DOE OSTI2022
The United States depends on the delivery of reliable, affordable, clean, and safe electricity. Electric utilities invest billions of dollars each year in generation, transmission, and distribution assets to meet this need. However, experiences with recent natural disasters of increasing frequency and duration demonstrate the shortcomings of this approach in the face of modern threats. Further, as customers rely on electricity for a broader range of important needs, such as transportation, as well as critical life-saving services and mission critical facilities such as water treatment, medical care, shelters, telecommunications, and more, the need to minimize the likelihood and impacts of outages grows. Against this backdrop, resilience has emerged as a key consideration to guide electricity spending, whether from utilities, customers, or taxpayers. Although reliability has been defined and measured for decades with broadly accepted metrics that measure how many customers lose power and at what frequency and duration, resilience considers the electricity system’s response to a disruption and its subsequent impacts on customers. Developing tools and methods to accurately assess the costs and benefits of resilience investments is a critical step toward the goal of mitigating the impacts of outages on customers and society. Today, electric system resilience is largely treated as an externality due to challenges estimating the costs of long-duration outages, impacts of outages on society, and increasing reliance on electricity for a growing set of interdependent services. These interdependencies include the water, wastewater, telecommunications, natural gas, and health sectors. Without knowing how much a given resilience investment will benefit customers or society more broadly, investors, policymakers, and regulators are less likely to make or approve such investments, and less able to prioritize those investments. State Energy Offices and public utility commissions (PUCs) lead the development of state-level energy policy and utility regulation, respectively, and each has interests in encouraging appropriate public and private investments in resilience. To this end, the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) and National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), with the support of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Electricity (OE), formed a joint Microgrids State Working Group to explore the costs and benefits of microgrids, barriers to broader deployment of microgrids to meet resilience and other objectives, and policy and regulatory strategies to optimize investments in resilience, including but not limited to microgrids. Although no universally accepted valuation tool for resilience exists, National Laboratories, utilities, researchers, and state and federal agencies have collaborated to develop, apply, and improve a number of approaches to quantify resilience, several of which are still in progress at the time this report is published. This report seeks to share these important advances by discussing current definitions of resilience (Section 1), how microgrids are defined and used to meet resilience objectives (Section 2), new approaches to valuing resilience (Section 3), steps State Energy Offices and PUCs have taken to further resilience valuation efforts (Section 4), and finally, considerations and suggested next steps for State Energy Offices and PUCs (Section 5). Relevant examples of specific microgrid projects and resilience valuation efforts are included throughout the report. While this report is written specifically for NASEO and NARUC members, it may be useful for utilities, local governments, and individual customers interested in improving the way public and private dollars are spent to achieve resilience outcomes.
24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗