Sandia National Laboratories
Prepared by DNV GL for The National Alliance for Advanced Technology Batteries (“NAATBatt”)
February 17, 2014

Executive Summary: The purpose of this project was to survey electric utilities, storage vendors and other stakeholders of the electricity grid concerning their views about the optimal use of DES technology and the principal barriers that prevent widespread deployment of that technology on the grid today. It is intended that that data provided by this report be used to design a program of related and coordinated DES demonstration projects that can most effectively address the issues identified in this report.

In order to achieve these objectives, DNV GL recommended and executed the following process and methodology:

  1. Identify DES applications that are most likely to provide the greatest value
  2. Design survey questions and review the whole methodology with EPRI
  3. Survey utilities and other stakeholders with a follow-up based on their feedback
  4. Analyze the Survey Results and review them with the NAATBatt Advisory Team
  5. Establish a subset of viable projects from the above survey and the Advisory Team comments
  6. Design a method for utilities to share deployment information

The survey results are presented in section 3, the subsequent analysis in section 4, a list of some noteworthy DES projects and project focus recommendations are provided in section 5, and recommended protocols for sharing project information amongst utilities are provided in section 6.

It is the opinion of this report that future government-funded DES projects should focus on demonstrating command and control technologies that will permit the owners and operators of DES systems to optimize the value of the multiple applications that those systems can provide to the grid. Demonstrating the maximization of the economic value of DES storage systems (or their value to the grid, whether or not capable of monetization due to regulatory restrictions) is the most important function that future, government-funded DES demonstration projects can serve.

More demonstration projects of existing storage technology are necessary to move DES technology from theory to reality on the grid. Future demonstration projects should focus on optimizing the economic benefits (or grid benefits) of DES systems. Until utilities can see specific examples of how DES systems can maximize benefits and generate an acceptable return on investment, incenting additional voluntary utility investments in DES systems will be challenging.

1. Purpose

The purpose of this project was to design a master list of DES demonstration projects that address stated industry and market challenges for grid-scale electrical energy storage delivery system with a focus on the distribution aspect of the electricity grid, and recommend potential demonstration projects to advance the maturity level of DES systems deployment.

2. Scope

To satisfy the scope of this project, DNV GL conducted a survey of representatives from EPRI, 18 utilities, 11 energy storage vendors, 8 consultant or analysts, and 2 other types of stakeholders. The results from this survey were instrumental in producing the following deliverables:

  • Identify most valuable applications and benefits of DES
  • Create a Master DES Projects List of DES demonstration projects addressing industry and market challenges
  • Create a list of highly feasible and useful DES Projects from the Master DES Projects List identifying the technical basis for conducting the project, and technical analysis done to define risks and solutions
  • Design a method and checklist for utilities to share deployment information and practical experiences to overcome technical challenges and improve the cost-effectiveness of grid-scale DES systems.

3. Survey Results

The survey respondents consisted of representatives from EPRI, various electric utilities, Energy Storage (ES) vendors and manufacturers, consultants, analysts, the Underwriter Lab and a Public Service Commission. The survey effort was conducted in two phases; there were 45 respondents to the first survey, and 14 to the follow-up survey. The results presented in this report will clearly state which survey they relate to.

The initial survey prompted respondents to rank various DES project drivers and applications identified by DNV GL on a scale of 1 to 10 (i.e. least desirable to most desirable or feasible). Additionally, respondents were encouraged to suggest additional drivers and applications, and provide comments. A sample of this survey is attached in Appendix A1.

The follow-up survey presented the preliminary aggregated results from the initial survey to the respondents, and prompted the respondents to rank five new drivers and one new application suggested by the respondents of the initial survey. It also inquired about the respondents’ preferred energy storage technology and deployment location, the nature of the barriers to DES adoption, interconnection issues, and opinion on the most viable mechanism to share best practices throughout the industry. A sample of this survey is attached in Appendix A2 – Follow-up Survey.

3.1 Survey Respondents

The initial survey respondents consisted of 43 representatives from utilities either interested or already deploying DES systems, energy storage vendors or manufacturers, consultants and analysts, and other stakeholders. The breakdown of these participants is illustrated in Figure 1.

The initial survey respondents represented 18 utilities, 11 energy storage vendors, 8 consultant or analysts, and 2 other types of stakeholders; they are listed in Table 1.

The follow-up survey respondents consisted of 13 representatives from utilities either interested or already deploying DES systems, energy storage vendors or manufacturers, consultants and analysts. The breakdown of these participants is illustrated in Figure 2.

The follow-up survey respondents represented 6 utilities, 5 energy storage vendors, and 2 consultant or analysts; they are listed in Table 2.

3.2 Preferred Storage Technologies

The results presented in Figure 3 were gathered from the follow-up survey. Taking into account all respondents, there is equal preference for no specific technology or lithium-ion batteries.

3.3 Preferred Deployment Locations

The results presented in this section were gathered from the follow-up survey. The responses from six utilities, five energy storage vendors, and two consultants are represented in Figure 4.

3.4 DES Deployment Barriers

The results presented in this section were gathered from the follow-up survey. The respondents were prompted to identify and rank the top three barriers to DES deployment. The responses from six utilities, five energy storage vendors, and two consultants are represented in Figure 5.

3.5 DES Project Drivers

The results in this section were weighed with respect to the number of respondents from each stakeholder type. The semi-transparent bars represent opinions gathered solely from the follow-up survey, and consist of responses from six utilities, five energy storage vendors, and two consultants. The ranking of key drivers for a successful DES project is presented in Figure 6.

3.6 DES Applications

The results in this section were weighed with respect to the number of respondents from each stakeholder type. The applications labeled with an asterisk (*) were gathered from the follow-up survey, and consist of responses from six utilities, five energy storage vendors, and two consultants.

The applications considered were evaluated for primary usage, where the application is the DES device dispatch priority and secondary usage, where the application is bundled with another primary application to provide additional benefits. The primary applications ranking is presented in Figure 7 and the secondary applications ranking is presented in Figure 8.

4. Analysis of Survey Results

Considering that the purpose of this study focuses on distributed energy storage systems to be deployed by utilities, the responses from the utilities, storage vendors, and other contributors were analyzed independently, and compared. Energy storage vendors’ opinion could be biased towards the specific capabilities of their products. Consultants, analysts, and governmental agencies are likely unbiased in their responses. The order of importance for each item populating the charts in this section was kept the same as the aggregated results.

4.1 Drivers

The survey results presented in Figure 9 suggest that meeting the grid needs and financial values and incentives of DES deployment are important drivers as seen by all stakeholders. Additionally, utilities care about DES systems compliance with standards due to the limitations a non-compliant system would pose. Ease of integration and operation, and reliability and safety are also considered important drivers.

The likelihood of DES systems to compete with other technologies seemed of relatively little importance to survey respondents. Also, the potential to be widely replicated, the footprint and portability, and the simplicity of controls and operation appeared to be secondary concerns for utilities.

4.2 Barriers

The barriers ranking are presented by respondent category in Figure 10, Figure 11, and Figure 12. All parties agree that economic barriers are a primary factor hindering the deployment of DES systems. There is a general consensus that the technical barriers are an important, but secondary concern. The utilities are generally concerned about the lack of open standards, where the rest of the industry is more concerned with policy being a major barrier to the widespread adoption of DES systems.

4.3 Preferred Technologies

The results presented in Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15 were gathered from five utilities, five vendors, and two consultants in the follow-up survey. Lithium-ion technology seems to be of most interest to vendors, and some utilities. However, most utilities do not have a preference as to which technology is being used.

4.4 Applications and Benefits

The primary and secondary applications rankings were further broken down by respondent category, as was done with the other results analyzed in this section. These results are presented in Figure 16 and Figure 17 respectively.

4.4.1 Distribution upgrade deferral

Energy storage can be installed to defer the installation or upgrade of power lines and transformers. The value of this application may not necessarily be the cost of the alternatives but rather timing and feasibility. Siting power lines and substations are time-consuming challenges requiring sizeable capital expenditure. Storage can be utilized to defer the need for the additional lines and substation to a later time period.

4.4.2 Service reliability

This application focuses on the need for back-up power systems located on the utility side of the electric meter. Alternatively, it focuses on the need for back-up power systems at Commercial and Industrial facilities. These facilities typically use a combination of batteries for ride-through of momentary outages and a diesel generator for longer duration outages.

4.4.3 Fast regulation

This application is similar to “Area Regulation”, with specific reference to FERC 755 for area regulation compensation. Energy storage units provide a faster response than conventional generation, and can be used both as an energy source and sink to achieve a finer generation to load balance.

4.4.4 Voltage support

The power conversion systems complementing battery systems are capable of providing dynamic, bidirectional VAR support to maintain line voltages within defined limits.

4.4.5 Solar RES ramp control

Shading caused by terrestrial obstructions such as clouds and trees can cause the power output from affected solar generation systems to drop quite rapidly. Solar farms are subject to specific ramping requirements in order to interconnect to the grid. Solar farm operators are contractually obligated to meet these ramping requirements, which vary by utilities, as stated in Power Purchase Agreements. Storage can be applied to smooth solar output and off-set these requirements.

4.4.6 Solar RES time shift

This is a subset of Energy Time Shift (arbitrage). Renewable resources are unpredictable and may not align with peak load patterns. Solar production tends to peak at or before noon when load is typically at a low and ebbs during the afternoon hours when load is at a maximum. Having a storage device with durations of 3-4 hours can provide a tremendous advantage to renewable efficiencies, easing of grid impacts, and renewable production. These devices can enable storage and discharge of renewable generation from low cost periods to high cost periods, and provide transmission relief from the stress caused by solar farms.

4.4.7 RES capacity firming

The objective of renewable capacity firming is to make the generation output somewhat constant. Storage could be used to store wind and solar power during hours of peak production regardless of demand, and discharge to supplement traditional generation when renewable output reduces during expected generation time.

4.4.8 Wind RES ramp control

Short duration intermittency from wind generation is caused by variations of wind speed that occur through the day. Storage could be used to manage or mitigate the less desirable effects from high wind generation penetration. Wind farms are subject to specific requirements in order to interconnect to the grid. Wind farm operators are contractually obligated to meet these ramping requirements, which vary by utilities, as stated in Power Purchase Agreements.

4.4.9 Supply Capacity

Energy storage could be used to defer the cost of installation of new power plants or to “rent” generation capacity in the wholesale electricity marketplace.

4.4.10 Wind RES time shift

This is a subset of Energy Time Shift (arbitrage). Renewable resources are unpredictable and don’t align with typical peak load patterns. Wind production tends to peak during the evening and morning hours when load is at a low and ebbs during daytime hours when load is at a maximum. Having a storage device with durations of 4-6 hours can provide a tremendous advantage to renewable efficiencies, easing of grid impacts, and renewable production. These devices can enable storage and discharge of renewable generation from low cost periods to high cost periods, and provide transmission relief from the stress caused by wind farms. The wind farms infrastructure is typically not sized to capture the maximum output of the farm; storage can capture energy that would be typically dumped in these cases and increase the wind farm capacity factor.

4.4.11 Load following

Energy storage could serve as load following capacity that adjusts its output to balance the generation and the load within a specific region or area.

4.4.12 System ramping

Fluctuations in system loading and generation are inherent to the operation of the electric power grid. The rate of change caused by these could be quite rapid. Storage can be applied to relieve stress on generation resources by smoothing these transitions almost instantaneously. In most markets, energy storage can be committed either as load or a generator, and are sized depending on the ratings and ability to provide a certain power magnitude for a given duration.

4.4.13 Supply spinning reserve

Reserve capacity is the generation capacity that can be called upon in the event of a contingency such as the sudden, unexpected loss of a generator. Three types of reserve capacities are: Spinning Reserve, Supplemental Reserve and Backup Supply.

4.4.14 Area regulation

Area regulation is the use of on-line generation or storage which can change output quickly (MW/min) to track minute-to-minute fluctuations in loads and to correct for the unintended fluctuations in generation. It helps to maintain the grid frequency and to comply with Control Performance Standards (CPSs) 1 and 2 of the North American Reliability Council (NERC).

4.4.15 Transmission upgrade deferral

Energy storage can be installed to defer the installation or upgrade of transmission lines and substations. The value of this application may not necessarily be the cost of the alternatives but rather timing and feasibility. Siting transmission lines and substations are time-consuming challenges requiring sizeable capital expenditure. Storage can be utilized to defer the need for the additional transmission lines and substation to a later time period.

4.4.16 Transmission support

Energy storage could be used to enhance the T&D system performance by providing support during the event of electrical anomalies and disturbances such as voltage sag, unstable voltage, and sub-synchronous resonance.

5. DES Demonstration Projects

5.1 DES Projects Master List

Survey recipients were prompted to provide a list of innovative DES projects they have deployed in the past three years, or are planning to deploy within the next three years. A master list of these was assembled and is presented in Appendix B – DES Projects Master List.

5.2 Innovative Projects

5.2.1 Snohomish PUD Projects

Comments from Snohomish PUD – [The] lack of open, comprehensive standards are a significant barrier to the availability of economically viable energy storage systems. The above projects will focus on demonstrating a viable solution to this challenge via the MESA (Modular Energy Storage Architecture) in partnership with 1Energy Systems, Alstom Grid, the University of Washington and major battery manufacturers.

5.2.2 PNM Project

Comments from PNM – Standards and code overlap for electrical energy storage systems installed within the last three years. Lack of clarity from NESC vs. NEC (480V systems in utility owned equipment)

5.2.3 SCE Projects

Comments from SCE – Each system is semi-custom at best; there’s no “off-the-shelf” solution. Jurisdictional issues when sited at customer sites and lack of presence of applicable standards for fire suppression [are hindering interconnection efforts].

5.2.4 Kokam Projects

Comments from Kokam – Standard tests are not available and accepted so each customer/end user must make up their own standards which can provide challenges during FAT and commissioning. These projects have largely been demonstration projects for which commercial drivers, supported by regulatory decisions, are not available.

5.2.5 Duke Projects

Comments from Duke – Each system is custom at this point in time. No real standards exist yet for energy storage both behind the meter and at the T&D level. Lack of algorithm development exists for energy storage. Developing systems and controls which allows energy storage to provide multiple value streams for the grid and customers is critical.

5.3 Recommended DES Projects

Based on the survey responses, various project types were identified as the most valuable projects to demonstrate various value streams of DES projects. These are presented in Table 8.

Comments from First Energy – The next DOE demonstrations need to focus on the technical ability of integrated and interoperable utility energy storage systems, including communications and control needed for integration.

[First Energy] supports energy storage technology development because as it is potentially an important option for utilities to enhance reliability and flexibility of the electric delivery system. Storage can be a flexible asset to address the integration of increasing renewable generation resources such as wind and solar. Storage can also be a tool to improve distribution asset utilization if it can be produced at a very low cost.

[First Energy proposes a project], which was developed in an industry collaborative with EPRI, [that] is a DES Demonstration Project that could feature both large energy storage systems deployed at substation level or on a distribution circuit. One type would sized from 500kW to 10 MW for 1 to 6 hours and another a smaller energy storage utility systems deployed on the circuit and sized between 50 to 500 kW for 2 to 4 hours. Both types of systems need to have the capability for interoperable control from a utility SCADA or a distributed energy resources management systems as well as local automated control. Secure, reliable communication networks are needed to support various control frameworks using utility communications protocols with appropriate cyber security considerations.

Comments from UL LLC – One value demonstration for energy storage projects not noted in the column on the right of Table 8, may be verification of the safety of these systems through safety evaluation and actual field use. This is especially true for those systems closer to the user such as community energy storage as well as those systems that may be utilizing emerging technologies. The demonstration of the safety of the system may not be as quantifiable as determining $/kW costs, but it is can be an additional benefit of conducting demonstrations.

Comments from EPRI – The Energy Storage Integration Council (ESIC) has initially identified two products categories of interest, “Large Sale Energy Storage Systems at Substation Level or Along the Distribution Feeder” (0.5MW to 10MW for 1-6 hours), and “Small-Scale Energy Storage Systems at Edge of Grid” (25kW to 500kW for 2-4 hours), both inspired by the previous efforts. The identification of these product categories came about through intensive discussions with utilities, energy storage vendors, and other stakeholders. EPRI asks that these categories be considered for the two primary categories for demonstration.

Comments from PNM – PNM suggests a project combining the following features: 1) utilizing a DES system to provide fast frequency response, 2) testing the volt/var capabilities of its power control system in conjunction with batteries, and 3) testing forward forecasting techniques relating to 1-2 minute ahead cloud prediction.

Comments from EaglePicher Technologies – EaglePicher suggests a project combining advanced communications and controls technology with a hybrid DES system with the modularity and interoperability of multiple electro-chemistries in order to meet the complex needs of multiple projects and applications. EaglePicher believes that once a hybrid system can prove itself in application and through a demonstration, a packaged solution suitable for commercial installation and for many applications can quickly be made available.

Comments from GS Battery (U.S.A.) Inc. and EPC Power Corporation – GS Battery and EPC Power suggest a project utilizing a portable DES system utilizing a standard Tricon container footprint. The system would be tested in emergency response applications (acting as a microgrid to provide power to critical load) and in commercial buildings (to demonstrate demand charge reduction, volt/VAR support, frequency support and backup for critical loads). The system would be Scada ready using DNP3 over IP.

6. Information Sharing

A mechanism to share general information about DES projects amongst utilities is crucial to promoting deployment efficiency. The DES Advisory Committee defined the scope of valuable information that could be made publicly available and identified ways to share this data amongst participant in the following subsections.

6.1 Scope of Shareable Information

Some information can reasonably be made public without compromising security or breaching NonDisclosure Agreements. The project information identified by the DES Advisory Committee can be divided into the following 6 categories:

  • Technical parameters of the DES device(s) and site
  • Financial parameters of the project
  • Details on Interconnection with the existing power system
  • Details on Control strategies and purpose
  • Details on evaluation methodology
  • Miscellaneous information including standards and lessons learned

6.1.1 Technical Information

  • DES technology
  • Power and energy ratings of the DES unit(s)
  • AC Voltage rating at the output of the DES unit(s), and at the point of interconnection
  • One-line diagram of complete system(s)

6.1.2 Financial Information

  • Cost of components and processes given as percentage of total project cost
  • Targeted project life DNV GL Energy & Sustainability

6.1.3 Connection Information

  • Geographic and Grid location of DES site(s)
  • List of additional equipment necessary for safe connection, such as transformer(s), breaker(s), etc.
  • Issues integrating with the utility data management system

6.1.4 Control Information

  • List of targeted application(s)
  • Control methodology(ies)
  • Operational criteria and plans

6.1.5 Evaluation Information

  • Performance metrics
  • Performance analysis method
  • Value verification methodology

6.1.6 Miscellaneous Information

  • Safety and protection issues
  • Tests and protocols performed
  • Applicable standards identified
  • Top 3-5 lessons learned DNV GL Energy & Sustainability

6.2 Sharing Methodology

Considering the number of projects and the scope of the information identified in section 7.1, a concise sharing methodology must be established to simplify the process for DES adopters and make the repository as accessible as possible. Three potential methods were identified:

  • Sharing information through the DoE via a web repository
  • Sharing information through the DoE via a Sandia Report or white paper format
  • Sharing information through EPRI working groups

6.2.1 Web Repository

A web-based approach would allow for versatility in data aggregation and accessibility for all concerned parties. Additionally, a web site could potentially host various applications to assist with project design tasks, such as a Cost-Benefit Analysis or a Technology Selection tools. Creating and maintaining a website along with validating the data would require a significant investment.

6.2.2 Report Publication

Another method involves using the current methods of publishing white paper or Sandia Report. This method would not necessitate significant investments, but would require more effort from potential participants.

6.2.3 Working Groups

Information can also be gathered and processed through Working Groups and stakeholder Forums through periodic meetings where various stakeholders assemble and present current and future projects, technological advancements, etc. DNV GL Energy & Sustainability

7. Conclusion

The survey of utilities and other stakeholders conducted as part of this study offers an insight into how utilities and other stakeholders value the types of services that DES systems can provide. Although there was not a consensus on all issues, there were clear preferences by the majority that are captured in the following highlights:

  • Most of the respondents who were non-vendors had no preference in battery technology
  • Meeting the grid needs, achieving financial benefits, and compliance with standards were the top drivers identified
  • High cost and the maturity level of energy storage system technology were the top two barriers identified
  • Distribution upgrade deferral and fast regulation were identified as the most valuable primary applications
  • Voltage support and service reliability were identified as the most valuable secondary applications
  • There is a preference to share project data via a website through DOE, EPRI or working group forums

It is the general consensus of the stakeholders that participated in this study that the key to making DES systems attractive to utilities is improving the ability of individual DES systems, or networked groups of DES systems, to perform multiple applications on the grid, including the high value applications identified in this report. These multiple applications must be performed, or “stacked”, in a manner that maximizes, without need of material human intervention, the aggregate value of those multiple applications. Only by optimally stacking applications and maximizing their aggregate value can utilities achieve an acceptable rate of return on investment that justifies the cost of DES system deployment.

Future demonstration project should focus on proving that DES systems can optimally stack multiple grid-related applications. Optimizing the stacking of applications is largely a function of command and control technology. While many aspects of DES technology have been adequately demonstrated by previous government-supported DES demonstration projects, this report concludes that the command and control technology necessary to optimize the value of grid applications that DES systems provide has not yet been adequately proven. Utilities and other potential users of DES technology have not yet seen practical demonstrations of DES technology that prove out its theoretical ability to optimize the value of the multiple applications such systems can bring to the grid.

It is the opinion of this report that future government-funded DES projects should focus on demonstrating command and control technologies that will permit the owners and operators of DES systems to optimize the value of the multiple applications that those systems can provide to the grid. Demonstrating the maximization of the economic value of DES storage systems (or their value to the grid, whether or not capable of monetization due to regulatory restrictions) is the most important function that future, government-funded DES demonstration projects can serve.

This report does not intend to minimize the importance of other initiatives necessary to enable the widespread deployment of DES technology on the grid. Reducing the cost of DES technology is critical. Special notice is taken of industry efforts to standardize codes, terminology, interfaces and products, such as that being undertaken by the Energy Storage Integration Council (ESIC) under the leadership of EPRI. Future demonstration projects should seek to incorporate these emerging standards.

More demonstration projects of existing storage technology are necessary to move DES technology from theory to reality on the grid. Future demonstration projects should focus on optimizing the economic benefits (or grid benefits) of DES systems. Until utilities can see specific examples of how DES systems can maximize benefits and generate an acceptable return on investment, incenting additional voluntary utility investments in DES systems will be challenging.

Appendix A1 – Initial Survey

This document is the initial survey distributed to industry stakeholders.

Survey Questions for a successful distributed energy storage project at the substation level (DES 1-4 MW)

1- Your contact Information:

a. Name:

b. Position in your company:

2- Your business type:
Utility
ISO
Energy Trader
Storage Vendor
Consultant/Analyst
Government
other

3- In your opinion, what are the key drivers behind a successful energy storage project in a distribution substation (DES, 1-4 MW)?

Drivers behind a successful energy storage project (1-4MW) (0 = insignificant 10 = key driver)
Meeting grid needs (DG & renewable flow control, ramp control, voltage support, reliability)
Financial values and incentives (regulation, T&D deferral, arbitrage)
Ability to bundle multiple applications for increased benefits
Likeliness to compete with alternatives like gas turbines and Demand Response
Simplicity of controls and operation (fitting into the current SCADA system)
Potential to be widely replicated (by the same or other utilities)
Other:

4- In your opinion, which of the following storage applications would be most likely served in a successful energy storage project in a distribution substation (DES 1-4 MW)?

Storage applications that would likely be served in a successful DES project )0 = unlikely 10 = very likely) As the main application 0 = unlikely 10 = very likely As a secondary (bundled) application Load Following Voltage Support Upgrade Deferral – Distribution Upgrade Deferral – Transmission Transmission Support Supply Capacity Supply Spinning Reserve Service Reliability Renewable time shift – Solar Renewable time shift – Wind Renewable Ramp Control – Solar Renewable Ramp Control – Wind Renewable Capacity Firming Area Regulation Fast Regulation Other:

5- Additional Comments:

Appendix A2 – Follow-up Survey

This document is the follow-up survey developed using input from the initial survey, and distributed to industry stakeholders who responded to the initial survey.

Preliminary Survey Results

Summary of the received surveys as of Sept 31, 2013: The preliminary analysis of the data on the survey responses received to date makes us conclude the following:

Follow-up Survey Questions for an energy storage project, 1-4 MW

Notes:

  • The new follow-up questions, based on your feedback, are highlighted. You may still respond to the original questions if you want to have your earlier responses modified or adjusted.
  • Power or discharge duration of storage depends on the preferred applications
  • Aggregation of distributed storage should be considered for providing values at transmission, generation or general system level

6- Your contact Information:

a. Your Name:
b. Company Name:
c. Position in your company:
d. Any specific regulatory/policy ties?

7- Your business type:

Utility
Storage Vendor
Consultant/Analyst
other

8- Thinking beyond a technology demonstration, what is your preferred technology to demonstrate the operational values and benefits of energy storage?

  • Lead Acid (conventional or advanced)
  • Li-ion• NaS
  • NaNiCl
  • Vanadium Redox Flow Battery
  • ZnBr flow battery
  • Flywheels
  • No Preference
  • Other __________________________

9- What location you prefer for distributed energy storage (DES)?

  • At a substation
  • On feeders closer to load or renewable generation
  • No Preference

10- Please list any energy storage project you have demonstrated or installed in the last 3 years or plan to do in the next 3 years 

11- Any issues with interconnection, standards, commercial availability, etc., for electrical energy storage systems installed (within the last three years).

12- In your opinion, what are the key drivers behind a successful energy storage project, 1-4 MW to be started in the next few years?

Meeting grid needs (DG & renewable flow control, ramp control, voltage support, reliability, etc.)
Financial values and incentives (ROI or savings in regulation, T&D deferral, arbitrage, etc.)
Ability to bundle multiple applications for increased benefits
Likelihood to compete with alternatives like gas turbines and Demand Response
Simplicity of controls and operation (fitting into the current SCADA/ EMS )
Potential to be widely replicated (by the same or other utilities)
Reliability and safety of the storage system
Footprint and portability
Regulatory and public acceptance
Compliance with applicable safety standards and installation codes
Be integrated and operated easily in the electricity T&D system
Other:

13- In your opinion, which of the following storage applications would be most likely served in a successful energy storage project, 1-4 MW? Secondary application is meant to be what you would do with storage for additional benefits but could not use it to justify the storage (like a flashlight on a cell phone)

Load Following
Voltage Support
Upgrade Deferral – Distribution
Upgrade Deferral – Transmission
Transmission Support
Supply Capacity
Supply Spinning Reserve
Service Reliability
Renewable time shift – Solar
Renewable time shift – Wind
Renewable Ramp Control – Solar
Renewable Ramp Control – Wind
Renewable Capacity Firming
Area Regulation
Fast Regulation
System Ramping
Other:

 14- You have identified in Item 8 the two most likely applications that would be served by a 1-4 MW storage system. Please rank in order of importance (1, 2 and 3) the top three barriers that have kept utilities from deploying DES systems that address those most likely applications to date.

  • Technical
  • Lack of open, non-proprietary standards
  • Economic
  • Social
  • Policy
  • PUC
  • Other __________________________

15- Developing a mechanism for utilities to share best practices for deploying, operating and evaluating similar DES projects is an important goal of this project. Please share any suggestions you may have about mechanisms or practices that could be put in place that would make that sharing effective and efficient for utilities

11- Additional Comments: 

 

See full PDF with tables here