Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

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.

Abstract not provided.

In 2019, Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) contracted Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) to research the integration of community and electric grid resilience investment planning as part of the Designing Resilient Communities (DRC): A Consequence-Based Approach for Grid Investment project. Synapse produced a series of reports to explore the challenges and opportunities in several key areas, including benefit-cost analysis (BCA), performance metrics, microgrids, and regulatory mechanisms. This report focuses on BCA. BCA is an approach that electric utilities, electric utility regulators, and communities can use to evaluate the costs and benefits of a wide range of grid resilience investments in a comprehensive and consistent way. While BCA is regularly applied to some types of grid investments, application of BCA to grid resilience investments is in the early stages of development. Though resilience is increasingly cited in connection with grid investment proposals and plans, the resilience- related costs and benefits of grid resilience investments are typically not fully identified, infrequently quantified, and almost never monetized. Without complete assessments of costs and benefits, regulators can be hesitant to approve some types of grid resilience investments. This report provides the first application of the framework developed in the 2020 National Standard Practice Manual for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Distributed Energy Resources (NSPM for DERs) to grid resilience investments. We provide guidance on next steps for implementation to enable grid resilience investments to receive due consideration. We suggest developing BCA principles and standards for jurisdiction-specific BCA tests. We also recommend identifying the resilience impacts of the investments and quantification of these impacts by establishing utility performance metrics for resilience. Proactive integration of grid resilience investments into existing regulatory processes and practices can increase the capacity of jurisdictions to respond to and recover from the consequences of extreme events. 1 National Energy Screening Project. 2020. National Standard Practice Manual for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Distributed Energy Resources.

Synapse Energy Economics has conducted structured interviews to better characterize the current landscape of resilience planning within and across jurisdictions. Synapse interviewed representatives of a diverse group of communities and their electric utilities. The resulting case studies span geographies and utility regulatory structures and represent a range of threats. They also vary in terms of population density and size. This report summarizes our approach and the findings gleaned from these conversations. All the communities and utilities we interviewed see increased interest in and commitment of resources for energy-related resilience. The risks and consequences these communities and utilities faced in the past, face now, and will face in the future drove them to improve engagement, advance processes, further decision-making, and in many cases invest in projects. While no process used by communities and utilities was the same, the different processes used by communities and utilities allowed each one to make progress in its own way. Several approaches are emerging that can provide good models for other communities and utilities with an interest in improving resilience.

Changes in the nature, intensity, and frequency of climate-related extreme events have imposed a higher risk of failure on energy systems, especially those at the community level. Furthermore, the evolving energy demand patterns and transition towards renewable and localised energy supply can affect energy system resilience. How can an energy system be planned and reconfigured to address these challenges without compromising the system's resilience against chronic stresses and extreme events? Unlike energy system reliability, resilience is neither a common nor an explicit consideration in energy master planning at the community level. In addition, there is no universally agreed-upon method or metrics for measuring or estimating resilience and defining mitigation strategies. This paper introduces a multi-layered energy resilience framework and set of metrics for energy master planning of communities, including the new generation of district energy systems. The potential system disturbances and their short and long-term impacts on various components of the energy system are discussed for commonly expected and extreme events. Three layers of energy resilience are discussed: engineering-designed resilience, operational resilience, and community-societal resilience. A starting set of energy resilience metrics to support engineering design and energy master planning for communities is identified. Implications for future research and practice are noted.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

An analysis of microgrids to increase resilience was conducted for the island of Puerto Rico. Critical infrastructure throughout the island was mapped to the key services provided by those sectors to help inform primary and secondary service sources during a major disruption to the electrical grid. Additionally, a resilience metric of burden was developed to quantify community resilience, and a related baseline resilience figure was calculated for the area. To improve resilience, Sandia performed an analysis of where clusters of critical infrastructure are located and used these suggested resilience node locations to create a portfolio of 159 microgrid options throughout Puerto Rico. The team then calculated the impact of these microgrids on the region's ability to provide critical services during an outage, and compared this impact to high-level estimates of cost for each microgrid to generate a set of efficient microgrid portfolios costing in the range of $218-$917M. This analysis is a refinement of the analysis delivered on June 01, 2018.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.