodating energy-neutral resources.

» Utilities should establish long term purchase agreements for ancillary services, which would greatly improve the ability to secure capital for storage financing.

Confidential

5: Inaction will equal lost opportunity costs

47

Procurement for the future should happen now.

California Energy Commission, 2012

» Median age of the California generation fleet is ~30 years, and T&D infrastructure is aging.

» Our decisions today will affect the grid for the next half-century.

» Construction equals long-term commitment – to financing, grid structure, fuel reliance, environmental impact, etc.

Confidential


48

Volatility from renewable generation backed by Natural Gas plants reverses expected GHG reductions from renewables» GHG/Fuel use INCREASES

when 33% RPS happens without grid connected storage available

» Smoother energy using grid-tied storage is required to realize the benefits of renewable generation, enabling true GHG reduction

CAISO 33% RPS Study of Operation Requirements and Market Impacts

Confidential


49

Business as usual subjects ratepayers to significant fuel price risk.» DOE EIA natural gas price

projections cannot forecast market disruptions and historically have underestimated trends.

» Excessive expansion of natural gas-fueled generation bears risks associated with natural gas availability and pipeline and gas storage capacity.

» Uncertainties include: » AB 32 auction prices» Fracking regulation» SONGS restarting EIA 2010, 2000, Annual Energy Outlook, content courtesy EnerVault Corporation

Confidential

Appendix

50

»About CESA


»References

Confidential

References

51

» 1366 Technologies. “Solar at the Cost of Coal.” 2011. http://www.1366tech.com/cost-curve/

» Afsah, Shakeb and Salcito, Kendyl. “Shale Gas and the Fairy Tale of its CO2 Reductions.” Aug 7, 2012. http://co2scorecard.org/home/researchitem/24 (Data from US Energy Information Administration. “Monthly Energy Review: December 2012” January 2012. http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/mer.pdf)

» California Energy Commission. “Age of Generating Units of California’s Power Plants as of 2011.” Retrieved December 19, 2012. http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/generating_units.html

» Denholm, Paul. “The Role of Energy Storage in the Modern Low-Carbon Grid.” (Powerpoint) June 12, 2008. http://storagealliance.org/sites/default/files/whystorage/NREL%20ea_seminar_june_12%202008.pdf

» Eyer, Jim and Corey, Garth. “Energy Storage for the Electricity Grid: Benefits and Market Potential Assessment Guide. A study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems Program.” February 2010. http://storagealliance.org/sites/default/files/whystorage/Sandia_Energy_Storage_Guide.pdf

» IPCC, 2011: Summary for Policymakers. In: IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation [O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

» Karpinski, Dave. “Achieving a Diverse Electricity Portfolio in Ohio.” (Powerpoint for IEEE Energy Tech) May 30, 2012. http://energytech2012.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/W-S2-D-NorTech-IEEE-Presentation-5.30.12.pdf [photo edited by Alex Ghenis, December 23, 2012]

» KEMA, inc. “Research Evaluation of Wind and Solar Generation, Storage Impact, and Demand Response on the California Grid” 2010. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CEC-500-2010-010/CEC-500-2010-010.pdf

Confidential

References

52

» Mills, Andrew and Wiser, Ryan. “An Evaluation of Solar Valuation Methods Used in Utility Planning and Procurement Processes” LBNL-5933E. December 2012. http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/LBNL-5933E.pdf

» Romm, Joe. “GE sees solar cheaper than fossil fuels in 5 years.” May 26, 2011. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/05/26/208184/ge-solar-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels-in-5-years/

» US Energy Information Administration. “Detailed State Data: Annual Data for 2011.” Released October 2012. http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/state/

» US Energy Information Administration. “Projected Natural gas prices depend on shale gas resource economics” August 27, 2012. http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7710

» CPUC 2020 Net Supply, Source: Summary Data of Revised Scenarios V4, Base Case, http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208-60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xls

» CPUC 2020 Managed Demand Net Load: Summary Data of Revised Scenarios V4, Base Case. http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208-60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xls

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7710

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7710

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208-60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xls




California Energy Storage Alliance

Documents

usual procurement

diverse benefits

justifiable procurement

net benefits

uncaptured benefits

thoughtful goals

electric power system

historic time reminiscent