skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Regulatory Policy and Markets for Energy Storage in North America

Abstract

The last 5 years have been one of the most exciting times for the energy storage industry. We have seen significant advancements in the regulatory process to make accommodations for valuing and monetizing energy storage for what it provides to the grid. The most impactful regulatory decision for the energy storage industry has come from California, where the California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision that mandates procurement requirements of 1.325 GW for energy storage to 3 investor-own utilities in 4 stages: in 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020. Furthermore, at the Federal level, FERC’s Order 755, requires the transmission operators to develop pay for performance tariffs for ancillary services. This has had direct impact on the market design of US competitive wholesale markets and the monetization of fast responding grid assets. While this order is technology neutral, it clearly plays into the fast-responding capability of energy storage technologies. Today PJM, CAISO, MISO, NYISO, and NE-ISO have implemented Order 755 and offer new tariff for regulation services based on pay-for-performance principles. Furthermore, FERC Order 784, issued in July 2013 requires transmission providers to consider speed and accuracy in determining the requirements for ancillary services. In November 2013, FERC issued Order 972,more » which revises the small generator interconnection agreement which declares energy storage as a power source. This order puts energy storage on par with existing generators. This paper will discuss the implementation of FERC’s Pay for Performance Regulation order at all ISOs in the U.S. under FERC regulatory authority (this excludes ERCOT). Also discussed will be the market impacts and overall impacts on the NERC regulation performance indexes. The paper will end with a discussion on the California and Ontario, Canada procurement mandates and the opportunity that it may present to the energy storage industry.« less

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1159786
Report Number(s):
PNNL-SA-102045
TE1400000
DOE Contract Number:
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Proceedings of the IEEE, 102(7):1065-1072
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Citation Formats

Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW. Regulatory Policy and Markets for Energy Storage in North America. United States: N. p., 2014. Web. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2014.2319243.
Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW. Regulatory Policy and Markets for Energy Storage in North America. United States. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2014.2319243.
Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW. 2014. "Regulatory Policy and Markets for Energy Storage in North America". United States. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2014.2319243.
@article{osti_1159786,
title = {Regulatory Policy and Markets for Energy Storage in North America},
author = {Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW},
abstractNote = {The last 5 years have been one of the most exciting times for the energy storage industry. We have seen significant advancements in the regulatory process to make accommodations for valuing and monetizing energy storage for what it provides to the grid. The most impactful regulatory decision for the energy storage industry has come from California, where the California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision that mandates procurement requirements of 1.325 GW for energy storage to 3 investor-own utilities in 4 stages: in 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020. Furthermore, at the Federal level, FERC’s Order 755, requires the transmission operators to develop pay for performance tariffs for ancillary services. This has had direct impact on the market design of US competitive wholesale markets and the monetization of fast responding grid assets. While this order is technology neutral, it clearly plays into the fast-responding capability of energy storage technologies. Today PJM, CAISO, MISO, NYISO, and NE-ISO have implemented Order 755 and offer new tariff for regulation services based on pay-for-performance principles. Furthermore, FERC Order 784, issued in July 2013 requires transmission providers to consider speed and accuracy in determining the requirements for ancillary services. In November 2013, FERC issued Order 972, which revises the small generator interconnection agreement which declares energy storage as a power source. This order puts energy storage on par with existing generators. This paper will discuss the implementation of FERC’s Pay for Performance Regulation order at all ISOs in the U.S. under FERC regulatory authority (this excludes ERCOT). Also discussed will be the market impacts and overall impacts on the NERC regulation performance indexes. The paper will end with a discussion on the California and Ontario, Canada procurement mandates and the opportunity that it may present to the energy storage industry.},
doi = {10.1109/JPROC.2014.2319243},
journal = {Proceedings of the IEEE, 102(7):1065-1072},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2014,
month = 5
}
  • Government policy changes and subsequent regulatory actions in Canada and the United States (US) in the mid-1980s led to effective deregulation of the commodity market for natural gas. This was done by price deregulation, unbundling of pipeline services, and the fostering of a competitive market through equal and open access to pipeline transportation capacity by all suppliers and users. This paper attempts to measure the degree of price convergence in the North American natural gas spot markets. 38 refs.
  • Boreal peatlands in Canada have harbored relict permafrost since the Little Ice Age due to the strong insulating properties of peat. Ongoing climate change has triggered widespread degradation of localized permafrost in peatlands across continental Canada. Here, we explore the influence of differing permafrost regimes (bogs with no surface permafrost, localized permafrost features with surface permafrost, and internal lawns representing areas of permafrost degradation) on rates of peat accumulation at the southernmost limit of permafrost in continental Canada. Net organic matter accumulation generally was greater in unfrozen bogs and internal lawns than in the permafrost landforms, suggesting that surface permafrostmore » inhibits peat accumulation and that degradation of surface permafrost stimulates net carbon storage in peatlands. To determine whether differences in substrate quality across permafrost regimes control trace gas emissions to the atmosphere, we used a reciprocal transplant study to experimentally evaluate environmental versus substrate controls on carbon emissions from bog, internal lawn, and permafrost peat. Emissions of CO{sub 2} were highest from peat incubated in the localized permafrost feature, suggesting that slow organic matter accumulation rates are due, at least in part, to rapid decomposition in surface permafrost peat. Emissions of CH{sub 4} were greatest from peat incubated in the internal lawn, regardless of peat type. Localized permafrost features in peatlands represent relict surface permafrost in disequilibrium with the current climate of boreal North America, and therefore are extremely sensitive to ongoing and future climate change. Our results suggest that the loss of surface permafrost in peatlands increases net carbon storage as peat, though in terms of radiative forcing, increased CH{sub 4} emissions to the atmosphere will partially or even completely offset this enhanced peatland carbon sink for at least 70 years following permafrost degradation.« less
  • This article discusses the conflicts created by the fact that while the drive for economic development has been fueled by both resource exploitation and strategic imperitives, energy policy over the last twenty years has been made largely by environmental regulators. The main topics discussed include: remedies for market failure; acid rain and the new market in emissions allowances; using markets to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
  • The author feels it is imperative that the US realistically evaluate its energy potential and strive for wise public-policy decisions to help the nation achieve energy self-sufficiency in the near future. In his opinion, US energy priorities should be ranked as follows: conservation, natural gas, oil, coal, and nuclear. 4 figures.
  • The U.S. imports 40 percent of its petroleum, and it is forecast that this dependence will grow to 50 percent by the 1980's, presenting three problems for U.S. citizens: energy prices will increase; the import bill will exceed $30 billion in 1976; and the U.S. is vulnerable at any time to an embargo of any resource. The coal industry is confident that if the Federal government would allow it to develop its resources, it could restore U.S. energy independence in ten years. There are some who advocate a ''no growth'' policy and the author points out that energy conservation alonemore » will not solve the crisis. Reconsiderations have also been broadcast by the Club of Rome regarding their 1972 studies. The author sums up his message that ''growth is ... essential ... we must increase food production to prevent starvation ... we must increase economic growth to alleviate poverty ... we must increase energy production to do either.'' (MCW )« less