Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “load growth”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Adapting Grid Criticality for Data Centers

This presentation explores the evolving definition of “critical load” in the electric grid, emphasizing the growing importance of digital infrastructure—particularly data centers—in grid resilience, restoration, and modernization. As utilities increasingly rely on AI-driven analytics and software-defined control systems, data centers have shifted from passive electricity consumers to essential computational hubs that enable National Critical Functions (NCFs) and support real-time grid operations. The deck examines the scale and impact of digital loads, the need for grid modernization to manage rapid load growth, and the diverse computing paradigms required for AI deployment. It introduces a tiered taxonomy for classifying critical loads, highlights operational dependencies between the grid and digital infrastructure, and discusses policy implications for integrating data centers into emergency planning and restoration protocols. Through case studies and practical frameworks, the presentation provides actionable insights for utilities, regulators, and planners navigating the digital transformation of the power sector.

29 - ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Managing Increased Electric Vehicle Shares on Bulk Power Systems

The convergence of transportation electrification, other load growth, and the integration of many power sector technologies presents a complex planning problem requiring realistic, region-specific modeling and analysis to ensure the power system can support new loads quickly and affordably.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Spatio-temporal impacts of a utility’s efficiency portfolio on the distribution grid

Energy Efficiency has historically focused on delivering savings to offset growth in energy supply. Today’s growing emphasis on decarbonization of the energy supply is driving renewables adoption and increased interest in electrification. As a result, energy efficiency is being assessed not just in its ability to offset load growth, but also for its ability to alleviate location-specific constraints on transmission and distribution infrastructure. This work demonstrates that advanced measurement and verification modeling techniques can be used to estimate the spatio-temporal grid impact of a portfolio of energy efficiency programs. It extends measurement-based methods to an entire Demand Side Management portfolio and uses a single model to predict annual as well as seasonal building energy use with near-zero bias. In addition, new metrics are introduced to assess grid level impacts of energy efficiency. The results show that the efficiency program portfolio delivers savings of over 12% at the territory-wide proxy level, with substation and feeder level savings ranging from 0.4% to 26%, and ~5%-42% respectively. Overall, these savings impacted 1.0%–1.4% of the energy used at these locations in the grid. This work provides a methodology with potential to connect efficiency with distribution planning, carrying implications for non-wires alternatives and targeted delivery of efficiency programs.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy innovation in the US buildings sector: Setting the stage and mapping the future

Jared Langevin is a staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, where he leads modeling of US buildings sector innovation and its implications for energy demand, consumer costs, and the power grid. Eric Wilson is a senior research engineer in the Building Technologies and Sciences Center at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Much of his 15-year career at NREL has revolved around modeling and analysis of the US building stock. Jared and Eric co-led the development of a National Blueprint for buildings sector innovation while serving as advisors to the US Department of Energy’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Buildings and Industry.

Langevin, Jared↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

Scaling Demand Flexibility: Building on 30 Years of Energy Efficiency Success

With electricity consumption across the United States (US) and Canada anticipated to grow, energy efficiency program administrators have a key role to play in helping to ensure energy affordability and reliability in support of the broader economic systems utilities and grid support. Connected, demand side load balancing solutions, such as load shifting heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and managed charging for electric vehicles (EVs), can dynamically manage energy, allowing for more volumetric electricity consumption without incurring the expense of upgraded transmission and distribution capabilities. When combined, or aggregated, many small loads can be managed to have meaningful impact on energy demand on the grid. Utilities and their partners have an opportunity to leverage decades of experience and the infrastructure needed to assess, design, implement, and measure programs to scale up the adoption of equipment with built-in load flexibility capabilities. Current efforts among a wide variety of electricity system service providers, utilities, standards agencies, regulators, national labs and private industry stakeholders aim to identify common standards, metrics, and methodologies for valuing grid services offered by demand side equipment. By combining those efforts with decades of proven energy efficiency resources, utilities are poised to effectuate a scaling up of equipment with energy management capabilities installed in homes and businesses across the US and Canada. This paper will provide an overview of how utilities are approaching this era of load growth and new peak demands across the United States and Canada. It will highlight the specific strategies that program administrators are employing to advance market transformation for grid-enabled products and devices that have the greatest potential to reduce energy use and increase load flexibility.

Grant, Peter↗
DOE OSTI2021

Storage Enabled Flexibility of Conventional Generation Assets (StorFlex)

The power systems have faced progressively more demanding operational requirements over the last two decades. Several factors contribute to these challenging operating conditions, including load growth, aging infrastructure, increasing penetrations of distributed energy resources (DERs), electrification of the economy, and policy initiatives such as decarbonization. The power system and its components must provide high operational flexibility to mitigate these challenges. For example, the proliferation of intermittent DERs such as wind and solar has increased the need for conventional generation assets like hydropower plants to respond to sudden load-generation imbalances. The higher flexibility requirements for hydropower plants cause more wear and tear, potentially shortening the useful lifespan of hydropower turbines. To reduce the need for hydropower plants to follow sudden changes in the dispatch signal, we investigate their combined operation with the energy storage systems (ESSs; “ESS-based hybridization”). Our analyses focuses on improving the lifespan of hydropower plants through ESS-based hybridization. Wear and tear on hydropower turbines (particularly Francis turbines) is modeled using a loss-of-life concept that is based on damage experienced by the turbine due to various cycles of operation. Then, we show that using ESSs to offset some of the high variation increases the remaining life of the hydropower plants. To demonstrate this, a few modeling tools were developed for this work: (1) a dynamic model for various components of the turbine and its governor; (2) a control strategy that assigns a slow-varying dispatch signal to a hydropower unit versus a fastmoving signal to ESS, such that the overall power request remains the same; and (3) models for the financial analysis to quantify the economic merits of such a framework. We used the models we developed to analyze the dispatch pattern of an actual hydropower plant with a power output of 50 MW and a head height of 152 m. This work showed that ESS-based hybridization could extend the life of the hydropower plant by 5% on average. This extension in life was then used to estimate the economic benefit in terms of cost deferrals associated with hydropower plant maintenance and replacement: on average, $3.6 million. Sensitivity analysis with respect to the size of ESS and cost of turbines was performed to show the variation in benefits over the range of turbine costs and ESS sizes. Crucially, stacking damage reduction and lifetime extension with other ESS value streams such as providing ancillary services could substantially increase the financial benefits of ESS-based hybridization. The higher costs associated with ESS of appropriate size would make more financial sense when multiple value streams are stacked and co-optimized to extract the maximum benefit. This dimension will be explored in future work.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Business Models for Scaling Demand Flexibility Volume III – Stakeholder ecosystem management challenges, and lessons learned from U.S. programs

Load growth at the grid edge is driving increased attention to the distribution system and its ability to enable customer technology adoption in an affordable and timely manner. Key industry stakeholders, including electric utilities and regulators, can benefit from strategies to manage and balance customer needs with infrastructure investments, such as demand flexibility. This report focuses on demand flexibility—the ability to reduce, shift, shed, generate, or modulate loads in response to building and grid needs—to reduce the need for costly grid upgrades by deferring investment needs and increase system reliability by shifting electricity usage during periods of high risk. Specifically, we focus on the emerging characteristics of business models for demand flexibility as a framework to understand how demand flexibility programs generate value. In this report, we focus on demand flexibility program stakeholder ecosystem management strategies, which provide information on value delivery and describe how program implementers leverage partner capabilities and collaborate to deliver customer and grid benefits. This report discusses the role of stakeholder ecosystem management in demand flexibility programs, identifies existing challenges to effective stakeholder management, and describes lessons learned. This report is part of a series that includes reports on value propositions, customer relationship management strategies, and program life cycle.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Business Models for Scaling Demand Flexibility Volume II – Customer relationship management strategies, challenges, and lessons learned from U.S. programs

Load growth at the grid edge is driving increased attention to the distribution system and its ability to enable customer technology adoption in an affordable and timely manner. Key industry stakeholders, including electric utilities and regulators, can benefit from strategies to manage and balance customer needs with infrastructure investments, such as demand flexibility. This report focuses on demand flexibility—the ability to reduce, shift, shed, generate, or modulate loads in response to building and grid needs—to reduce the need for costly grid upgrades by deferring investment needs and increase system reliability by shifting electricity usage during periods of high risk. Specifically, we focus on the emerging characteristics of business models for demand flexibility as a framework to understand how demand flexibility programs generate value. In this report, we focus on demand flexibility program customer relationship management strategies, which provide information on value creation and focus on ensuring customers can navigate programs smoothly. This report discusses the role of customer relationship management strategies in demand flexibility programs, characterizes customer relationship management strategies that can be considered during program design and implementation, identifies existing challenges to customer relationship management strategies, and describes lessons learned. This report is part of a series that includes reports on value propositions, stakeholder ecosystem management, and program life cycle.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Business Models for Scaling Demand Flexibility Volume I – Value proposition characteristics, challenges, and lessons learned from U.S. programs

Load growth at the grid edge is driving increased attention to the distribution system and its ability to enable customer technology adoption in an affordable and timely manner. Key industry stakeholders, including electric utilities and regulators, can benefit from strategies to manage and balance customer needs with infrastructure investments, such as demand flexibility. This report focuses on demand flexibility—the ability to reduce, shift, shed, generate, or modulate loads in response to building and grid needs—to reduce the need for costly grid upgrades by deferring investment needs and increase system reliability by shifting electricity usage during periods of high risk. Specifically, we focus on the emerging characteristics of business models for demand flexibility as a framework to understand how demand flexibility programs generate value. In this report, we focus on demand flexibility value propositions, which provide information on value creation and describe how programs deliver clear benefits that address customer and grid needs. This report discusses the role of value propositions in demand flexibility programs, provides an overview of value propositions for a range of demand flexibility stakeholders, identifies existing challenges to establishing an effective value proposition, and describes lessons learned. This report is part of a series that includes reports on customer relationship management strategies, stakeholder ecosystem management, and program life cycle.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Business Models for Scaling Demand Flexibility Volume IV – Program life cycle challenges and lessons learned from U.S. programs

Load growth at the grid edge is driving increased attention to the distribution system and its ability to enable customer technology adoption in an affordable and timely manner. Key industry stakeholders, including electric utilities and regulators, can benefit from strategies to manage and balance customer needs with infrastructure investments, such as demand flexibility. This report focuses on demand flexibility—the ability to reduce, shift, shed, generate, or modulate loads in response to building and grid needs—to reduce the need for costly grid upgrades by deferring investment needs and increase system reliability by shifting electricity usage during periods of high risk. Specifically, we focus on the emerging characteristics of business models for demand flexibility as a framework to understand how demand flexibility programs generate value. In this report, we focus on the life cycle of demand flexibility programs, which provides information on value creation and describes the various deployment phases program implementers navigate from initial program conceptualization through to program expansion and replication to new customer segments and regions. This report characterizes the key phases of the demand flexibility program life cycle, identifies existing challenges across the program deployment phases, and describes lessons learned. This report is part of a series that includes reports on customer relationship management strategies, stakeholder ecosystem management, and program life cycle.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Potential Solutions to Demand Growth in Virginia: Options for Demand Flexibility [Slides]

This slide deck report presents a literature review on virtual power plants (VPPs) and a demand flexibility analysis for the state of Virginia as part of DOE's State Energy Program (SEP) technical assistance work. The literature review describes key concepts, examples, participation models, and other issues for VPPs, and the analysis section presents a state-specific demand flexibility analysis estimating the technical potential for demand response from various sectors and end-uses. These materials are meant to inform and support VA's ability to shepherd ongoing dialogue and meet energy needs in the midst of strong load growth.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Adoption of AI in the Utility T&D Sector: Use Cases, Consequence, Assessment and Benefits

Digital transformation and utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) in the electric grid are fundamentally changing the industry’s approach to common problems and enabling a broader paradigm shift in grid planning and operations. The change in approach is circularly both enabling and driving modernization, with load growth and reliable management of data center and AI infrastructure shifting away from planning approaches with relatively predictable behaviors and toward a mix of consumer and industrial choices that surpass human cognitive abilities to process. This movement has potential to condition humans to not understand the system on which the AI depends, while requiring it for development of the necessary infrastructure. Approaches which would address most likely grid conditions and events, such as faults, aging of equipment, and weather, now must also account for large loads which shift not based upon weather or time of day, but the computational load. Quantifying computational load is independent of the traditional grid forecasting variables, where a data center’s aggregate load is determined by user and AI system behavior and decoupled from normal grid planning and operations. AI is both the cause and solution for these challenges, with new grid planning tools integrating massive amounts of decisions into frameworks.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

CalderaCast User Manual Version 1.0

CalderaCast is a user-friendly web-based tool for electrical-load forecast, providing stakeholders with a fully customizable decision-support framework that estimates the likely power draw from a possible future electric-vehicle (EV) charging station at a given location on a given day along an alternative fuel corridor (AFC). These EV charging profiles are accurately modeled in CalderaCast using the Caldera software framework developed by Idaho National Laboratories (INL), reflecting the realistic charging levels observed in actual charge events. This tool was developed as part of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, which is quickly generating substantial interest from would-be charging station operators (CSO), large and small electric utilities, and state transportation planners, some of whom had not seriously considered EV charging previously. All these entities—with or without background in EV infrastructure—must estimate the electricity load that a proposed charging station will generate. This load forecast is critically important for a utility to properly assess the capacity of their distribution network to support the proposed station or properly size grid upgrades for potential load growth due to future EV adoption, vehicle technology improvements, or station growth. This document describes each aspect of the CalderaCast tool and provides guidance to users who are interested in utilizing the tool for their work.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

New Resource Adequacy Criteria for the Energy Transition: Modernizing Reliability Requirements

The transition toward a cleaner and more weather-dependent power system brings with it unprecedented challenges and opportunities for maintaining resource adequacy—namely, a future that includes rapid load growth, plant retirements, and a shift toward variable and energy-limited resources. Resource adequacy analyses, capacity accreditation, and the resource adequacy planning criteria are becoming increasingly important for power system planning and investment decisions. While previous ESIG reports evaluated the changing resource adequacy risks and planning practices created by the energy transition, none specifically examined potential changes to the resource adequacy criterion used for planning. The resource adequacy criterion sets the level of supply- and demand-side resources that are required for a given power system to meet reliability objectives. It is a pivotal standard that influences billions of dollars of investment decisions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Plentiful electricity turns wholesale prices negative

In 2020, average wholesale electricity prices in the United States fell to $21/MWh, their lowest level since the beginning of the 21st century. Low natural gas prices and the proliferation of low marginal cost resources like wind and solar had already established a trend toward lower wholesale prices, and this trend was exacerbated by declining electricity demand due to the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. Negative real-time hourly wholesale prices occurred in about 4% of all hours and wholesale market nodes across the United States, but these were not distributed evenly. Regional clusters emerged, for example, in the Permian Basin in western Texas, and in Kansas and western Oklahoma in the Southwest Power Pool (SPP), negative prices accounted for more than 25% of all hours. Negative electricity prices result either from local congestion of the transmission system leading supply to exceed demand locally or due to system-wide oversupply. Looking at the latter condition in SPP, we find that all major generator types contribute to this excess supply, because of limited ramping flexibility or self-scheduled out-of-market unit commitments. Additional monetary production incentives such as renewable energy credits or tax credits also enable negative bids; indeed, negative prices predominantly occur when demand levels are low and wind production levels are high. Frequent negative prices can inform the value of additional renewable energy investments at specific locations, the need for transmission and storage development, and opportunities load growth or adaptation.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Microgrid design and multi-year dispatch optimization under climate-informed load and renewable resource uncertainty

Microgrids are an increasingly popular solution to provide energy resilience in response to increasing grid dependency and the growing impacts of climate change on grid operations. However, existing microgrid models do not currently consider the uncertain and long-term impacts of climate change when determining a set of design and operational decisions to minimize long-term costs or meet a resilience threshold. In this paper, we develop a novel scenario generation method that accounts for the uncertain effects of (i) climate change on variable renewable energy availability, (ii) extreme heat events on site load, and (iii) population and electrification trends on load growth. Additionally, we develop a two-stage stochastic programming extension of an existing microgrid design and dispatch optimization model to obtain uncertainty-informed and climate-resilient energy system decisions that minimizes long-term costs. Use of sample average approximation to validate our two case studies illustrates that the proposed methodology produces high-quality solutions that add resilience to systems with existing backup generation while reducing expected long-term costs.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗