Meeting Notes

Load Shift Working Group (LSWG)

In person meeting: CPUC Golden Gate Room, 505 Van Ness Avenue

April 18, 2018

DRAFT

These notes summarize the Load Shift Working Group workshop facilitated by Gridworks. For a stakeholder list and presentations for this meeting (and for previous meetings), go to or contact Laura Wang at for more information.

AGENDA

  1. 10:00 – 10:20am: Intro and Purpose (Matthew Tisdale, Gridworks)
  2. Purpose for 4/18/2018 meeting: Determine what are “grid needs” and how do grid needs link with possible operational requirements for a load shift product
  1. 10:20 – 12:00pm: Presentations on Grid Needs
  2. RESOLVE and 2017 IRP Results (Nathan Barcic, CPUC, Jimmy Nelson, E3)
  3. LBNL Potentials Study (Peter Alstone, Humboldt State University)
  4. CAISO Operational Needs: Case Studies and Flexibility Needs (Eric Kim, CAISO)
  5. 12:00 – 1:00 pm: Lunch
  6. 1:00 – 1:45pm:Linking grid needs with operational requirements
  7. PG&E Excess Supply Pilot (XSP) Case Study (Jonathan Burrows, PG&E)
  8. Facilitated discussion: how do we tie grid needs with operational requirements?
  9. 1:45 – 2:00pm: Next Steps (Gridworks)

SUMMARY

  1. Introductions and Purpose

Matthew Tisdale (Gridworks) facilitated introductions of stakeholders in the room and on the phone and restated the purpose of the LSWG, per D. 17-07-017.

The following participants participated in person:

1

Meeting Notes

Load Shift Working Group (LSWG)

In person meeting: CPUC Golden Gate Room, 505 Van Ness Avenue

April 18, 2018

DRAFT

●Peter Alstone, LBNL

●Carmen Best, Open EE

●Catherine Smith, SDG&E

●Henry Richardson, Watt Time

●Helena Oh, CPUC ORA

●Jin Noh, CESA

●Jimmy Nelson, E3

●Brian Gerke, LBNL

●Nathan Barcic, CPUC

●Brian Ballard, SCE

●Stephanie E3

●Jill Powers, CAISO

●Eric Kim, CAISO

●Brian Kooiman, Ohmconnect

●Peter Schwartz , LBNL

●Paul Nelson, CLECA

●Anna Brockway, NRDC

●Eric Woychik, Strategy Integration

●Jennifer Chamberlain, Cpower

●Jean Lamming, CPUC

●Anja Gilbert, PG&E

●Jonathan Burrows, PG&E

●Matthew Tisdale, Gridworks

●Laura Wang, Gridworks

1

Meeting Notes

Load Shift Working Group (LSWG)

In person meeting: CPUC Golden Gate Room, 505 Van Ness Avenue

April 18, 2018

DRAFT

The following participants participated over the phone:

1

Meeting Notes

Load Shift Working Group (LSWG)

In person meeting: CPUC Golden Gate Room, 505 Van Ness Avenue

April 18, 2018

DRAFT

●Nora Sheriff, CLECA

●Doug Karpa, Clean Coalition

●Nicholas O’Connell, AMS

●Jon Hart, CSE

●Julie McNamara

●Joan Nelson SDG&E

●Carol Manson

●Scott Hoppe

●Nuo Tang, SDG&E

1

Meeting Notes

Load Shift Working Group (LSWG)

In person meeting: CPUC Golden Gate Room, 505 Van Ness Avenue

April 18, 2018

DRAFT

  1. Grid Needs Presentations

Three Working Group members presented on the topic of grid needs as it relates to load shift. The full set of presentations can be found online at

Overarching conclusions from the presentations:

-Greater “need” for load shift occur at higher levels of RE penetration/more stringent GHG reduction goals, when increased flexibility is needed to avoid costly RE curtailment. Under current BAU (meeting a 50% RPS goal), the current 2017-2018 RESOLVE model does not “select” load shift as a resource option.

-Broadly, grid needs include: provision of low-cost energy, at lower levels of pollution, maintained reliability, and provision of equal service to all customers.

-Shift DR can provide additional value to the grid by considering local reliability needsand local distribution-system services.

-Revenue opportunities for shift DR should align with provision of services to meet grid needs

-CAISO identified the times of greatest grid “need” as the 3-hour evening ramping period, with fluctuating seasonality.

RESOLVE and 2017 IRP Results (Nathan Barcic, CPUC, Jimmy Nelson, E3)

Nathan Barcic (CPUC) presented on the purpose of the CPUC’s Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process, while Jimmy Nelson (E3) presented on the RESOLVE model, focusing on how shift is represented in E3’s RESOLVE model. Shift is modeled as an energy neutral resource and is limited by the daily energy budget. Assumptions on cost, performance, and potential of shift DR is based on the LBNL study. E3 identified that the current iteration of RESOLVE for the 2017-2018 IRP model reflects forecasts of distributed energy resource adoption, but does not optimize DER adoption. Improving this modeling component is a priority focus going forward.

E3 presented on shift resources under three policy cases (status quo (50% RPS), 42 MMT, 30 MMT) and identified the MW opportunity for the RESOLVE model to “select” shift across the three policy cases, as well as the potential incremental savings to customers. Currently, the model selects significantly more shift resources under the 30 MMT scenario and does not select shift under the default (50% RPS) scenario. E3 observes that, based on the model results, renewable integration challenges are not significant enough to justify payments to flexible loads at less stringent GHG targets, but at more stringent targets, balancing challenges, via more frequent curtailment, become significant enough to incent adding flexible loads.

LBNL Potentials Study (Peter Alstone, Humboldt State University)

Peter Alstone (Humboldt State University) identified additional potential value for shift DR that is not currently included in the RESOLVE study. He provided additional detail on how the LBNL study evaluated local capacity areas for DR potential and how distribution system services were treated with a first-order estimate. First, RESOLVE considers the ISO as a single node, whereby shift DR may also be used to meet local capacity needs/curtailment constraints. In certain local planning capacity areas, DR may be more valuable and has greater potential to defer investment in new generation. In addition, DR resources have the opportunity to meet both system-level and distribution-level needs. Layering these value streams showed to provide additional DR shift potential. Peter concluded that these models should represent a floor for shift DR value, and that as we find additional applications or value streams, the value of shift DR increases. In addition, modeling could improve to consider additional shiftable resources, such as electric water heating and space heating.

Peter also focused his presentation on identifying priorities for the grid (grid needs) and how they are translated to potential value streams for shift DR.

Grid Need / Value Mechanism / Revenue for Shift DR / Notes
Low Cost / Fuel and other marginal cost operational savings / Energy market price arbitrage / Market prices should reflect opportunity for reduced operating/ marginal costs
Low Pollution (at a low cost) / Avoided lost RPS compliance through curtailment and/or EIM transfers, etc. / TBD / Pay for avoided RPS losses based on avoided LCOE for new renewables?
Reliability (at a low cost) / Avoid the need for new peak capacity investment (system and local RA)
Ancillary services / Capacity payments
Ancillary services payments / Capacity is NOT in the energy market, so we have capacity markets.
Flexible/ramping capacity too?
Equal service / ? / ? / Difficult to estimate, but important
  1. CAISO Operational Needs: Case Studies and Flexibility Needs (Eric Kim, CAISO)

Eric Kim (CAISO) provided an update on the ESDER 3 process and summarized what was presented in the recent technical stakeholder workshop. ESDER 3, focused on BTM storage, is a load shift product that separately identifies load curtailment and load consumption, whereby participants curtail to meet their must-offer obligation, and consume during negative price times of the day. CAISO plans to consider stakeholder comments and submit a revised straw proposal by the end of April.

CAISO also provided its perspective on grid needs. First, CAISO is focused on the 3-hour ramp-up period in the late afternoon/evening as the time of greatest need. Next, CAISO evaluated a flexible capacity needs assessment to determine when seasonally ramping needs are greatest. Those seasons included spring, when high hydro, high solar, and low load coincide, and increasingly winter.

Finally, CAISO identified that one potential avenue to provide increased opportunities for flex RA is having the CPUC unbundle RA requirements, so that a resource could provide flex RA without first being a system RA resource. This is currently being considered in the CPUC RA proceeding. Eric also identified multiple products under development at CAISO addressing flexibility needs, including FRACMOO Phase 2, and day ahead market enhancements. It was noted that, once day ahead market enhancement is implemented, a load shift resource would be eligible as an imbalance product. It was also noted that flexible ramping products are considered load-following, or “shimmy” DR products, rather than shift DR.

Discussion and Next steps

In discussion, a subset of WG members agreed to spend time in between the WG meetings to enhance Peter Alstone’s proposed matrix (replicated above).

  1. Lunch Break
  1. Linking Grid Needs with Operational Requirements

Jonathan Burrows (PG&E) provided a refresh summary of PG&E’s excess supply pilot, as an example of turning an identified need into a product with defined operational requirements. XSP examined the ability of demand-side resources to increase load during times of excess supply, as well as times of low or negative prices. To develop the product, PG&E identified both when customers are available to provide shift, as well as when negative prices are most common. XSP is designed as a technology neutral product.

-Participation requirements: Participants are asked to be available for a four-hour block within an eight-hour window, and their maximum dispatch is up to two-hours.

-Size: 30kw minimum (allows for dual participation in Supply Side pilot as a bi-directional product)

-Market triggers: Responsive to day-ahead dispatch, but can be issued after CAISO day-ahead market awards (example of a market-influenced trigger)

-PG&E clarified how the pilot structured incentives based on number of available days a week.

Homework:

WG members are asked to participate to develop the following items for discussion in advance of next month’s workshop:

1)Enhancement of grid needs matrix – identify value streams applicable to load shift

  1. All interested WG members are encouraged to participate. Please fill out this Doodle poll with availability:

2)Development of a technology-neutral enhanced PDR product

  1. CAISO is asked to consider enhancements to its ESDER 3 product
  2. DR providers are asked to provide separate considerations

3)IOUs are asked to consider operational requirements envisioned for an enhanced PDR product based on grid needs.

The high-level draft Work Plan is as follows:

●Meeting 4-5: Enhanced PDR

●Meeting 5-7: Load Bidding

●Meeting 8: Retail Program

1