Strategies magazine November 2020

AESP Website | Events Calendar | November 2020 LESSONS IN PROGRAM DESIGN FROM TWO NEW YORK SMART RATE PILOTS By Rebecca Roberts, Debbie Sassoon, Candice Tsay, Francesca Jones, Laura Orfanedes, and Leigh Winterbottom Through two innovative pilots, Con Edison is learning how best to design, execute, and market new programs that marry price signals, technology, and customer behavior. Insights and observations are rolling in for the Smart Energy Plan and Smart Home Rate pilots. Learn their insights that led to making recruitment-driven design changes, and technology-driven design changes. Read more. LARGE OR SMALL, CHP WORKS FOR ALL By Mike Frischmann Traditionally, Combined Heat and Power (CHP) is viewed as a technology suitable for big customers only. However a recent landmark study in Pennsylvania, which included studying customer heating requirements, leads to a much different conclusion, opening up the potential for microturbines. Read more about the study and its findings here.

Letter from the AESP Board Chair TIMING IS EVERYTHING By Raegan Bond In our lives and in our work, timing plays a critical role in many things. In the energy efficiency industry, timing can present an uncertainty, a challenge and an opportunity. Understand the role that timing plays in optimizing energy savings and in resource planning. Read more. Aerial View of Reynolds Landing Source: Alabama News Center From the AESP-Energy Central Energy Efficiency Community: GRID-INTERACTIVE EFFICIENT BUILDINGS - THE DER TO TRANSFORM THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT By Zach Sussman

Grid-interactive Efficient Buildings (GEBs) are a new type of DER in town. GEBs are energy efficient buildings, regardless of size, that are capable of adjusting its operations based on signals sent by the utility grid. Learn more about their role in the electric grid of the future. \"Arizona Regulators Give OK to Requiring More Energy Efficiency From Utilities\" \"Generate Capital Provides Alturus With $600 Million for Energy-Efficiency Projects\" \"U.S. Department of Energy Provides $65 Million for ‘Connected Communities’ of Buildings Powered to Transform Electric System\" \"Midwest Cities Show More Improvement in Annual Efficiency Scorecard\" \"North Carolina Can Save $5.9 Billion in Electricity Costs – ACEEE\" \"New Jersey Utilities to Push Customers to Use Less Gas, Electricity\" \"Connecticut Bill Would Invite Competition to Run Efficiency Programs\" \"ComEd Energy Efficiency Program Nets Customer Savings of $5 Billion\" \"How Transparent Solar Panels + 'Quantum Dots' Could Harvest Energy on an Architectural Scale\" \"New York Sets Minimum 3-Year Term for New Load Management Programs to Drive More Energy Storage\" \"Energy Efficiency: Budget Proposal Seeks $100 Million for Untapped Energy Savings\" 2021 please come quickly. AESP 31st Virtual Annual Conference is on January 25 We learned, adapted and innovated in 2020. We realized just how resilient we can be in the face of unprecedented change. Now it is time to apply what we learned and charge forward in 2021. Fuel up on current best practices in program implementation, evaluation, technology and marketing. Let’s all get together this January 25-28 for AESP’s 31st Annual Conference. For the first time, our annual conference will be all virtual, but the agenda is PACKED like our usual conferences with the latest ideas, best practices (especially the lessons learned from 2020) and key issues that have emerged in recent times. Let’s have the necessary discussions around energy equity, workplace diversity, electrification, DERs and decarbonization.

With no travel required and a lower registration cost, now everyone can attend AESP’s Annual Conference! Cost is only $349 or 2 Group Member Points for Members or $499 for non-members. Why not REGISTER now? Sponsorship opportunities available. Get you company’s name, product or services in front of an audience of the industry’s leading professionals. Find out more here. WEBINARS ONLINE TRAINING COURSES Leveraging Connected Communities and Implicit Bias and Its Impact on Workplace Utilizing Buildings as a Grid Resource Excellence (California Chapter DER series) November 10 November 10 (free) CONFERENCES Attracting and Retaining a Diverse Workforce (Diversity series) 31st ANNUAL CONFERENCE November 12 (free) January 25-28, 2021 - Virtual Driving Efficient Purchases – COVID-19 SPRING CONFERENCE 2021 and Beyond May 17-19, 2021 - Jacksonville, FL November 17 (free) Aggregating DERs for Resource Adequacy and Customer Resilience (California Chapter DER series) November 19 (free) Have an idea for a webinar? Email [email protected].

LESSONS IN PROGRAM DESIGN FROM TWO NEW YORK SMART RATE PILOTS

By Rebecca Roberts, Debbie Sassoon, Candice Tsay, Francesca Jones, Laura Orfanedes, and Leigh Winterbottom With advancements in technology, utility customers are emerging as an untapped resource to help system operators meet demand, protect reliability, and achieve state energy policy goals. This partnership benefits the utility and its customers: Utilities expand the portfolio of assets available to meet system needs, while customers unlock new opportunities to manage their energy bills. Yet many questions and challenges remain. Through two innovative pilots, Con Edison and its implementation partner, ICF, are learning how best to design, execute, and market new programs that marry price signals, technology, and customer behavior, for the benefit of all customers. These two pilots, the Smart Energy Plan (SEP) and the Smart Home Rate (SHR), are still underway, but insights and observations are rolling in. Learnings span pilot design, program implementation and operations, and insights into customer response. They reveal a wealth of information on how best to reach customers through effective program design and service delivery, as well as how to leverage feedback and findings to create a positive customer experience while capturing the desired system benefits. This article will focus on lessons learned from the implementation of these pilots, diving into two key areas: (1) recruitment-driven design changes, and (2) technology-driven design changes. Further, it will demonstrate how emerging best practices can be applied by utilities to design pilots that make it easy and compelling for customers to explore new rate offerings and technology solutions. How Con Edison’s Innovative Pilots Work The Smart Energy Plan (SEP). This cutting-edge pilot is part of Con Edison’s Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Customer Engagement Plan to explore novel rate structures that enhance customer benefits in a cost-effective manner. Launched in 2018, the pilot tests seven time-variant demand-based rates designed to provide customers with greater control over their energy costs, as well as test the impact of demand-based rates on customer satisfaction, bill amounts, and energy-use behaviors. The seven rates differ in various ways, including when the customer’s peak demand is measured, and how demand and electric supply are priced. Through SEP, Con Edison will gain understanding of customer acceptance of various rate structures and their impact on load management. Con Edison is studying demand rates under two enrollment strategies: opt-in and opt-out enrollment (also referred to as default enrollment). The pilot aims to determine whether opt-in and opt-out strategies produce similar relative impacts. Residential customers are being recruited through default and opt-in methods simultaneously in each of the pilot regions: largely suburban Staten Island/Westchester County (SI/W) and more urban Brooklyn. Enrollment for small commercial customers is conducted only on a default basis. The pilot’s enrollment goal is 75,000 customers.

The Smart Home Rate Pilot (SHRP). Born out of New York’s Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) initiative, Con Edison and affiliate, Orange and Rockland, are executing the SHR pilot. Its design reflects the Public Service Commission’s goal to use REV demonstration projects to test new technologies, prove new business models, and stimulate innovation, particularly around distributed energy resources (DER). Launched in 2019, SHR is testing how alternative rate structures can provide price signals to residential customers with AMI and smart home technology to deliver greater control over energy use and costs. This pilot will evaluate load changes in response to the dynamic time-varying rates, as well as measure bill impacts and gauge customer engagement with smart home rates and technologies. In this pilot, participants receive smart thermostats connected to home energy management technologies, which help them maximize savings on the SHR rates. The pilot was designed as a Randomized Control Trial (RCT) with customers assigned to one of two rates (Rate A or Rate B) or to the Control Group. The pilot’s enrollment goal is 450 participants with active thermostats per rate.

The word ‘pilot’ implies continuous learning and fine-tuning. A successful pilot design requires agility – it must have flexibility incorporated from the start, allowing the utility to adjust the approach as needed to meet its goals. Additionally, a tight, well integrated cross-functional team supports that need to be agile for pilots of this scale and complexity. In their first and second years, both SEP and SHR made changes in pilot design. Recruitment-Driven Design Changes Smart Energy Plan The SEP recruitment and enrollment strategy was originally designed as a two-phased process occurring across two waves, two billing plans, seven rates, and multiple messaging treatments in each of the targeted geographies — beginning with SI/W, followed by Brooklyn. This deliberately staggered approach included the implementation of initial small-scale tests - called Test & Learns – with a subset of target customers used to determine the relative impact of various offer features on customer acceptance of the base rate. These small-scale tests indicated whether Con Edison was likely to achieve its target enrollment rates and helped determine which messaging and features to include in the marketing materials used to recruit customers during the second phase. The winning approaches were sent to the remaining larger target customer pilot population in each area. This staggered approach allowed the team to apply learnings from early waves to inform subsequent waves for ongoing operational optimization and smoother rollout. It also allowed them to leverage customer feedback and insights in order to fine-tune recruitment and enrollment and continuously improve the customer experience. SEP’s first year encountered several changes in its original design. One change included the replacement of the small-scale SI/W Test & Learn with a MaxDiff analysis (an analytic approach using best-worst scaling to gauge survey respondents’ preference scores for different features). Another change was the shift from a two-waved to a three-waved recruitment rollout, including the addition of a small incentive testing phase to assess the impact of a $25 incentive on SI/W enrollment rates.

Key changes resulting from these design modifications included the following: 1. The team eliminated enrollment incentives from the recruitment offer to the larger target pilot population in SI/W and Brooklyn (after additional testing within that population resulted in the same findings as SI/W). 2. The longer time horizon of staggered recruitment extended the operations ramp-up period from three to six months, which allowed the team to better configure technology to meet pilot requirements; hone and refine messaging; implement additional customer care and call center training; identify additional key metrics to track; develop more sophisticated reporting dashboards; and engage other stakeholders as SEP moved from launch through full-scale rollout to the target pilot population. Additionally, Year Two of the pilot saw an unforeseen deployment disruption: COVID-19. As a result, Brooklyn’s full-scale pilot recruitment was paused, and the rate launch delayed. ICF worked with Con Edison to adjust operations accordingly. Impacted areas included project schedules, project duration, call center handling, IT system plans, campaign deployment, and creative development. Critical to this last activity, COVID-19 shifted customer sentiment and energy use behavior in new and unknown ways. To investigate how these changes impacted Con Edison’s target population for this pilot, ICF implemented an agile message testing effort. The results of ICF’s testing informed the creative strategy utilized for final recruitment activities, as well as for Con Edison’s ongoing engagement efforts in Year Three and beyond. Smart Home Rate At the start of SHR recruitment, a targeted list of Con Edison and Orange & Rockland customers received a direct mail letter and email. While customers began signing up, enrollment was lower than anticipated and attrition rates at key steps in the process were higher than expected in the original program design. Tracking metrics by recruitment channel indicated that, while recruitment material was piquing customer interest and the online portal allowed for the collection of important enrollment data, there were challenges to getting customers all the way through the process. Contributing factors to customer attrition included: • Stringent eligibility requirements – Interested targeted customers had to navigate a two-page, 18 question, self-directed eligibility screen on the enrollment portal. Of those who viewed the portal’s second page of screening questions, 34 percent were deemed ineligible and 12 percent did not complete the page. • Randomized rate assignment during enrollment – The randomization design meant that customers were not exposed to information about the new rate until the last step of enrollment. Learning about the rate late into the enrollment process may have caused the customer attrition at this step: approximately 46% of customers dropped off at this stage. • Subscription level selection during enrollment – The design required potential participants randomly assigned to Rate B to select from one of three possible demand subscription and overage charge levels, customized based on each customer’s historical energy usage. Customers found it difficult to make a subscription decision at this early stage of their journey, causing prospective Rate B respondents to drop at almost double the rate of prospective Rate A respondents, who were not required to select a subscription level. Another challenge was losing interested customers to the Control Group: The RCT design meant one third of eligible customers attempting to enroll online were assigned the Control Group. This not only removed eligible customers but also caused confusion, with 22 percent of Control Group customers calling in to learn why they couldn’t participate. After the initial phase of recruitment completed in early 2020, SHR pilot recruitment paused due to

COVID-19. As the team planned for recruitment relaunch, these insights informed several updates to program design aimed at increasing enrollments. This included: • Streamlining eligibility screening on the enrollment portal to remove non-essential questions, bringing the maximum number of questions down to 12. • Removing demand subscription level selection from the Rate B enrollment flow. Instead of three demand subscription level options, Rate B respondents are now presented with a single default subscription level and overage charge. • Moving the design from an RCT to a design with a matched control. This new design allows all interested, eligible customers to be placed into either Rate A or Rate B, without the possibility of being randomly placed into the Control Group. While the SHR pilot’s fall 2020 recruitment campaign is still underway, the team anticipates that these changes will retain a greater number of customers and improve the likelihood of meeting enrollment targets. Recruitment Mitigation Planning When planning recruitment, utilities are strongly encouraged to consider including a mitigation strategy upfront in program planning. The need for mitigation planning became clear as recruitment campaigns were executed, and the team encountered the possibility of one or more of the opt-in rates

not hitting the target enrollment rate. For SEP, based on lessons learned from previous opt-in recruitment campaigns, the team developed a mitigation plan prior to the launch of Brooklyn recruitment. When SHR developed a recruitment re-launch plan for fall 2020, it incorporated a mitigation plan into the modified recruitment approach. For both pilots, a key mitigation strategy has been to monitor enrollments against targets via weekly reporting and enrollment projection analyses. Specifically, the SEP team developed a metric report to track enrollments by rate and wave, comparing each rate’s progress to the recruitment target against the previous campaigns over a comparable time period. SHR employed a similar approach. Based on these analyses, each pilot team would then determine whether additional recruitment touchpoints would be necessary. Part of this process entailed outlining a creative development schedule that would enable the teams to finalize ahead of time the mitigation recruitment materials for each potential additional touchpoint. Advance creative development was needed so that these recruitment materials could be quickly deployed. This schedule also had to allow customers enough time to receive the touchpoint and enroll before the rate went live. Technology-Driven Design Changes Designing pilots with emerging technologies often poses inherent challenges. For SHR, COVID-19 added another dimension of complexity to integrating new technology. The original pilot design allowed customers in Phase One to choose between self-installing their smart thermostats or receiving free, professional installation. Approximately 75 percent of customers selected professional installation. Due to COVID-19, Con Edison transitioned to the self-install method only. The team knew this change could present a significant barrier to installation, so they devised ways to alleviate the friction of customer-directed installation. This resulted in several program design changes, including: • Increased Incentives – An increased incentive ($50) upon confirmation of a successful installation and registration of the thermostat (vs. original $10 incentive design that was provided upon enrollment). • Text Message Nudges – In addition to existing email-based nudges to install their thermostat, customers are also now sent reminders via text • Virtual Installation Support – Phone- and video-based support is provided to customers that request it or have not installed the thermostat after a certain number of days. • Installation Contingency Measures – The original design did not include significant thermostat installation and registration mitigation “levers” built into it. The updated design builds in the following contingency measures, to be used should installation rates lag: • Installation Mitigation Bonus Incentive Email Campaign – Targeted email campaign to customers who have not yet installed their thermostat that offers an incentive if they install within a certain timeframe • Installation Mitigation Outbound Call Campaign – ICF calls customers who have not installed and registered their thermostat and offers virtual install support. • Installation Mitigation Formal Letter – Customers who have not installed and registered their thermostat receive a formal letter. Overall, these adjustments directed customers forward in the enrollment and installation journey using “carrots” rather than “sticks” (e.g. if thermostat isn’t installed customer is charged for it). Recruitment and installation are still in progress, but initial results show promise in lessening risk around stranded technology assets and customer attrition.

Conclusion Two years into the deployment of the Smart Energy Plan pilot and one year into the deployment of the Smart Home Rate pilot, the body of knowledge associated with informing, recruiting, driving action from, and building satisfaction with customers on new demand-based rate structures has grown substantially. This article has shared only a few key lessons from a larger set of critical findings of how the target customers and participants think, act, and react in response to billing structures and technology that can provide opportunities to save on energy costs and maintain grid reliability. Con Edison is proud to be among the first utilities to blaze this exciting trail. Rebecca Roberts is Section Manager of Utility of the Future at Con Edison where she leads a team piloting new rate structures that aim to provide customers with greater choice and control. Rebecca has held various roles at Con Edison, including Manager in its Energy Efficiency & Demand Management department, where she led a team that developed and piloted new energy saving products, services, and technologies. Candice Tsay is a Senior Planning Analyst at Con Edison, where she is currently responsible for implementing an innovative rate and smart home technology demonstration project. Her career at Con Edison has been focused throughout on developing and implementing new ideas to enable clean energy technologies and demand-side flexibility on the electric grid. Debbie Sassoon is Project Specialist, Utility of the Future at Orange and Rockland Utilities where she is currently responsible for implementation of the smart home technology demonstration project as well as regulatory analysis associated with the implementation of REV and its impact on the company. Debbie has held previous roles at Orange and Rockland, including Manager, Customer Accounting. Laura Orfanedes serves as the Director of Northeast Marketing Team in ICF’s Commercial Energy Division where she leads her team in designing, implementing, and optimizing energy marketing campaigns and initiatives for clients that include Con Edison, Orange & Rockland Utilities, Central Hudson, Avangrid, National Grid, and the Sponsors of Mass Save. She also serves as a four-time elected member of AESP’s Board of Directors. Francesca Jones is a Marketing Manager at ICF where she leads marketing and campaign strategy for the energy and utility sectors, with core expertise in new rates and emerging technologies. She has led high-impact marketing and brand campaigns for a variety of clients including Con Edison, National Grid, DTE Energy, Orange & Rockland, Mass Save, NYSERDA, NYPA, and Efficiency Maine. Leigh Winterbottom has been a Senior Marketing & Communications Manager at ICF for three years and since July 2018, the Project Manager for the Con Edison Innovative Pricing Pilot. Leigh began her work in energy efficiency marketing with a nine-year tenure at the award-winning Efficiency Vermont program – the country’s first state-wide energy efficiency utility at the leading edge of clean energy. This article is contributed by the AESP Pricing and Demand Response Topic Committee. Back to top LARGE OR SMALL, CHP WORKS FOR ALL

By Michael Frischmann As Pennsylvania geared up for Phase IV of Act 129, the Statewide Evaluator (SWE) undertook a full-scale market potential study to assist the commission in setting goals for each of the seven electric distribution companies in the commonwealth. One area of focus, both in Phase IV and historically, is combined heat and power (CHP). Like other states, Pennsylvania's energy efficiency stakeholders are diligently examining a wide variety of technologies that can fill the savings gap left after shifting away from incentivizing LED lighting. CHP provides one way to reduce customer energy consumption from the grid while reducing its overall carbon footprint and saving costs. Quantifying exactly how much of an impact CHP, or any other efficiency measure, can have on utility programs requires estimates of technical, economic, and achievable program potential. The process which the SWE undertook, and the resulting potential, can provide critical insights for other program administrators who are considering including CHP in their portfolios. Build Potential from the Ground-Up But unlike more traditional energy efficiency technologies, the potential for CHP is challenging to characterize broadly. A CHP system is not a run-of-the-mill energy efficiency widget which every electric customer can install. Successful CHP installations need to utilize the waste heat stream from electricity production fully. That requires finding facilities where the customer has existing heat loads that are large enough in magnitude and consistent enough in duration. High, sustained heat loads will allow the customer to continuously run the CHP system, offsetting as much of their heating requirements, and electricity usage, as physically possible. Identifying these customers is a tricky task. Typical potential studies, including the DOE's state-level CHP assessments, take a top-down approach to estimate CHP potential. Starting with the number of customers in specific NAICS codes, the potential analysis will use industry level metrics to infer the electricity and heating needs for groups of customers. While not perfect, this type of research can provide decent high-level estimates when customer-specific data is unavailable. The advantage of our study from Pennsylvania was that we did have access to customer-specific data, most importantly, natural gas usage histories. Access to gas data enabled the SWE team to complete a bottom-up approach to estimating the potential. Each customer's gas load determines if the customer has sufficient heat requirements to support a CHP, and if so, what size of CHP is required to utilize their base heat loads fully. Taking this approach, the analysis assumes the customer uses the CHP's thermal output fully to offset their current natural gas heating needs. Sizing the CHP systems to match the customer's heat loads ensured that the SWE grounded its potential estimates on the CHP's ability to run continuously. For this study, the analysis required each customer to have sufficient base heat loads to offset at least a 50 kW CHP system, the smallest size used in the DOE CHP technical potential analyses.

Once the appropriate CHP size was known, the study team analyzed the installation, operational, and benefit-cost ratio for four different CHP technology types: 1) steam turbines, 2) natural gas turbines, 3) internal combustion engines, 4) microturbines. The SWE team used the resulting projects matrix in the remainder of the potential study to determine the economic, achievable, and program level potential estimates for Phase IV. Potential Everywhere Building this type of analysis seems like an extremely exclusive process. With specific usage constraints and requirements, one might expect that CHP potential is limited only to the most considerable electricity and natural gas users. Fortunately, that is far from the truth. In addition to the expected industrial, manufacturing, and hospital customers, other customer types the study found to support CHP installations were retail, lodging, grocery, office, religious, warehouse, and institutional buildings. These customers were also not all large energy users. Approximately 60% of the customers analyzed used less than 250,000 kWh annually and are classified as small by Pennsylvania's standard definitions. And they are located everywhere in the state. This was not isolated potential around large metropolitan areas such as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. Each of the seven electric distribution companies EDCs showed tangible potential for CHP projects. The spread of potential was a fascinating finding, which may have been overlooked by performing a top-down analysis and making assumptions about what may or may not be appropriate CHP applications. A large driver of the broad applicability of CHP systems was the inclusion of microturbines in the study. According to the DOE, microturbines are a type of natural gas turbine CHP system designed to be small and modular. Microturbines typically range in size from 30 kW up to about 300 kW of electrical output. Based on the analysis, microturbines made up 80% of the number of CHP installations included in the potential estimates. This will provide a significantly larger pool of potential customers than what has traditionally been the focus for CHP installations. Hopefully, program marketing and other outreach will shift to focus on this currently underserved CHP market both in Pennsylvania and nationally. That is not to say that traditional CHP systems do not play a vital role. While the total number of steam turbines, natural gas turbines, and internal combustion engine CHP systems is one quarter of microturbines, they account for two times as much installed capacity. Natural gas turbines were the most significant, at 61% of the total installed capacity potential, compared to 33% from microturbines. The average size of potential natural gas turbines was 5.2 MW, more than twenty times the typical microturbine size.

Moving Forward The notable number of possible microturbine installations and the contribution to total potential from this expanding technology are promising. CHP has been relegated as a \"huge customer only\" type of technology for much of its lifetime. Examining customer heating requirements, though, leads to a much different conclusion. There is significant potential across a wide range of customer types in various locations, large and small alike. Pennsylvania has ultimately included CHP as a significant part of the Phase IV goals. This type of analysis could also be conducted in other states to understand further and improve CHP's outlook. Especially in states where the spark rate, the difference between electric rates and natural gas generation costs, is high. Are you interested in reading more? The Pennsylvania CHP analysis and full potential study are available online1 . The commission also coordinates a CHP working group to stay informed about planned and installed CHP systems and industry input2. Mike Frischmann is a Principal at EMC Energy Insights, where he leverages data analytics to help utilities and program administrators plan, design, and implement program solutions that reduce costs and lower evaluation risk. This article is contributed by the AESP Gas EE Topic Committee. References: [1] http://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1656474.pdf [1] http://www.puc.state.pa.us/utility_industry/natural_gas/chp_cogeneration.aspx Back to top

Letter from the AESP Board Chair TIMING IS EVERYTHING By Raegan Bond I am a big fan of maxims. Some of my personal favourites include: “Hope is not a Strategy,” “Many Hands make Light Work,” “Hindsight is 20-20” and “There’s always Room for Crème Brulee” (I take full author credit for that last one). One maxim that I have been reflecting on recently – and which fully came into focus with the clocks going back an hour this past weekend – is that Timing is Everything. There is an almost overwhelming amount of information, discussion and analysis in our industry today about the evolving energy sector – new technologies, changing regulatory paradigms, evolving business models. My virtual reading pile is constantly overflowing. As I monitor these trends and work to support my utility clients who are facing them head-on, I am increasingly seeing the criticality of timing. Specifically, in the context of distributed energy resources (which I use in the broadest sense here to include energy efficiency, demand response, renewables etc.). I see the influence of timing in three ways: as an uncertainty; as a challenge and as an opportunity. Timing as an Uncertainty At this point, I think it would be difficult to find many (or any) energy industry experts who would disagree with the notion that the electricity sector is becoming more decarbonized, more decentralized and more digitized. There is general agreement that these changes are happening. What’s less certain is how quickly the changes will occur. A recent Forbes article contends that the Electric Vehicle market has hit its tipping point; however I know first hand that this sentiment is not shared universally among utility leaders. In absence of explicit policy and regulatory mandates, many utilities are struggling to determine the appropriate timing for EV-related investments such as public charging infrastructure and load management programs. If utilities invest too early there may be a significant lag before the benefits of these investments are realized. However if utilities wait too long, opportunities for ensuring that transportation electrification is beneficial electrification - such as by using vehicle grid integration strategies – may be reduced. Timing as a Challenge

Distributed energy resources can present several challenges for electric utilities – among them is the timing of energy generation from distributed renewable sources, such as behind-the-meter rooftop solar PV. Utilities are unable to directly control these “power plants” and must take action on the grid side of the meter to maintain the overall safety, reliability and performance of the power system. While the residential solar market is still small in some states and provinces within North America, the global picture and trend is clear. Even the current year overshadowed by a global pandemic and related economic downturns, the household demand for solar rooftop PV is surging, according to a recent article by Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Timing as an Opportunity Timing – or more specifically market approaches and technologies that leverage timing – presents an opportunity for integrating distributed energy resources and enabling a cost-effective energy transition. While energy storage may be the solution that immediately springs to mind in this category (and I have no doubt that storage is a critical game changer), I see many opportunities to further use pricing strategies (such as time-of-use rates and dynamic pricing), demand response and targeted energy efficiency to reduce, shift and/or increase energy demand when needed. If you are interested in electricity pricing strategies, I would encourage you to follow some very recent changes that are taking place in Ontario. Ontario was the first jurisdiction in North America to mandate the rollout of smart meters and mandatory time-of-use rates for all residential and small business customers. After a full decade under mandatory TOU pricing, a recent policy change means that as of November 1, 2020 customers may choose to opt-out of default TOU pricing onto a tiered, consumption-based pricing plan. To my knowledge this situation is the first of its kind and will no doubt present some interesting findings related to customer behaviours and preferences after such a prolonged period without choice. Timing presents different things in different situations – it can present uncertainties, opportunities and challenges – but one thing for certain is that time always moves forward. As we near the end of 2020, let’s put the wisdom earned from this year to good use and embrace the uncertainties, opportunities and challenges that 2021 will present with energy and optimism. AESP Chair of the Board Raegan Bond is a Principal at Dunsky Energy Consulting. Back to top Now You’re Talking! What People are Saying in the AESP-Energy Central EE Community Did you know that there's an active (11,000+ members and growing) community of energy efficiency professionals ONLINE? It's the AESP and Energy Central's EE Community. As an AESP member, join this community to post your articles, weigh in on a topic, ask questions of fellow EE professionals, or help answer questions to foster collaborative discussions that benefit everyone. Each month, we highlight one post from the community, but we encourage you to explore the many other articles and posts online, so check out the community here.

Aerial View of Reynolds Landing Source: Alabama News Center From the AESP Energy Central EE Community GRID-INTERACTIVE EFFICIENT BUILDINGS - THE DER TO TRANSFORM THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT By Zach Sussman As customers continue to install Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) in their homes and businesses, the need for the electric grid to evolve rapidly grows. Enter the new type of DER in town — Grid-interactive Efficient Buildings (GEBs). The adoption and acceptance of GEBs is an important step in creating the electric grid of the future, but this end goal requires the interaction and cooperation of key players across multiple sectors. What exactly is a GEB and why should it be considered a DER? A DER is generally understood as behind-the-meter distributed generation, such as solar, wind, storage, or cogeneration. These DERs turn a customer from a power consumer into a power producer (or prosumer), which upends the traditional utility delivery model. This can be easily seen in California’s solar generation and the infamous Duck Curve. So then, what exactly is a GEB and how does it fit into all of this? As the name suggests, a Grid-interactive Efficient Building is an energy efficient building, regardless of size, that is capable of adjusting its operations based on signals sent by the utility grid. One example of a GEB is a 50-story commercial office building that adjusts the temperature and level of air conditioning based on real-time building occupancy, and communicates this data with the local utility, informing the utility when it has capacity to shed load. In such a scenario, the GEB can store thermal energy and act rather remarkably like a battery. Another example of a GEB is a single-family residential home that receives a real-time price signal from the utility and adjusts the thermostat automatically. Successful GEB adoption requires a concerted effort across multiple sectors, from the utilities and the regulators to hardware manufacturers to solution providers and end-customers, with each playing an important role. Utilities need to be able to send and receive grid signals, regulators need to leverage policy to encourage GEB adoption, industry players need to produce the hardware and software to enable buildings to become interactive, and customers need to be willing to invest in and adopt GEBs. In these early stages of GEBs, policy changes can and must play a critical role. Policymakers have the ability to help accelerate GEB acceptance and deployment by various means, such as through

legislation, adoption of new energy codes, or strategic regulation. For example, in 2019, California signed the “Clean Power, Smart Power” bill (SB49), into law, which directs the California Energy Commission (CEC) to encourage appliance manufacturers to develop smart appliances. Smart appliances are able to communicate with parties outside of the home, supporting grid integration, which SB49 also encourages. However, while there are various smart appliances currently on the market, most are cost prohibitive and were not developed with grid interactivity in mind. By incentivizing companies and manufacturers to increase the capabilities, development, and production of smart appliances, SB49 is expected to help drive down the cost of smart appliances, which will accelerate their adoption and evolution, ultimately leading to more GEBs on the market. Southern Company is another example of how a utility can embrace and leverage GEBs for the benefit of the grid. As the utility and load balancing authority for its service territory, Southern Company funded an R&D project in Birmingham, AL to understand how smart residential homes could interact with their grid. In the case of Reynolds Landing, Southern Company partnered with a local developer to create a 62-home smart neighborhood on its own “island-able” microgrid. The neighborhood has its own solar field, battery array, and natural gas generator, totaling approximately 1MW of output. The new homes were built to what the project developers deemed to be a possible future building standard, and all homes were outfitted with smart technology, such as connected heat pump water heaters and connected central air systems. Within the home, the water heaters and central air communicate to optimize electric demand within the home. Once optimization occurs within one individual home, then the whole neighborhood optimizes based on the available output and storage capacity of the solar, storage, and gas generation. Even if government and regulators pass policy that supports and accelerates the production of GEBs and the utilities prepare to send and receive signals, the customers still need to adopt the new technology and install GEB technology in their buildings. There are a number of questions a customer needs to consider when choosing what to install. What does the customer want to control — is it the HVAC, the lighting, hot water? Why does the customer want to control it — to save money, increase energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions? How will the technology connect to the grid — over the internet, cell towers, radio? Technology solutions, such as BOSS Controls, allow building operators to monitor and control building electricity loads all the way down to the circuit. With this level of control, building operators can have a better understanding of their building’s energy use, allowing them to make more energy efficient choices and adjust their operations based on whatever signals they receive. Decarbonizing the built environment in old and complex cities like New York is a daunting challenge, which calls for modernizing the electric grid and the infrastructure, not to mention a myriad of buildings. Smart and interactive solutions like GEBs have the capability to sufficiently streamline and accelerate this process, and help NYC meet its ambitious goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2050. It’s up to policymakers to kickstart the adoption and deployment of GEBs, but it’s up to utilities, manufacturers, and building owners/operators to make it a reality through working in concert. This article is part of the Distributed Energy Resources - Special Issue - 10/2020, click here for more. Zach Sussman, Director of Build Environment, joined Build Edison in February 2020, where his responsibilities include advising clients on go-to-market strategies for early stage energy technology for buildings and building-to-grid solutions. Are you working on a GEB project? Share your insights and add to the discussion on the AESP-Energy Central EE community here. Back to top

The following executive summaries of current news items were written for Strategies after being compiled from various news sources. Arizona Regulators Give OK to Requiring More Energy Efficiency From Utilities The Arizona Corporation Commission has voted 4-1 to increase the state's efficiency standard that was originally approved in 2010. The new standard would require utilities to create enough energy- efficiency programs and changes by 2030 that equal 35 percent of their 2020 peak demand. The standard also includes requirements that ensure utilities are workings towards their goal every year. Currently, Arizona-based power companies are required to use efficiency measures that meet 22 percent of their energy demand by 2020. Despite general agreement on the efficiency proposals, the commission is still working on a proposal for the state's overall renewable energy standard. The current renewable-energy standard requires power companies to get 15 percent of their power from renewable resources by 2025. Instead of increasing that percentage, commissioners are considering a requirement that utilities lower their carbon emissions over a certain time period. From \"Arizona Regulators Give OK to Requiring More Energy Efficiency From Utilities\" Arizona Republic (10/14/20) Randazzo, Ryan Back to top Generate Capital Provides Alturus With $600 Million for Energy-Efficiency Projects Generate Capital has acquired a minority stake in Alturus LLC, an energy efficiency company. As part of the deal, Generate Capital will finance $600 million worth of outsourced sustainable infrastructure projects. Alturus funds, develops, and operates appliances like energy-storage systems and generators that help corporate customers limit energy usage and waste. The company uses service- based contracts that allow customers to keep projects off their balance sheets while work is being done. When projects are complete, Alturus runs the completed projects while clients reap the benefits. This methodology means clients can reach sustainability goals without making upfront investments or taking resources from other parts of a company. Scott Jacobs, Generate Capital's chief executive and a co-founder, believes Alturus has a bright future as more companies focus on developing their own energy infrastructure to cut costs and carbon emissions. Meanwhile, a recent report from McKinsey & Co. projects $1.2 trillion in energy savings in the U.S. economy by the end of this year resulting from $520 billion in upfront investments. From \"Generate Capital Provides Alturus With $600 Million for Energy-Efficiency Projects\" Wall Street Journal (10/06/20) Garcia, Luis Back to top U.S. Department of Energy Provides $65 Million for ‘Connected Communities’ of Buildings Powered to Transform Electric System The Department of Energy (DOE) has announced a $65 million funding opportunity to expand the DOE's network of grid-interactive efficient building communities throughout the country. The 125 million homes and commercial buildings in the country use about 40 percent of the country's energy, 74 percent of its electricity, and are responsible for a large portion of peak electricity demand. Connected communities can use technological advancements to more effectively manage and deploy

grid-scale energy efficiency and distributed energy resources. Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Daniel Simmons said, “Our Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings Initiative helps the U.S. further modernize its power grid and thus improve reliability, integrate renewable power sources, improve environmental performance, and make electricity more affordable for America’s households and businesses.” From \"U.S. Department of Energy Provides $65 Million for ‘Connected Communities’ of Buildings Powered to Transform Electric System\" Department of Energy News Release (10/13/20) Back to top Midwest Cities Show More Improvement in Annual Efficiency Scorecard The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy has released its annual city scorecard. U.S. cities in the Northeast and West Coast populated much of the list, but St. Paul, Minn. and St. Louis, Mo. were the two most improved cities. St. Paul moved from 31st on the list to 16th and St. Louis rose from 36th to 28th. St. Paul's improvement was driven by a new building benchmark policy and a plan to cut the amount of car traffic in the city. St. Louis moved up on the list after adopting a building energy performance standard that was the first of its kind in the Midwest. Cleveland, Columbus, Grand Rapids, Cincinnati, and Milwaukee were also Midwest cities to make the top 20 on the scorecard. New York, Seattle, and Boston claimed the top three spots on the scorecard. David Ribeiro, lead author of the scorecard, said the appearance of so many Midwestern cities signals the potential these cities have in terms of energy efficiency and conservation. He said, “There is the opportunity for cities to continue prioritizing energy efficiency and renewable energy. In terms of how that will actually shape up, it’s open to question. All city agencies will be under pressures, budgets will be strapped next year. It matters how leadership in cities prioritizes the staff that would implement the programs.\" From \"Midwest Cities Show More Improvement in Annual Efficiency Scorecard\" Energy News Network (10/06/20) Lyderson, Kari Back to top North Carolina Can Save $5.9 Billion in Electricity Costs – ACEEE According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), North Carolina can save $5.9 billion in energy costs over the next 20 years by implementing energy efficiency measures. North Carolina recently set a goal to cut greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector by 70 percent by 2030. The ACEEE says energy efficiency efforts can contribute 11 percent of the needed emissions reductions that will help the state reach its goal. The ACEEE says the state can achieve its goal by creating minimum energy savings targets for utility programs that help customers improve efficiency. State officials should also remove obstacles that prevent industrial facilities from participating in utility-sponsored energy efficiency programs. The ACEEE also recommends that energy efficiency programs be expanded to rural, low-income, and renter families, and agricultural and small businesses. Officials also recommend closing loopholes in building energy codes and adopt tougher codes in the future. From \"North Carolina Can Save $5.9 Billion in Electricity Costs – ACEEE\" Smart Energy International (10/07/2020) Gold, Rachel Back to top New Jersey Utilities to Push Customers to Use Less Gas, Electricity

Six of New Jersey's utilities have submitted filings that would boost spending intended to lower electric and gas consumption by customers. In total, the utilities have proposed spending $865 million on their programs. The spending would be spread out over the next three years and would comply with a state mandate to invest in energy efficiency programs. The filings from the utilities include proposals for energy efficiency upgrades, rebates on energy efficiency appliances, and assistance for low- and moderate-income households. For example, Atlantic City Electric wants to spend $99 million on its energy efficiency programs. The company says $600,000 of that amount would go towards workforce development throughout the state. Rockland Electric and New Jersey Natural Gas have proposed spending $18 million and $249 million, respectively. However, it is unlikely that all the plans will be approved by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. The various energy efficiency programs, if approved, are expected to have a modest impact on residential energy bills. From \"New Jersey Utilities to Push Customers to Use Less Gas, Electricity\" NJ Spotlight (09/30/20) Johnson, Tom Back to top Connecticut Bill Would Invite Competition to Run Efficiency Programs The Energy and Technology Committee in the Connecticut Legislature is reviewing a package of reforms that includes a proposal that would make utilities compete for control of energy efficiency programs. Specifically, the proposal would allow the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) to solicit proposals from third parties to operate the state’s energy efficiency programs. DEEP commissioner Katie Dykes says the proposal would ensure the state has the best energy efficiency programs while lowering administrative costs. Other supporters say the proposal could lead to the introduction of new ideas from the private sector. However, Rep. Jonathan Steinberg (D-Westport) and his colleagues believe the current efficiency programs are running smoothly and do not see a reason to change them. Eversource and United Illuminating do not support the proposal calling it \"punitive in nature.\" They also point out that their energy efficiency programs have been recognized by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. From \"Connecticut Bill Would Invite Competition to Run Efficiency Programs\" Energy News Network (09/22/20) Prevost, Lisa Back to top ComEd Energy Efficiency Program Nets Customer Savings of $5 Billion ComEd reports that an energy efficiency program launched in 2019 has resulted in $5 billion in savings by customers. That program includes 35 separate offers, yielded 53 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions reductions, and help power 5.2 million homes. Joe Dominguez, ComEd CEO, said, “Thanks to the ComEd Energy Efficiency Program, the average customer has saved about $1,250 by participating in the offerings – that’s enough to cover the cost of an average residential energy bill for 15 months.\" The program offered by the company included free home energy assessments, free installation of energy-saving smart appliances, rebates for energy efficient appliances, free facility assessments at commercial properties, incentives for HVAC upgrades, and more. From \"ComEd Energy Efficiency Program Nets Customer Savings of $5 Billion\" Daily Energy Insider (10/12/20) Galford, Chris Back to top

How Transparent Solar Panels + 'Quantum Dots' Could Harvest Energy on an Architectural Scale Designing transparent solar cells that, when sandwiched between the panes of double-glazed windows, inconspicuously harvest energy from sunlight faces the challenge of maximizing the cell's energy efficiency while maintaining transparency. University of Michigan (UM) scientists in August achieved a new efficiency record for color-neutral, transparent solar cells, realizing 8.1 percent efficiency and 43.3 percent transparency with an organic design. \"Windows, which are on the face of every building, are an ideal location for organic solar cells because they offer something silicon can't, which is a combination of very high efficiency and very high visible transparency,\" said UM professor Stephen Forrest. Transparent solar panels could use the energy absorbed by window glass to feed into the building's electrical needs. In the meantime, New Mexico-based UbiQD is continuing to develop transparent solar panels that look exactly like regular glass, which harvest solar power using quantum dots, or microscopic particles that manipulate light. This year the company teamed with quantum dot maker Nanosys to develop luminescent greenhouse films called UbiGro. Installed above plants, UbiGro is a layer of light that helps plants get more sunlight, by applying fluorescence to create a more optimal light spectrum for crops. From \"How Transparent Solar Panels + 'Quantum Dots' Could Harvest Energy on an Architectural Scale\" DesignBoom (09/07/20) Stevens, Philip Back to top New York Sets Minimum 3-Year Term for New Load Management Programs to Drive More Energy Storage The New York Public Service Commission (PSC) has changed demand response program rules intended to spur development of energy storage projects. The rules encourage utilities to obtain dynamic load management (DLM) resources for terms of at least three years while also maintaining other tariff-based DLM programs. The PSC says current DLM program guidelines \"pay for yearly performance and result in a bias towards short-term, low-capital investment solutions.\" Officials say the new program rules will help New York City reach energy storage benchmarks. The city hopes to obtain 1,500 megawatts of energy storage by 2025. Demand response resources can also participate in the new DLM program. Experts say the programs will also help utilities reduce peak loads and respond to specific system needs during periods when demand for energy is high. From \"New York Sets Minimum 3-Year Term for New Load Management Programs to Drive More Energy Storage\" Utility Dive (09/24/20) Walton, Robert Back to top Energy Efficiency: Budget Proposal Seeks $100 Million for Untapped Energy Savings The Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC) has proposed increasing the amount of ratepayer funding for the state's energy efficiency program. The proposal was included in the PSC's budget request to Governor Tony Evers, and would add $100 million more a year to the Focus on Energy program. Officials say the proposal could result in 50 percent more energy saved, avoid costly power company investments, and promote job growth. Analysts say the program is the most cost effective ways to lower energy bills and slow climate change, but it is not meeting its full potential. Focus on Energy is a ratepayer-funded program that encourages energy efficiency and renewable energy by providing technical guidance and rebates that help businesses and homeowners make energy

efficiency improvements. For the past five years, the budget for the program has been about $100 million. Audits of the program have found that it generates between $3 and $5 in benefits for every $1 spent and has lower administrative costs than similar programs throughout the nation. The program is popular in the state, but the new proposal from the PSC could be challenged by business groups and lawmakers in the General Assembly. From \"Energy Efficiency: Budget Proposal Seeks $100 Million for Untapped Energy Savings\" Madison.com (09/29/20) Hubbuch, Chris Back to top News summaries © copyright 2020 SmithBucklin Editorial Committee Adeline Lui, Editor, [email protected] Chris Baggett, board member Jeff Ihnen, Chair, board member Sherry McCormack, board member Tracy Narel, member Laura Orfanedes, board member Elizabeth Titus, member Greg Wikler, board member Click here to unsubscribe. 15215 S. 48th St., Suite 170 Phoenix, AZ 85044 PHONE: 480-704-5900 - www.aesp.org