Monday, July 11, 2016

Microgrids and Community Energy Projects: Distributed Generation for the (Currently) Limited Niche Markets of Off Grid Backup Power, Closer-to-Usage Applications, Meeting RPSs, and Solar Investment for Those Without Ideal Rooftop Access



Microgrids and Community Energy Projects: Distributed Generation for the (Currently) Limited Niche Markets of Off Grid Backup Power, Closer-to-Usage Applications, Meeting RPSs, and Solar Investment for Those without Ideal Rooftop Access 

A microgrid is defined at Wikipedia as:

 “a localized grouping of electricity sources and loads that normally operates connected to and synchronous with the traditional centralized electrical grid (macrogrid), but can disconnect and function autonomously as physical and/or economic conditions dictate.”

They also give another definition from the U.S. DOE Microgrid Exchange Group: 

“A microgrid is a group of interconnected loads and distributed energy resources within clearly defined electrical boundaries that acts as a single controllable entity with respect to the grid. A microgrid can connect and disconnect from the grid to enable it to operate in both grid-connected or island-mode.”

Another DOE definition

“a distribution network that incorporates a variety of possible DER that can be optimized and aggregated into a single system that can balance loads and generation with or without energy storage and is capable of islanding whether connected or not connected to a traditional utility power grid.”

A very small microgrid is usually referred to as a nanogrid. Nanogrids more resemble a single distributed energy source. They are typically less than 100 kW with battery backup. A version larger than a microgrid is typically called a virtual power plant (VPP). The boundaries can be blurred as VPPs can incorporate microgrids and nanogrids as DERs. Two-way power flow is important for any DERs and needs to be managed with software and smart grid technology in order to remotely, automatically, and in real-time dispatch DERs which can be linked to wholesale power markets. This can provide value to both the utility and to the DER and microgrid operators.

While microgrids are being touted as the next big thing among renewable energy enthusiasts, distributed generation advocates, and anti-fossil fuel activists, it should be pointed out that the applicability of microgrids is currently limited to certain situations. Eventually, as smart grid technologies are more widely implemented there will be more opportunity for distributed energy applications. So far as it is happening on a small-scale there continues to be some disruption of utility grid management processes and adaptation requirements. By one estimate the current U.S. microgrid market makes up a mere 2 MW of energy production which is quite a small blip. However, it is projected to rise fairly rapidly as the practicality of microgrids is applied to applicable situations. Peter Fox-Penner, in his book, Smart Power, states:

“Many decades from now, much more power will be made locally, within smaller-scale versions of our current grid known as microgrids. Microgrids, which will range widely in size, will have a variety of local and regional power sources as well as power storage options and will also often draw on larger, relatively distant sources.”

    “We will routinely control and measure the cost of most of the energy-consuming devices we own. In buildings that are grid- or micro-grid connected, all significant devices will communicate seamlessly with the software that runs the resident grid. Parts of what is now the single central grid will become parts of microgrids, and the distinction between the Big Grid and regional and local networks of microgrids will be a matter of degree, not black and white.
 
Off Grid Backup Power

Off grid backup power is one of the most useful applications for microgrids. Facilities like hospitals where access to energy is a life-and-death matter require backup energy sources when the grid goes down. Other facilities like schools and certain industries can also benefit from microgrid backup power. Industries requiring large-scale refrigeration of perishable food productsd are particularly susceptible to power disruption. The microgrids can also, of course, be used for primary power and also be tied to the grid when the grid is running to take advantage of using the grid for storage and extending battery life. In places where power outages are common or tend to be long-lived due to weather, microgrids can be advantageous. Of course, if snow is the weather issue it should be noted that solar power can be quite poor in the winter season and snow removal from solar panels would be a requirement. Backup microgrids can also utilize small natural gas turbines where gas supplies are available or as is more common digital generators that run on diesel, gasoline, or propane. These can help charge any battery banks if battery backup is integrated.

Closer-to-Usage Applications of Decentralized Power and Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

Decentralized power has the ability to be used closer to where it is produced, reducing power losses from transmission, which can make it more economic to buy once built. Without the need to be delivered by large overhead power lines it can also be more resistant to storm damage. Local power can be more reliable in terms of stable voltages, frequencies, and loads. Traditional centralized power generation was built closer to sources of fossil energy as well as closer to sources of water for cooling. 

Microgrids may also incorporate combined heat and power (CHP) which may give them an efficiency between 66 and 80% rather than below 50% with traditional centralized power. Basically, in any process that produces enough waste heat, that heat can be converted into power by reciprocating engines, gas turbines, steam boilers and turbines, microturbines, fuelcells, and more. Microgrids can incorporate other local sources of power as well including biogas from landfills and anaerobic digestors, waste-to-energy facilities and other biomass plants. The excess stored heat may allow for significant off grid functioning as well.

Community Solar

While community energy projects may involve multiple generation sources including wind, micro-hydro, and fossil fuel backup, it is solar that has and will continue to be the main source by far. Energy storage may be added in the form of batteries or even fuel cells where applicable. Community solar is another niche market for microgrids and distributed generation. People like solar power because it is comparably environmentally benign. The first community solar project was brought online in 2006 in the state of Washington by a municipal utility. It also offers local groups a chance to maximize their use of local solar energy in models where small-scale smart grid and energy trading technologies are set-up as in the “blockchain” method described in the reference. This is mostly limited and is really a “feel-good” sort of thing for those who want to be rid of fossil fuel usage. In order to work in the model noted for Brooklyn, New York it still requires the utility grid to be used for temporary storage unless significant battery storage is installed. It is an interesting model for solar-only distributed generation on an experimental internet-based local distributed energy market with prices fluctuating according to demand, also called dynamic pricing and time-of-use pricing. 

Other community solar models such as solar gardens and solar demonstration installations for schools offer similar economics to residential rooftop solar and vary according to area. Community solar is good for people who want to invest in solar with little upfront investment capital and those who do not have ideal roof space or roof orientation and whose neighbors in the project have some of it to spare. Roof suitability is definitely an issue since by one estimate as much as ¾ of U.S. roofs were deemed unsuitable for solar panels. Project economics can vary quite a bit. Utilities or third parties (like Solar City) could own and lease the systems and customers could pay monthly through higher utility bills where the generation offsets the cost and it is simplified and integrated into the single bill. Financed individual residential solar systems do get quite low interest rates but any financing lowers the economics from a full purchase – and the economics are not that great even with full purchase. Community solar participants usually subscribe on a cost per watt basis which has been dropping over the years. Subscribers are also eligible for the 30% federal tax credit for solar installation.

Electric co-ops and municipal utilities represent the major market share of community solar. 350 KW is a typical size of the electric co-op projects but some projects up to about 750 KW are planned. Even investor-owned utilities (IOUs) are becoming interested in community solar. They prefer larger systems and those that can provide some current or future demand response and grid balancing capabilities. They also have more regulatory hurdles than co-ops and municipal utilities. How to value the systems on the utility customers’ bills is an issue of current interest. Utilities can essentially put community solar projects where they want them so as to optimize their own economics while also satisfying customer demand for solar which gives them both first mover advantage and tends to keep solar disruption where they would prefer it. They can utilize community solar to defer or avoid transmission and/or distribution upgrades as well as peaker plants.

In 2010 there were only two U.S. shared solar projects but now there are 111 projects administered by 77 utilities, mostly co-ops, in 26 states with a combined capacity of 106 MW. Community solar is expected to grow 59% annually through 2020 reaching an installed capacity of 534 MW. While that may sound like a lot it means the ability to meet the energy needs of about 10,000 households now and about 50,000 households in 2020 so community solar will remain a very minor part of the total electricity picture. Community solar is typically oversubscribed so that those wanting to exit the deal or those that default can be replaced by those on a waiting list. This can create some customer management issues and costs. The advantage is that those who subscribe to community solar rather than their own rooftop solar can control how much they invest and for how long. Due to the rooftop suitability and financial commitment requirements of rooftop solar it is very unlikely that rooftop solar and community solar will ever be in competition. Clean Energy Collective (CEC) has developed a software platform that integrates meter tracking with utility infrastructure and customer billing. Virtual net metering, where multiple customers receive apportioned credit for the system’s excess energy generation, is one of the major features of community solar in states that allow it. Currently, only a handful of states have shared solar policy mandates with a few more in either pilot stage or proposed. Several states are involved in negotiations between regulators, IOUs, and solar developers regarding rules for sizing and locations of projects. Not surprisingly, low income areas have been slow to get into community solar, obviously due to cost. Utilities need to be careful to avoid shifting costs of integrating community solar to non-participating customers which would be unfair. Co-ops can also get low-interest loans and other financing help through federal programs. In order to get the tax credit the co-ops may lease the system from the developer before buying it. IOUs have tended to develop larger community solar projects, siting and sizing them to best suit the needs of the IOU. This is a trend that is likely to continue. 

Solar Co-Ops

Another community solar model is that of the solar co-op. This is typically done by area or even county. Solar provider and installation companies may also initiate and support projects since they will benefit as the developer. Other organizations may also help to organize and even specialize in development of group solar projects. Sign-ups for county-wide solar co-ops in Ohio have had good turnout which suggests many people want to go solar in the community solar format. Going solar as a group can offer discounted prices from installers as this aggregation can allow them to eliminate some duplicate costs for things like planning, permitting, and scheduling. These are also typically much bigger projects for the providers than individual residential projects.
      
Utility Participation

Many microgrid projects are likely an annoyance to utilities but there are some advantages. As in the community blockchain model mentioned above they can test out how solar-only distributed energy will work on the local level in various places and times. Such projects added up can help utilities meet their renewable energy requirements for state RPS standards. It can also perhaps give them more options for offering their customers chances to buy renewable energy in the form of state renewable energy credits which also helps them meet their RPS requirements. Eventually, utilities may be able to benefit from these distributed energy sources, especially if they are rich in battery storage so they could be utilized with software as backup power banks reducing the need for peaker plants, so they contribute to “costs avoided.” 

Distributed Energy Resources

Distributed energy resources, or DERs, also called distributed generation (DG), refer to energy production sources that are not derived from large centralized power plants, centralized wind farms, or centralized solar farms. Residential rooftop solar is a major source as are small combined heat and power (CHP) plants, as well as other small sources like small digital generators running on gasoline, diesel, propane, or natural gas. Battery storage can also be considered a distributed energy resource when added to small systems. The capability of running off-grid due to battery back-up, the connecting of different generation resources as a unit, and grid connection as a unit such as group net-metering – make a distributed energy source a microgrid. One source estimated that there are a mere 2 MW of microgrid capacity in the U.S. That is likely to grow drastically in the near future and likely already is growing. New energy generation bundling and sharing ideas are popping up all over.

According to Navigant Research cost effective DERs could replace a staggering 320 GW of centralized generation from 2014-2023. They see the current solar-plus-storage going from the current 2MW(?) to about 1800 MW by 2025. These is a very bold prediction. The whole notion is predicated on ‘software managed energy storage.’ In my previous post about energy storage I note multiple times about the problem of cost. Navigant expects 30-40% of residential solar (basically nanogrids) to be aggregated into VPPs by 2025 as smart grid technology is more widely implemented. Thus aggregated residential solar, typically with some battery backup, and other DERs become VPPs.  This could create huge opportunities for ancillary services through DER management. Time-of-use bill management creates value for the utility customers that have residential solar as well as other DER owners. Smart grid technologies also include smart home IOT technologies such as smart plug-load controllers, smart thermostats, and programmable water heaters. In such systems where battery backup becomes widespread, each house can island as a nanogrid, the whole block can island as a microgrid, and in providing demand response the whole linked system can be considered a VPP. Utilities may even set up such banked or aggregated nanogrids into VPPs, charging upfront payments but benefiting from the DER demand response services. Thus the utility manages the individual solar-plus-storage residential solar nanogrids. Still, these projects are not economically feasible in today’s pricing, either for the customer or the utility. The cost of solar and particularly the cost of storage will have to come down further. The technology is proven and works but by some estimates the battery storage costs would have to be about 20% of what they are now to be truly economic. It seems that will keep these “technology demonstrations” as just that and not as a massive replacement of centralized generation any time soon as Navigant suggests.

A New “Business Model” for Residential Solar: The Scalable ‘Transverters Plus Smart Internal Demand Response’ Model

This is a rather fascinating model where potentially up to 50 homes or more could be tied together and utilized by the grid for demand response and/or utilize internal demand response through plug computers and smart demand response modules analyzing and adjusting power usage on short time scales so that demand response could be maximized, individual electrical systems could be downsized (from avg. 100 amp to 50 amp), and solar use could be maximized. Battery backup is used in these systems mostly for short time interval demand response and frequency and voltage balancing so that battery life is extended. These systems could be grid tied in large enough blocks to provide some grid-scale demand response which could significantly increase their value. Alternatively, they could be backed up with digital generators running on gasoline, diesel, propane, or natural gas to help with base load when needed. This could better provide optimal sizing of generators rather than oversizing them since these digital generators are capable of revving up and idling down in response to power surges which saves on their fuel usage and thus emissions. Scaling up the systems from home size to nanogrid to microgrid should be easy and this scalable system may become an important microgrid type. The biggest obstacles to widespread adoption of such systems is of course cost, typically initial cost. Battery life and replacement costs would also be an issue as would potential system maintenance issues. Large power using appliances operation would be sequenced to prevent surges as in any IOT-style smart-home technology. Remote system operation, including remote generator startup is also employed. For the homeowner, these systems seem to be about 50-60% the value of a comparable grid-tied system with the advantages that they can run off grid and remove problems with grid integration of solar. Thus they could help the utilities by diverting distributed solar away from the need to be integrated and in the big system cases they could aid utilities by providing demand response ancillary services. Several pilot projects are underway now to test these systems. It is hard to see, however, how widespread adoption of them could take place without the initial costs coming down. Both this model and the similar blockchain model seem to be applicable for urban environments where homes are close together, where optimal rooftop access can be shared, and where net-metering can be aggregated. Heart Transverter, the company leading this model touts these systems with the digital generator back up as ideal energy systems to run cell phone towers. It may be interesting to see how many are adopted in future by cell towers. 

Solar-Plus-Storage Municipal-Scale Microgrids

Just recently it was announced that the first municipal solar-plus-storage project in the U.S. will be built in the city of Minster in Western Ohio. The city hosts a few large industrial plants which makes its power needs large and the need for uninterrupted service vital. The batteries are set to provide black start capabilities and to be accepted to bid as a generator for the PJM interconnection frequency regulation market, in addition to providing the utility with peak shaving, power quality stabilization, and voltage regulation. These abilities allow the project to “stack value streams.” In order to perform all these the functions the batteries had to be sized large. In fact, optimizing battery size needs for any system that includes multiple applications such as back-up energy, internal demand response, and grid balancing, is important for optimizing costs. Reliability needs need to be accurately assessed. The Minster project is financed by a backer with investors. Municipal utilities are known for their ability to get projects done quickly. This one is slated to take 18 months which is quick for a utility-scale project. Of course the economics are dependent on the 30% federal tax credit (ITC) as well as state renewable energy credits (SRECs) which typically add another 5-10% of subsidization. The project is dependent on a power controller in the form of embedded software.

The microgrid in Minster is planned to come after the project is built in order to prevent blackouts at the industries which could cause significant financial damage. It is estimated that $26 billion is lost due to sustained outages and $52 billion due to momentary outages every year. The municipal-scale microgrid could instantly “island” if power from the utility (Dayton Light and Power) is disrupted. The microgrid could also incorporate wind power and other distributed generation. Like the solar-plus-storage project it will be financed by a public-private partnership. Since “munis” and co-ops do not have to answer to shareholders or depend on costly and time-consuming approval of large transmission projects and for a few other reasons as well – they are more suitable for developing microgrids. Traditionally, as noted, they have become known as well for implementing energy projects quickly.

An important issue with solar-plus-storage is battery life. While the life of a solar system may be 25-30 years (with about 1% panel efficiency loss per year avg.) the life of lithium ion batteries is in the range of 5-10 years. This means at least two battery replacements during the life of the solar system which obviously would add a significant amount to costs. I assume the replacement costs would also be subsidized by the 30% federal credit and possibly other incentives as well. Even so, if such replacement costs are not accounted for in economic analyses then they are basically not accurate. The replacement costs would also add to the total subsidization per KWh, presumably. There is also some power usage, or loss, in charging as well as discharging battery systems (10-20%? – I still have yet to find good data) which also affects the economics significantly. For a municipal energy system that requires long-term economics just over break-even, this may not be a big problem, but it seems to me it constrains any large takeoff of solar-plus-storage which would contradict the Navigant Research predictions. 

The Energy Democracy Movement and Issues Between Utilities and Community-Based DERs

One offshoot of the microgrid and community energy trend is the energy democracy movement. This movement can be quite political and may share the view of the growing fringe Democracy Over Corporations movement and is basically a foray into anti-corporatism. Some liberal universities are aligning with such trends. It is one way that anti-corporatists are diversifying their community focused activities in order to advance an ideology. In a less ideological way perhaps is the energy democracy advocated by John Farrell of the Institute for Local Self Reliance (ILSR). They advocate for more energy generation owned by individuals, energy co-ops, municipalities, and the community. While it is true that the distribution end and two-way flow from and to it will be a  growing feature of the whole grid system in the future there are many utilities (‘munis’, IOUs, and co-ops) planning for it while also building centralized plants, mostly natural gas ones to replace coal. The ILSR thinks that not enough investment is going to DER and too much for old-style distribution upgrades. They are advocating that the utilities hedge their bets on undeveloped and costly technologies like DERs and EVs. There is much debate about how the utilities should integrate these competitors by buying their energy and giving them free or cheap transportation services. Relying on old business models where utilities seek to profit from energy sales rather than energy services is slowly fading, too slowly for some. This revenue decoupling has succeeded modestly (or not according to some) in California and will likely occur everywhere eventually as the values of energy services are commodified in ways that are agreed by utilities, utility commissions, regulators, federal and state governments, and power customers. Utilities traditionally set rates for a certain degree of guaranteed profit. Since they will have to increasingly compete with DERs they tend to see that as a threat even though there are some potential benefits of utility-DER collaboration.

The German “Energy Transition” has brought power generation back to people and communities with mixed results. They are currently at the limits of “grid integration,” so it should be interesting to see what happens going forward. The Community Rights Movement is another similar grassroots effort toward local control of resources, industry, and regulation. While all of these movements are certainly forces to be reckoned with, they by and large tend to be confrontational here in the U.S. rather than collaborative as well as biased and often uncooperative, and uncompromising. They tend to despise natural gas due to the backlash against fracking. This is unfortunate since creative integration of renewables and small-scale natural gas can solve many local energy issues adequately. Perhaps recent happenings with the firing of aggressive solar advocate Bryan Miller from both Sunrun and the Alliance for Solar Choice (TASC) amidst the net-metering wars between utilities and solar advocates in Arizona and Nevada indicate that the solar industry in general is moving toward a collaborative rather than a confrontational approach, one which may have perhaps prevented the recent Nevada move to eliminate net metering. Another indication is Solar City’s hiring of former FERC chairman Jon Wellinghoff as chief policy officer. 

There is already backlash against “corporate solar,” or “Big Solar,” larger companies getting into installation and gobbling up smaller companies. These bigger companies like Solar City, Vivint, Sunrun, and SunEdison can take advantage of economies of scale, process and product standardization, volume purchasing, on-line planning and sales, and market saturation. While some may see this as less ‘personalized’ service, there are significant cost advantages to the customers and with solar’s tough economics adding value for the customer is important. However, it also means less high-paying career opportunities in solar sales and installation. For this reason some are advocating for unions in the solar industry. The recent offer from Tesla to buy Solar City may be seen as a consolidation of the natural complementary industries of solar and storage or it may be seen as Big Solar-Plus-Storage. While DER in the form of residential solar may seem to give more power to the people as independent energy producers they are also benefited by subsidization and force their competitors, the utilities, to buy and transmit their excess power, which may help and/or hinder the utilities. Unless and until solar-plus-storage becomes truly economic, which may take several decades rather than one, the DER producers will be dependent on the macrogrid. They also depend on the macrogrid to become more economic as providing demand response services to the macrogrid will make their installations pay out faster. Consolidation in the solar and battery storage industries (Big Solar and Big Storage) will also help their installations pay out faster. Thus, the ‘power from the people’ advocates depend now and will depend for some time to come on both government handouts and corporate handouts. The most valuable corporate handouts come from both Big Utility and Big Solar/Storage and yet it is no secret that many in that camp would love to ‘bite the corporate hands that feed them,’ only if it were economically possible. Utility business models are changing and will continue to change to integrate DERs while also maximizing value for their shareholders and their customers. The confrontational approach of the more radical energy democracy advocates is not the most sensible approach since they are dependent on those they choose to see more as adversaries than collaborators. Hopefully, the future of energy democracy advocacy will be more reasonable and less confrontational. That would be in everyone’s best interest. It is also true that utilities need to adapt to DERs, not as a threat but as a collaborative opportunity. Even so, they also need to wait until the solar and storage technologies become cheaper and the smart grid technologies become more functional and widespread for any widespread adoption of pro-DER business models. 

The current state-level debates about net-metering show that the utilities do not want to be forced to lose value and even some efficiency gains by integrating DERs. Even so, as quasi-monopolies with guaranteed profit structures one might think they could be more adaptable. Big utilities are not, in that sense, free market corporations, but government-assisted entities which should thus have at least a little more accountability to the public, both in power rates and integration of DERs. It is complex but models will come in time, especially if DER costs go down. Peter Fox-Penner stresses the need for reforms in both energy pricing (rate-structure) and oversight. He gives two versions of new business models for utilities: the Smart Integrator model for states which have adopted deregulation where energy distribution companies transition from energy providers to energy service providers; and the Energy Services Utility for states without deregulation and with predominant IOUs which develop subsidiaries that focus on the value of energy services. Traditional energy companies in Germany, where renewables and DER penetration is very high, have suffered significant revenue losses and plant closures. Such revenue losses, says Fox-Penner, may force traditional energy companies to become Smart Integrators and Energy Service Utilities. The companies argue that the costs associated with integrating DERs must be born equally by those who do not own DERs, making power costs rise for all. It is a rather important paradox for the traditional power industry. Fox-Penner asks:

“What kind of industry would invest one or two trillion dollars simply to sell less and less of its product as its customers took control, and made more of their own energy, and other companies grabbed a larger and larger share of the value chain”

In addition, due to these needed grid investments, upgrades, efficiency investments, and increased operating costs, the price per KWh for customers will rise even as electricity consumption remains steady or even drops. There is value to DER but in order to harvest it the utilities need to retool their models. It seems that it will remain a difficult and controversial task. Fox-Penner also notes four fundamental objectives of modern power sectors: 1) adequacy, which is simply sufficient energy supply to avoid shortages; 2) reliability, which means uninterrupted supply – this is extremely important for certain industries – base-load power sources and energy storage are required to mitigate the reliability issues of renewables; 3) affordable power availability for all – this is very important now for developing countries; and 4) decarbonization – this favors renewables, increases their public value, and justifies the increased costs of developing and integrating them.  
   
References:

Driven by Power Outages and Savings, Towns Look to Microgrid – by George M. Walsh, Associated Press, posted Feb. 7, 2016

Microgrid Presentation at Ohio University, presentation and discussion, Jan. 28, 2016

Community Solar Poised for Growth as Utilities Gain Confidence, Familiarity – by Herman K. Trabish, in Utility Dive, April 7, 2016

Power From the People: How to Organize, Finance, and Launch Local Energy Projects – by Greg Pahl (Post-Carbon Institute/Chelsea Green Publishing, 2012)

Beyond Utility 2.0 to Energy Democracy: Why a Technological Transformation in the Electricity Business Should Unlock an Economic Transformation that Grants Power to the People – by John Farrell, ILSR Democratic Energy Initiative, December 2014

The World’s First Consumer Blockchain Energy Transaction Begins “Power to the People” Revolution in New York – by PennEnergy Editorial Staff, April 11, 2016

Microgrid – entry at Wikipedia.com

Addressing the Challenge of Distributed Energy Resource Growth and Keeping the Lights On: How the Electric Utility Industry is Coping with the Rise of Distributed Energy Resources – white paper form westmonroepartners.com

Smart Power: Climate Change, the Smart Grid, and the Future of Electric Utilities, Anniversary Edition – by Peter Fox-Penner (Island Press, 2014)

Fuel Cells Are a Good Partner for Microgrids, But Costs Limit Deployment – by Peter Maloney, posted at Utility Dive, May 10, 2016

Implementing Microgrids: Controlling Campus, Community Power Generation – by Paul Barter, PE, ESD; and Edward T. Borer, PE, Princeton University, in Consulting, Specifying Engineer, June 8, 2015
 
Optimization of a Battery Energy Storage System Using particle Swarm Optimization for Stand-Alone Microgrids (Abstract) – by T. Kerdphol, K. Fuji, Y. Mitani, M. Watanabe, and Y. Quddaih, in International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, Vol 81, pgs 32-39, October 2016

Heart Transverter – Residential Solar with Transverters – by Heart Akerson, CEO Heart Transverter, www.transverter.com
 
Unlocking the Value of Community Solar: Utilities Find Opportunity in the Inevitable Growth of Distributed Energy Resources – by Deloitte Center for Energy Solutions, Marlene Motyka, Andrew Slaughter, and Julia Berg, 2016

Add Value, Reduce Cost, Eliminate Risk: OCCUPY SOLAR OHIO – Commentary – by David Dwyer, in Green Energy Ohio News Magazine, Vol 9, Issue 1, Spring, 2016

The Lorain County Solar Co-Op Selects an Installer – by Luke Sulfridge, in Green Energy Ohio News Magazine, Vol 9, Issue 1, Spring, 2016

Fanning the Flames of Solar Enthusiasm: The Delaware County Solar Co-Operative – by Dave Carpenter, in Green Energy Ohio News Magazine, Vol 9, Issue 1, Spring, 2016

Inside the First Municipal Solar-Plus-Storage Project in the U.S. – by Herman K. Trabish, in Utility Dive, July 5, 2016

How Storage Can Help Solve the Distributed Energy ‘Death Spiral’ – by Herman K. Trabish, in Utility Dive, June 21, 2016

Bryan Miller Ousted from Sunrun and TASC: What Does It Mean for State Solar Advocacy – by Stephen Lacy, in Green Tech Media, July 7, 2016


No comments:

Post a Comment