By Erich Huffaker

As we examine the landscape for new utility “solar plus” projects, along the lines of community solar combined with demand response (DR) or storage, we realize that one of the more compelling reasons why utilities should pursue a this type of program is that a growing number of non-utility companies are already working in this market space. On the East and West Coasts and in some places in between, there is a burgeoning industry around integrated demand-side management, including DR, storage and distributed renewables. Innovative third-parties are giving electricity customers increasingly better tools to cut demand charges, modernize operations and reduce overall bills. For utilities that choose to watch from the sidelines, the fracture in the traditional utility-customer relationship drives deeper.

For example, GreenCharge Networks (GCN), with offices in Silicon Valley, New York, and San Diego, provides “intelligent energy storage” solutions-management services for onsite generation, energy management systems, DR, and storage. GCN installs integrated battery systems in large buildings and institutions nationwide. Recognizing that these systems can greatly expand the value of solar in mitigating utility demand charges, GCN is specifically targeting commercial solar sites. It is not adverse to utility partnerships, however—should the utility ask—as proven by recent work in collaboration with Duke Energy.

What about the arguments that storage is prohibitively expensive? Earlier this year, GCN secured financing to offer no-money-down battery systems to customers. And, GCN is not the only one providing this innovative financing model. Stem, a primary competitor to GCN, headquartered in Milbrae, CA, also offers a behind-the-meter demand-charge mitigation storage tools.

Companies are also making innovative software platforms to handle the increasingly evolving ecosystem of devices and hardware available for customer energy management. Geli’s hardware and software helps manage microgrid and EV-solar battery integration projects. The platform optimizes for complicated use-cases, involving multiple on-site assets, focusing on solar-plus-battery sites. Geli models the technical performance and financial impacts of installations, with market-specific information on how the system impacts utility tariffs and demand charges.

The takeaway is not that every utility should attempt to undertake innovative, complex integrated demand-side management projects on its own. Instead, it is that there is a growing customer appetite for more holistic energy management. In fact, this growing appetite is more important than any specific end-use solution. Once a customer has embarked upon this path with one service provider, that customer is unlikely to abandon that path completely and to start work with a whole new partner or partners. Continuity is valuable to these customers. That’s why the utility must show up now and join in, before it’s too late.

We’ve found that the utility has unique comparative advantages, which may be leveraged with the customer during this early-stage window of opportunity, irrespective of what other offers may be on the table by third parties. Utilities need to think clearly about what kind of a service packages they can provide to meet their customers’ needs. Often this will involve technical partners and initial pilot projects—in fact, projects that might include community solar, designed to include key stakeholders and technical partners. But utilities need to get serious about addressing this growing market, because if they don’t, somebody else will.

Erich Huffaker, a Project Specialist at Olivine, Inc. will be departing the CSVP Team this month as he pursues diverse professional interests and a penchant for travel. He recently coauthored the CSVP guide, Integrating Demand Response Into Community Solar Programs. We will miss him and look forward to his future dispatches.

When we began the Community Solar Value Project, we held a clear vision of shared-solar projects that would bring the utility and its customers together in a market-based demonstration of several DER strategies needed for an integrated and flexible grid. We envisioned tapping strategic solar siting and design plus DR and storage “companion measures”—orchestrated to help balance the load and increase the net value of local PV. Now, a year later, we’re almost there, except for a few challenges, including one in the guise of low-cost centralized solar.

Yes, it is hard to turn down a cheaper solar option. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association and GTM Research, solar costs fell last year to less than $1.50 per Watt for utility-scale fixed-tilt systems. If you were doing community solar primarily to deliver savings to subscribers, this might look like an answer. A number of utilities are now planning voluntary programs that tap big solar and package it kind of like wind-based green-power programs. Even community solar on the distribution grid is going to the urban fringe. In Minnesota, community solar developers have been co-locating 1-MW projects to reach economies of scale, with the state limiting developers to five co-located projects.

At the Community Solar Value Project (CSVP), we always recognized the benefit of scale. But we are focused on distribution-system projects, and preferably infill projects in the 500-kW to 2-MW range. Why? Well, one of our core assumptions is that distributed solar is here to stay. Whether or not the utility is involved, customers will pursue distributed solar. But if the utility were involved, the pairing of these large-commercial scale projects with DR and storage options (and in some cases, energy efficiency) represents what we call a “market-based laboratory” for field-testing many of the smart-grid and flexible-DER strategies that are currently stuck at the white-paper stage or in isolated pilot programs. As far as we know (and tell us if we’re wrong) no one has yet market-tested the economics of a distributed solar fleet strategy (achieving, say, 10 MW through a fleet of community-solar projects). Certainly there is little testing of distributed solar strategies that incorporate high-value companion measures. Sources like GTM Research and Rocky Mountain Institute and ICF International all have recently touted the distributed-energy future. And, for the most part, we believe them. But implementation in existing utility cultures, including engagement with and learning from “real” customers, is a project that needs to start now. The smart grid will not emerge fully armed, like Athena, from the head of Zeus. It will emerge from a trail of better and bigger attempts to get the thing right.

The CSVP recently started to work on an effort called “Filling the Pricing Gap,” to help utilities create and justify more competitive community-solar pricing for programs based (at least primarily) on local PV resources. You will see presentations and reports on our progress here in coming weeks. The folks at the Sacramento Municipal Utility District have been walking this road with us—or more accurately, they are usually in the lead, as they apply tremendous experience and in-house expertise to the challenge. One early example: they have taught us that a conventional “value of solar” argument is not such a practical solution for justifying near-term program design. For one thing it makes most utility guys’ hair stand on end. For another, it raises endless “what-if” questions about increasingly dynamic technical options, markets, and policies.
While others look for a VOS algorithm that would be, in effect a “theory of everything” for DER, we work to combine a relative few, fairly indisputable aspects of VOS analysis with targeted strategic arguments. This includes presenting what we call “realistic hypotheticals,” scenarios with ranges of numbers that are not intended to hit the value nail on the head, but which are nevertheless worth considering.

I use plural because we are addressing multiple internal stakeholders in the utility, all of whom have strong (and often conflicting) points of view. We are also addressing the utility’s most timely concern—that it needs to build and maintain strong customer relationships throughout these trying times. Watch our Library and Workshops pages for our reports from the field—where at least for the most part, we are keeping it local.