Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Utility Regulation”

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.

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

At least 37 records · Page 2

Virtual Power Plant Profiles and Inventory

Increased adoption of distributed energy resources (DERs), growing quantities of renewable energy on the grid, and load growth from buildings, industry, and data centers are driving the need for increased demand flexibility and solutions to reliably and cost-effectively balance electricity supply and demand. In order to deploy DERs on a similar scale as conventional supply-side resources, utilities and state decision-makers are exploring a range of programmatic approaches and market designs, including Virtual Power Plants (VPP). Based on interviews with more than twenty subject matter experts on VPPs, the Insights into Scaling Virtual Power Plants report and appendix outlines actions that utilities and regulators can take to expand VPPs, organized around successful VPP designs, deployment, and operation. The companion report, Virtual Power Plant Profiles and Inventory describes three conceptual profiles that can be used as a starting point to facilitate clear discussions among regulators, utilities, solution providers, and stakeholders about various VPP strategies. It also includes details on more than 790 demand response programs and net energy metering solar plus battery programs, and 180 VPP programs. The Inventory is provided below as a separate file.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

A Snapshot of EV-Specific Rate Designs Among U.S. Investor-Owned Electric Utilities

EV-specific electric utility rates have a profound effect on the underlying economics motivating EV adoption. State utility regulators and electric utilities play a critical role in approving and designing rates, respectively. However, the nascence of the EV industry has resulted in regulators’ and utilities’ having very limited experience with EV-specific rate designs. This suggests there could be substantial benefit from efforts intended to provide a better understanding of how EV-specific rates are designed presently in the United States. To meet that need, Berkeley Lab researchers, with support from E9 Insight, developed a database of piloted, proposed, and offered rates among U.S. investor-owned utilities (IOUs) between 2012 and 2022. The database is comprised of 217 electric utility retail rates from IOUs in 38 states and the District of Columbia that either required proof of EV ownership or were otherwise designed for the purposes of reselling energy for use in EV charging (i.e., EV-specific rates). The analysis of the database identifies the EV-specific rate designs currently observed, infers a number of policy-driven objectives, and suggests a number of next steps for future research.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Evolving Grid Services, Products, and Market Opportunities for Regulated Electric Utilities

This report and policy brief focus on the more recent changes and evolutions in grid services, products, and market opportunities regulated electric utilities are offering to their customers, both traditional end-use electric customers as well as third-party party businesses. Drawing on a database of more than 50 recent examples, the most prevalent and significant evolutions are occurring in: residential retail rate design shifts toward voluntary and default time-of-use (TOU); changes to distributed generation (DG) compensation methodologies; utilization of customer and non-utility assets as non-wires alternatives (NWAs); and utility investments in electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure. Important and related themes emerge from this assessment of recent trends suggesting regulators and policymakers should formulate clear and consistent policy goals around the following two issues: 1. Opportunities increasing competition to serve the electricity needs of retail customers. Reforms that drive increases in NWAs and DG pit utility investments against customer investments and may erode the exclusivity of the utility franchise. In contrast, reforms to DG compensation, that may reduce the financial benefits of a customer’s investment, may maintain or strengthen the firmness of the utility franchise boundaries. 2.Opportunities driving greater innovation within and outside the electric industry. Electric utilities are innovating by developing novel NWA opportunities that can provide financial support for the broader adoption of DERs. There are also electric utility efforts to enable broader innovation in other industries, where utility investment in EV charging infrastructure could promote greater EV ownership and enable utility control of these resources to provide grid services.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Next-Generation Performance-Based Regulation: Emphasizing Utility Performance to Unleash Power Sector Innovation

Performance-based regulation (PBR) enables regulators to reform hundred-year-old regulatory structures to unleash innovations within 21st century power systems. An old regulatory paradigm built to ensure safe and reliable electricity at reasonable prices from capital-intensive electricity monopolies is now adjusting to a new century of disruptive technological advances that change the way utilities make money and what value customers expect from their own electricity company. Advanced technologies are driving change in power sectors around the globe. Innovative technologies are transforming the way electricity is generated, delivered, and consumed. These emerging technology drivers include renewable generation, distributed energy resources such as distributed generation and energy storage, demand-side management measures such as demand-response, electric vehicles, and smart grid technologies and energy efficiency (EE). PBR enables regulators to recognize the value that electric utilities bring to customers by enabling these advanced technologies and integrating smart solutions into the utility grid and utility operations. These changes in the electric energy system and customer capacities means that there is an increasing interest in motivating regulated entities in other areas beyond traditional cost-of-service performance regulation. This report addresses best practices gleaned from more than two decades of PBR in practice, and analyzes how those best practices and lessons can be used to design innovative PBR programs. Readers looking for an introduction to PBR may want to focus on Chapters 1-5. Chapters 6 and 7 contain more detail for those interested in the intricate workings of PBR or particularly innovative PBR.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

State Engagement in Electric Distribution System Planning

Electric distribution system planning is focused on assessing needed physical and operational changes to the local grid to maintain safe, reliable, and affordable service. While electric utilities have always engaged in this activity, the planning horizon has typically been short and involvement by state utility regulators minimal. Safety, reliability, and affordability remain top objectives for deeper state engagement in longer-term distribution system planning. Other drivers are proposed utility investments to replace aging infrastructure and modernize grids, opportunities to improve distribution system efficiency, enabling consumers to have greater control over energy costs and sources, and integrating higher levels of distributed energy resources (DERs) such as rooftop solar, distributed energy storage, and price-responsive demand. This report provides a snapshot of current state engagement in distribution system planning: •Part 1 describes activities in states that have adopted some elements of integrated distribution system planning and analysis (see Figure 1): New York, California, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Minnesota. It summarizes their impetus for early action, stated goals, regulatory requirements, additional state activities related to distribution system planning, and next steps. •Part 2 covers a broader array of state approaches throughout the country. For example, some of these states have long-standing distribution reliability and performance codes, requiring regulated utilities to report regularly on poor-performing circuits and propose investments for improvements. Other states require regulated utilities to make filings related to proposed grid modernization investments. A growing number of states are beginning to consider comprehensive distribution system planning processes. As this report highlights, approaches vary significantly from state to state, in part stemming from differences in electricity market structure. States can learn from each other and tailor successful approaches to their unique circumstances. Reviewing the broad range of legislative and public utility commission activities described in this report is a useful starting point.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

EV Charging Infrastructure Energization An Overview of Approaches for Simplifying and Accelerating Timelines to Processing EV Charging Load Service Requests

The United States has seen significant growth in electric vehicle (EV) adoption, leading to increased demand for EV charging infrastructure. Over the past decade, EV charging infrastructure site developers, site hosts, and electric distribution utilities have navigated the process to integrate chargers onto the electric grid. Site developers and site hosts have raised the alarm that the integration process for high-powered EV charging projects does not meet the needs of the EV market for timeliness or cost. High-powered charging stations typically require a load service request or an agreement with the local utility to connect to the grid. The process of energizing a new high-powered charging site can be complex and time-consuming, often taking up to 2 years. This timeline is the result of current utility energization processes having been designed for construction projects that take longer to build (i.e., buildings). The specific challenges stem from various factors, including compartmentalization in application processes, the integration of EV charging process approvals with other distributed energy resources (DERs), and the need to ensure grid reliability. The energization process needs to evolve to meet the growing demand for high-powered EV charging. This white paper compiles information gathered through various conversations with key stakeholders, including utilities, utility regulators, EV charging operators, site developers, and authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) as well as through an extensive literature review. This document identifies the challenges and provides potential solutions to streamline the process of connecting EV charging infrastructure to the power grid in the United States, serving as a starting point for future conversations around these solutions. The solutions noted in this white paper require collaborative efforts among utilities, regulators, and EV charging infrastructure developers to streamline the grid connection process for EV charging infrastructure. They are broadly organized into four areas: 1. Increase data access and transparency: Develop automated load service request tools, integrate hosting capacity and load service request analyses, incorporate EV adoption forecasts, and provide transparency on the processing queue. 2. Improve energization processes and timing: Create fast-track options based on prescreening criteria, provide flexibility or phased approvals in the load service request/interconnection process, build internal knowledge within utilities about EV charging technologies, and provide standardized workforce training. 3. Promote economic efficiency: Right size distribution components to accurately reflect the load requirements of EV charging infrastructure, make proactive investments in grid infrastructure based on EV adoption forecasts and growth projections, and consider energy equity and environmental justice factors such as equitable access to EV charging when planning infrastructure. 4. Improve grid reliability and resilience: Use load management/power control systems (PCS) at EV charging stations, adopt and implement harmonized standards for communication protocols and information models between the EV charging and grid control infrastructure, and address cybersecurity considerations by implementing robust security measures and standards for EV charging infrastructure—with particular emphasis on clarifying the security requirements for the interface to the grid. The objective of the solutions proposed in this white paper is to accelerate the timeline and decrease costs associated with connecting EV charging infrastructure to the grid. Electric utilities, utility regulators, EV charging infrastructure developers, and site hosts will first need to understand which solutions are available in their service territory, and if warranted, which combination of solutions would support their specific needs. Through the successful implementations of solutions at scale detailed here, industry will demonstrate a new and innovative ecosystem where timely deployment and energization of EV charging infrastructure with greater grid resiliency and reliability is a reality.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

The Value of Resilience for Distributed Energy Resources: An Overview of Current Analytical Practices

Recent extreme weather events, natural disasters, and cyber incursions have brought the vulnerability of the electric system into sharp focus. These events have demonstrated that planning for long-duration power interruptions caused by high-impact, low-probability events will require new approaches to power system resilience above and beyond previous hardening efforts. At the same time, the rapid growth and declining costs of distributed energy resources (DERs) such as microgrids, solar photovoltaics, and batteries have introduced new technology options for energy resilience. Consequently, state policymakers across the country have established electricity resilience policies and programs, with several states focusing specifically on resilient DERs as part of clean energy programs and grid modernization efforts. Although it is clear that DERs offer resilience benefits, it is unclear how to determine the value of those benefits. Identifying appropriate methodologies to calculate the value of resilience will be an important step toward ensuring that resilient DERs are considered alongside alternatives and integrated into future energy infrastructure and investment planning efforts. This paper reviews current practices for calculating the value of resilience with a focus on valuing resilient DERs installed within the distribution system. It examines both regulatory decision-making and non-regulatory cost-benefit analyses in order to determine if, and how, a value of resilience was calculated and applied. The paper is designed to address questions that utility regulators have identified as being of interest: (1) Have regulators identified and utilized a value of resilience in regulatory decisions related to resilient DERs? (2) Is the value of resilience being used to analyze resilient DERs in venues other than regulatory proceedings? (3) What are the different methods to value energy resilience? (4) What are the pros and cons of different methods used to value resilience? (5) Can regulators adopt or improve value of resilience methods to support their decisions?

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

The Effects of Rising Interest Rates on Electric Utility Stock Prices: Regulatory Considerations and Approaches

This technical brief identifies conditions under which utility regulators should consider implementing policy approaches that seek to mitigate negative outcomes due to an increase in interest rates. Interest rates are a key factor in determining a utility’s cost of equity and investors find value when returns exceed the cost of equity. Through historical observations of periods of rising and falling interest rates and application of a pro forma financial tool, we identify the key drivers of utility stock valuations and estimate the degree to which those valuations might be affected by increasing interest rates.3 We also analyze the efficacy of responses by utility regulators to mitigate potential negative financial impacts. We find that regulators have several possible approaches to mitigate a decline in value in an environment of increasing interest rates, though regulators must weigh the tradeoffs of improving investor value with potential increases in customer costs. Furthermore, the range of approaches reflects today’s many different electric utility regulatory models and regulatory responses to a decline in investor value will fit within state-specific models.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Potential State Regulatory Pathways to Facilitate Low-Carbon Fuels

States and the federal government are increasingly engaged in the challenges around decarbonizing the electric grid. In particular, regulators, consumers, stakeholders, and utilities recognize the need to carefully consider the role natural gas will play in a decarbonized future. A variety of technology and policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with natural gas use are available, including energy efficiency programs, demand reduction tools, strategic electrification, and strategies to reduce emissions from natural gas production, transportation, and consumption. Low-carbon fuels – mainly renewable natural gas (RNG) and clean hydrogen – are being considered an important component of decarbonization goals. RNG and hydrogen may be able to meaningfully reduce emissions from processes independent of geologic natural gas, displacing emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Although RNG and hydrogen are not cost-competitive today with geologic natural gas and are smaller in scale and potential than other decarbonization options, they can be explored as potential critical tools to decarbonize sectors that are difficult to electrify or shift off of natural gas entirely, such as air travel, industrial processes, maritime transport, long-distance trucking, space heating on cold days, and railroads (Nadel, 2022). The role of this report is to provide informational context for state utility regulators to understand the impacts of and challenges associated with broader integration of low-carbon fuels, followed by examples of state regulatory actions taken to date to facilitate the development of low-carbon fuels. Setting clear guidance to calculate the environmental benefits of low-carbon fuels and continuing federal and state investments in research and development to reduce costs relative to fossil fuels will be important steps to take to signal the desire to grow the market for these fuels. State public utility commissions may play a key role in setting regulatory frameworks for low-carbon fuels and ensuring that ratepayer funds, if utilized, are done so to further the public interest. This report is intended to summarize decisions that states have made to date on low-carbon fuels. In the spirit of understanding the current market and sharing information, this report provides success stories, and lessons learned across states as regulators implement varying strategies to achieve decarbonization objectives while maintaining their focus on affordability, safety, and reliability of the energy system. The report begins with an introduction of the role of natural gas in the U.S. economy (Section I) and background information on natural gas use, decarbonization, and low-carbon fuels (Section II). Next, the report describes the current market by discussing the scale of current production, emissions intensity, resource potential, and costs of low-carbon fuels compared to geologic natural gas (Section III). Following these sections, the report describes four strategies states have employed to facilitate low-carbon fuels: opening exploratory dockets, approving voluntary tariffs for customers, approving interconnection tariffs for producers, and considering portfolio-wide procurement targets (Section IV). This section lists states that have taken actions in each category, citing utility filings, commission decisions, stakeholder comments, and other relevant sources. Finally, the report concludes with suggested questions regulators may wish to consider regarding low-carbon fuels, in the interest of preparing to make decisions in the future (Section V). These questions include: Are there existing regulatory or technical barriers to voluntary purchases of low-carbon fuels? Can customers work with utilities to procure low-carbon fuels; are producers able to interconnect projects without significant barriers to entry? Should the infrastructure and/or commodity costs of low-carbon fuels be socialized among all ratepayers, or borne solely by the large commercial and industrial (C&I) customers currently driving the market? Should regulated natural gas and/or electric utilities own and operate low-carbon fuel production? How should regulators consider the unique decarbonization potential of low-carbon fuels, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors, in decision-making? Is additional direction or clarity from state policymakers needed? What no-regrets approaches can help facilitate both near-term RNG development and long-term development of hydrogen and other zero-carbon fuels? We collectively wish to express our gratitude to the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, for supporting this report and other technical assistance resources for state regulators on natural gas topics. State regulators operate under a variety of policy environments, and states have vastly different types of energy resources, infrastructure, and customers. While there is no optimal regulatory, policy, or technological solution that will be successful in every state, state regulators can benefit by exchanging lessons learned with their peers across the country. We look forward to continued engagement with our fellow commissioners, commission staff, NARUC, the U.S. Department of Energy, and other stakeholders to develop sound regulation in the public interest.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Regulatory Mechanisms to Enable Investments in Electric Utility Resilience

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.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Energy Storage Policy Summaries for the Global Energy Storage Database

This report includes energy storage policy analysis from six states: Arizona, California, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Mexico, and New York. These summaries offer prototypes for summaries that will subsequently be prepared for all 50 states (and territories). There is presently a shortage of comprehensive energy storage policy analysis that public utility regulators can call upon to inform policymaking in their own jurisdictions. The state policy summaries that will be offered publicly on the Global Energy Storage Database (GESDB) will include analysis on the executive directives, legislation, regulations pertaining to energy storage that have been adopted by an individual state, along with perspective on the remaining policy issues pertaining to storage that a state will be likely to address in the future. It is anticipated that public utility regulators in particular will find the database to be a useful resource in benchmarking policy approaches critical to the continued development of an energy storage marketplace in the U.S., including policy approaches specific to storage and renewables procurement targets, interconnection standards, valuation of energy storage, rate reform and tariff design specific to energy storage, consideration of multiple uses for storage at the distribution level, and potential revisions to existing state net metering programs to accommodate an expected growth of energy storage technologies.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Deliberate Design: Creating Electricity Rates with Purpose

Today’s electricity rates often are legacy designs that do not reflect the dynamics of an evolving power grid or align with current policy objectives. Four steps will assist utilities, regulators, and industry stakeholders in modernizing outdated electricity rate designs. 1. Understand the context for rate design change: The power system is changing at a pace that the industry has not experienced for decades. It is essential to understand the implications of these changes so rates can evolve to remain consistent with changes to the underlying cost profile, customer preferences, and power system requirements. 2. Establish ratemaking objectives: Rates can do more than recover utility costs. They can be a tool for promoting desired outcomes such as improved energy affordability, flexible and efficient electricity consumption, or promoting technology adoption. First, these objectives must be clearly defined and prioritized. 3. Account for tradeoffs when designing new rates: Rate design is the art of balancing tradeoffs. It is essential to understand these tradeoffs when designing new rates, particularly if the rates are being used as a tool for accomplishing policy objectives that extend beyond the basic goal of cost reflectivity. 4. Transition to the new rates with a plan: The move to well-designed rates requires a transition plan. This will ensure that rate design changes do not happen in isolation and are consistent with a long-term, holistic vision. The report, published as an interactive web tool for which the content can be separately downloaded as a standalone document, is intended to allow state energy regulators, utility rates staff, and other industry stakeholders with an interest in rate design to selectively “drill down” on content that is relevant to their interests and situation.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Electricity Rate Designs for Large Loads: Evolving Practices and Opportunities

Electricity demand from large load customers such as data centers is projected to grow significantly in the near term. While data centers play an important role in advancing technology innovation and economic growth in the United States, data center energy needs present challenges and opportunities for electricity supply and infrastructure. This technical brief serves as a foundation for the discussion of issues and sharing of perspectives among utilities, regulators, large load customers, and other stakeholders. As utilities and regulators explore rate structures to address growing data center electricity demand, several issues have emerged: -Fair allocation of electricity system costs to large-load customers without unfair shifting of costs to other customers -Appropriate mitigation of the financial risks associated with stranded assets from underutilized utility system investments -Mitigation of operational and resource adequacy risks if electricity demand exceeds supply -Appropriate risk-sharing in commercializing newer electricity technologies such as advanced geothermal, small modular reactors, and long duration energy storage -Accommodating the diverse needs of large-load customers, such as having the option to match electricity consumption with output from carbon-free resources or using onsite generation to provide system capacity The technical brief also identifies key design elements that aim to address these issues and uses leading examples from pending and approved rate structures, agreements, and special contracts to ground the elements in practice.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Preliminary Modeling of Chloride Deposition on Spent Nuclear Fuel Canisters in Dry Storage Relevant to Stress Corrosion Cracking

This study presents a method that can be used to gain information relevant to determining the corrosion risk for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) canisters during extended dry storage. Currently, it is known that stainless steel canisters are susceptible to chloride-induced stress corrosion cracking (CISCC). However, the rate of CISCC degradation and the likelihood that it could lead to a through-wall crack is unknown. This study uses well-developed computational fluid dynamics and particle-tracking tools and applies them to SNF storage to determine the rate of deposition on canisters. The deposition rate is determined for a vertical canister system and a horizontal canister system, at various decay heat rates with a uniform particle size distribution, ranging from 0.25 to 25 µm, used as an input. In all cases, most of the dust entering the overpack passed through without depositing. Most of what was retained in the overpack was deposited on overpack surfaces (e.g., inlet and outlet vents); only a small fraction was deposited on the canister itself. These results are provided for generalized canister systems with a generalized input; as such, this paper is intended to demonstrate the technique. This study is a part of an ongoing effort funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Nuclear Energy Office of Spent Fuel Waste Science and Technology, which is tasked with doing research relevant to developing a sound technical basis for ensuring the safe extended storage and subsequent transport of SNF. This work is being presented to demonstrate a potentially useful technique for SNF canister vendors, utilities, regulators, and stakeholders to utilize and further develop for their own designs and site-specific studies.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Considerations for Resilience Guidelines for Clean Energy Plans: For the Oregon Public Utility Commission and Oregon Electricity Stakeholders

This document summarizes relevant approaches, research, models, and national examples for state utility regulators tasked with developing utility guidelines for risk-based resiliency planning. In 2021, the Oregon Legislature enacted a 100 percent clean electricity by 2040 standard that requires the Oregon Public Utility Commission (PUC) to oversee utility planning for aggressive clean energy deployment through Clean Energy Plans (House Bill 2021, Sec. 4). In addition to meeting emissions reductions targets, Clean Energy Plans must also: "Include a risk-based examination of resiliency opportunities that includes costs, consequences, outcomes, and benefits based on reasonable and prudent industry resiliency standards and guidelines established by the Public Utility Commission." This report will support the Oregon Public Utility Commission in developing resilience guidelines. Other state public utility commissions may also benefit from this research.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Research Needs and New Capabilities for Retail Electricity Rate Analysis

Retail electricity rates are at the center of supply- and demand-side changes in future power systems and influence system costs and DER adoption decisions, all with important implications for system reliability, resiliency, and energy affordability. Building on decades of research experience and analytical insights at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the report identifies key near-term analysis questions, enhancements to existing capabilities, and longer-term new capabilities to provide actionable insights for electricity system decision-makers, including state utility regulators, electric and gas utilities, ratepayer advocates, and DER solution providers.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Grid Reliability and U.S. Coal Fleet Attributes: Considerations for State Regulators

This briefing paper provides state utility regulators with a comprehensive and current understanding of the reliability attributes of coal as a generation resource, potential reliability impacts associated with near-term coal plant retirements, and possible mitigation strategies to ensure a stable and resilient energy system.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗