2019 Utility Energy Storage Market...

2019 Utility Energy Storage Market SnapshotAugust 2019

2019 Utility Energy Storage Market Snapshot

SEPA | 2019 Utility Energy Storage Market Snapshot 2

Table of ContentsAbout the Report ...........................................................................................................................................................5

§ Survey Methodology and Survey Coverage .................................................................................................5Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................6

§ Market Overview ...................................................................................................................................................6 § Markets By Utility Type ........................................................................................................................................6 § A Market Primed for Growth .............................................................................................................................6

SEPA’s Top 10 Utility Energy Storage Rankings ...................................................................................................7National Market Overview .........................................................................................................................................8Residential Storage Market ........................................................................................................................................9

§ Residential Market—Policy Impacts ............................................................................................................ 10 § Residential Customer Programs ................................................................................................................... 11

Non-Residential Storage Market ........................................................................................................................... 12 § Role of Storage in Addressing Demand Charges .................................................................................... 13

Utility-Supply Storage Market ................................................................................................................................ 15 § 2018 Highlighted Energy Storage Projects ................................................................................................ 16 § Planned Projects ................................................................................................................................................. 17

Energy Storage Markets by Utility Type .............................................................................................................. 18 § Investor-Owned Utilities .................................................................................................................................. 19 § Electric Cooperatives ......................................................................................................................................... 20 § Public Power Utilities ........................................................................................................................................ 21

Energy Storage Policy Update ................................................................................................................................ 22 § Net Metering and Energy Storage ................................................................................................................ 22 § Energy Storage Studies .................................................................................................................................... 23 § Utility Planning Rules ........................................................................................................................................ 24 § Energy Storage Targets .................................................................................................................................... 25 § Clean Peak Standards ....................................................................................................................................... 25

A Market Primed for Growth .................................................................................................................................. 26 § Energy Storage Technologies ......................................................................................................................... 26

Appendix A: 2018 Energy Storage Capacity by State and Select Territories ......................................... 30Appendix B: Top 10 .................................................................................................................................................... 32Appendix C: Survey Participants ........................................................................................................................... 34

§ Federal/Generation & Transmission Utilities ........................................................................................... 34 § Distribution Utilities ........................................................................................................................................... 34



List of Tables Table 1: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Capacity (MWh) ..........................................................7Table 2: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Watt-Hours Per Customer (Wh/C) .......................7Table 3: 2017 to 2018 Energy Storage Growth by Sector (MWh) .................................................................8Table 4: State Energy Storage Targets ................................................................................................................ 25Table 5: Energy Storage Capacity by State and Territory ............................................................................. 30

Table 6: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Capacity (MWh) ....................................................... 32Table 7: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Watt-Hours Per Customer (Wh/C) .................... 32Table 8: Top 10 Utilities by Cumulative Energy Storage Capacity (MWh) ............................................... 33Table 9: Top 10 Utilities by Cumulative Energy Storage Watt-Hours Per Customer (Wh/C) ............ 33

List of Figures Title Page: 2018 Cumulative Energy Storage Deployment (MWh) ...............................................................1Figure 1: 2018 Annual Energy Storage Deployment (MWh) ...........................................................................6Figure 2: 2018 Annual Energy Storage Deployment Breakdown (MWh) ..................................................8Figure 3: 2018 Annual Residential Deployment (MWh) ...................................................................................9Figure 4: Top Utilities by 2018 Annual Residential Deployment (MWh).....................................................9Figure 5: Annual Residential Deployment ...........................................................................................................9Figure 6: 2016-2018 Annual HECO Customer-Owned Residential Battery Deployment (No. of Systems) .......................................................................................................................................................... 10Figure 7: Utility Interest in Customer-Owned Battery Storage Incentives ............................................. 11Figure 8: 2018 Annual Non-Residential Deployment (MWh) ...................................................................... 12Figure 9: Top Utilities by 2018 Annual Non-Residential Deployment (MWh) ........................................ 12Figure 10: Annual Non-Residential Deployment ............................................................................................. 12Figure 11: Non-Residential Battery Storage Incentive Trends .................................................................... 13Figure 12: 2018 Annual Utility-Supply Deployment (MWh) ......................................................................... 15Figure 13: Top Utilities by 2018 Annual Utility-Supply Deployment (MWh) ........................................... 15

Figure 14: Annual Utility-Supply Deployment .................................................................................................. 15Figure 15: 2016-2018 Annual Deployment Breakdown (MWh).................................................................. 18Figure 16: 2018 Cumulative IOU Deployment Breakdown (MWh) ........................................................... 19Figure 17: 2016-2018 Annual IOU Deployment by Sector ........................................................................... 19Figure 18: 2018 Cumulative Cooperative Deployment Breakdown (MWh) ........................................... 20Figure 19: 2016-2018 Annual Cooperative Deployment by Sector ........................................................... 20Figure 20: 2018 Cumulative Public Power Deployment Breakdown (MWh) ......................................... 21Figure 21: 2016-2018 Annual Public Power Deployment by Sector ......................................................... 21Figure 22: Examples of States Initiating or Completing Energy Storage Studies in 2018 or 2019 ............................................................................................................................................ 23Figure 23: States Considering Changes to Utility Planning Rules Since 2018 ....................................... 24Figure 24: Lithium-Ion Battery Prices .................................................................................................................. 26Figure 25: Energy Storage Technology Comparison by Average Discharge Duration and Average Installed Cost ($/kWh) .................................................................................................................... 27Figure 26: Energy Storage Applications .............................................................................................................. 29



AcknowledgementsSpecial thanks to the following SEPA staff members for their contributions to the data collection, development and review of this report: Josh Blockstein, Jarad Asselin, Medha Surampudy, Greg Merritt, Brenda Chew, Tom Bishop, Brad Benton, Jordan Nachbar, Ian Motley, Maliya Scott, Jen Szaro, Kevin McGrath, Chris Schroeder, Jared Leader, Ted Davidovich, Harry Cutler, Anneliese Gallagher, Conor Hanvey, and Forrest Pasturel.SEPA would like to thank our partners: Autumn Proudlove and her team at North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center for their energy storage policy insights, Energy Acuity, Scott Hammond and Mark Svrcek at Central Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., LouAnn Rone at Northern Indiana Public Service Company, Eric Kostecki at WPPI Energy, Michael Clavin at Tennessee Valley Authority, Chris Johnson at Blue Planet Energy, Ted Hilmes at KAMO Power, and Bob Gibson from Gibson Energy Insights.

AuthorsMac Keller, Research Associate Nick Esch, Research Manager Kate Strickland, Manager, Utility & Regulatory Strategy Trevor Gibson, Research Associate

About SEPAThe Smart Electric Power Alliance (SEPA) is an educational nonprofit that works to facilitate the electric power industry’s smart transition to a clean and modern energy future through education, research, standards and collaboration. SEPA offers a range of research initiatives and resources, as well as conferences, educational events, advisory services, and professional networking opportunities. To learn more and discover our pathways, visit www.sepapower.org.

Copyright© Smart Electric Power Alliance, 2019. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.

DisclaimerSEPA does not claim that this report is entirely complete and may be unintentionally missing information. SEPA advises readers to perform necessary due diligence before making decisions using this content. Please contact SEPA at [email protected] for additional information.

http://www.sepapower.org

mailto:[email protected]



About the Report

1 Figures derived from Energy Information Administration (EIA) Form 8612 See Appendix A for a full list of utility participants. Results in this section of the report are limited to the survey context, and should not be misinterpreted.

The Smart Electric Power Alliance (SEPA) began surveying electric utilities in 2007 to track the amount of solar power interconnected to the grid each year. The survey was expanded three years ago to collect energy storage and demand response deployment data. This 2019 Utility Energy Storage Market Snapshot summarizes 2018 energy storage interconnections based on the data collected from electric utilities, supplemented with SEPA’s updated trend analysis and insights that include market developments in the first half of 2019. The participating utilities represent more than 82 million customer accounts, or approximately 56% of all customer accounts throughout the U.S.1

Survey Methodology and Survey Coverage SEPA conducted its Annual Utility Survey between January and May 2019, using an online survey platform. 211 participating utilities2 throughout the United States and its territories provided cumulative and 2018 deployment data on grid interconnected energy storage installations in their service territories through December 31, 2018. SEPA encouraged participation via direct outreach to key energy storage contacts at utilities, and through partner organizations’ contact lists and newsletters. Utilities with service territories in multiple states reported data from each state separately. SEPA verified the accuracy of survey information using contacts at utilities, previous data submissions, and external sources.

Unless explicitly stated, all storage data in this document is reported in watts (W), kilowatts (kW), megawatts (MW), and gigawatts (GW). SEPA reports energy storage data in AC format as it is a more accurate accounting of the amount of energy storage that is interconnected to the grid.For the purpose of this snapshot, energy storage installations include electric storage technologies such as: batteries, flow batteries, and kinetic energy storage (such as flywheels). Additional technologies are discussed, but are not included in the data in this report. SEPA has aggregated or supplemented survey data with additional information, including energy storage project data from Energy Acuity, cumulative energy storage data from S&P Global Market Intelligence, project data acquired through online research and through interviews with energy storage project developers and stakeholders. Please note that recommissioned batteries are not counted as additional capacity. In addition, energy storage systems which are not grid interconnected, such as uninterruptible power supply (UPS) deployments, are not counted in SEPA’s energy storage deployment figures. SEPA estimated each residential battery storage system as having 5 kilowatts (kW) and 12 kilowatt-hours (kWh) in instances where utilities were unable to provide specific capacity and generation data for residential batteries. Growth rates in the report refer to year-over-year changes in added capacity unless otherwise stated in the report.For more information or questions, contact SEPA at [email protected] .

mailto:[email protected]

MW = Megawatts-ac SEPA | 2019 Utility Energy Storage Market Snapshot 6


Executive Summary Market Overview n In 2018, a total of 760.3 MWh of energy storage were interconnected, a 44.9% increase over 2017, bringing the cumulative energy storage total to 1,966.6 MWh nationwide. n Residential storage deployments grew 500.1% in 2018 driven by favorable policies in CA, HI, VT and other states. Non-residential storage displayed strong growth of 34.9% with deployments totaling 189.9 MWh, while utility-supply storage remained the largest segment at 394.8 MWh and grew by 11.3% over 2017.

Markets By Utility Type n Investor-owned utilities (IOUs) deployed the most storage of any utility type, but public power utilities and electric cooperatives showed strong growth. In 2018, IOUs interconnected 488.6 MWh of energy storage systems, accounting for 64.3% of the MWh interconnected to the grid. n Collectively, electric cooperatives and public power utilities interconnected 271.7 MWh of storage in 2018, an increase of over 300% from 2017. Public Power deployments grew by over 1400%.

A Market Primed for Growth n Favorable policies, combined with falling costs and an increased appreciation of the advantages of energy storage for both the grid and power consumers signal a fast-growing market and increased range of applications. Furthermore, research and development continues on both existing commercial storage technologies and promising new technologies such as flow batteries.

MWh130+

51-60

10.1-50

2.1-10

0.01-2

0

Alaska Hawaii GuamDistrict OfColumbia

AmericanSamoa

Puerto Rico &U.S. Virgin Islands

Figure 1: 2018 Annual Energy Storage Deployment (MWh)

Source: Smart Electric Power Alliance, 2019



SEPA’s Top 10 Utility Energy Storage RankingsEach year, SEPA recognizes the U.S. utilities that interconnected the most new energy storage capacity in their service territories with two categories of Top 10 Rankings: most energy storage megawatt-hours (MWh) and watt-hours per customer (Wh/C)—which are listed in Appendix B for both 2018 and cumulative. Only utilities with at least 500 customer accounts were considered for the watt-hours per customer ranking. Complete detailed rankings from SEPA’s 2019 Storage Utility Benchmarking Report are available to utility survey participants by contacting [email protected].

Table 1: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Capacity (MWh)

1 Southern California Edison California 154.3

2 Kauai Island Utility Cooperative Hawaii 102.0

3 Pacific Gas & Electric California 73.2

4 Florida Power & Light Company Florida 56.0

5 Salt River Project Arizona 44.5

6 Long Island Power Authority New York 40.0

7 San Diego Gas & Electric California 33.7

8 Connexus Energy Minnesota 30.0

9 Hawaiian Electric Company Hawaii 23.3

10 United Power, Inc. Colorado 18.2

Source: Smart Electric Power Alliance, 2019.

Table 2: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Watt-Hours Per Customer (Wh/C)

1 Kauai Island Utility Cooperative Hawaii 3,037.6

2 Sterling Municipal Light Department Massachusetts 523.1

3 City of Holyoke Massachusetts 341.6

4 Braintree Electric Light Department Massachusetts 240.5



7 Hawaii Electric Light Company Hawaii 95.2


9 Green Mountain Power Corporation Vermont 66.3

10 Randolph Electric Membership Corporation North Carolina 44.0


mailto:research%40sepapower.org?subject=2019%20Utility%20Energy%20Storage%20Snapshot



National Market OverviewIn 2018, utilities interconnected 760.3 MWh of energy storage across the United States. This represents an annual increase of 44.9% in deployed MWh over 2017, and brought cumulative storage to 1,966.6 MWh. States interconnecting the most energy storage in 2018 were California (146.9 MW, 275.6 MWh), Hawaii (36.8 MW, 135.4 MWh), and Texas (33.4 MW, 59.5 MWh). Of the 211 utilities that responded to our survey, 94 had at least one energy storage installation in their service territory as of the end of 2018. One quarter of those (23 utilities, 24.5%) deployed their first storage project in 2018. This is an increase over the 22% of utilities that deployed their first energy storage project in 2017.

Table 3: 2017 to 2018 Energy Storage Growth by Sector (MWh)

MWh Growth

Residential 175.5 500.1%

Non-Residential 189.9 34.9%

Utility-Supply 394.9 11.3%

Total 760.3 44.9%


Figure 2: 2018 Annual Energy Storage Deployment Breakdown (MWh)

Annual:760.3 MWh

Residential:7.2 MWh

Non-Residential:4.9 MWh

Transmission:0 MWh

Residential:3.7 MWh


IOU:488.6 MWh

Cooperative:

152.0 MW

h

Municipal:

119.7 MWh

Utility-

Supply:

130.3 MW

h Residen

tial:

164.6

MW

hUtility-

Supply:

107.6 MWh

Util

ity-

Supp

ly:

157.

0 M

Wh

Non-Residential:167 MWh




Residential Storage Market

3 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) (n.d.). Self-Generation Incentive Program. Retrieved from https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/sgip/ 4 Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) (2018). Net Energy Metering Plus. Retrieved from https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-

and-services/customer-renewable-programs/private-rooftop-solar/net-energy-metering-plus

175.5 MWh of residential storage was added in 2018, an increase of 500.1% over 2017. n California interconnected 99.9 MWh across 7,344 residential battery storage systems, an increase of 629.2% in MWh and 506.4% in systems over 2017. This continued growth is the result of the state’s Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP).3

nHawaii interconnected 33.6 MWh across 1,975 residential battery storage systems in 2018, an increase of 278% in MWh and more than doubled the number of systems deployed over 2017. This increase was primarily driven by net metering changes that offered a self-consumption option to customers.4

n Vermont interconnected 13.5 MWh across 1,000 residential battery storage systems, an increase of 526.2% in MWh and 549.4% in systems over 2017. Green Mountain Power was the sole driver of residential storage growth in Vermont in 2018.

MWh95+

14.1-35

2.01-14

1.01-2

0.01-1

0

Alaska

Hawaii Guam

District OfColumbia

AmericanSamoa


Figure 3: 2018 Annual Residential Deployment (MWh)


Figure 4: Top Utilities by 2018 Annual Residential Deployment (MWh)

Pacific Gas & ElectricSouthern California EdisonSan Diego Gas & ElectricHawaiian Electric CompanyGreen Mountain Power CorporationHawaii Electric Light CompanyArizona Public ServiceSalt River ProjectOther Utilities

23.0%

17.8%

15.3%13.1%

7.7%

13.9%

2.6%2.6%

4.0%


Figure 5: Annual Residential Deployment

0

50

100

150

200

201820172016

Residential MWh

Residential MW


https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/sgip/

https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-and-services/customer-renewable-programs/private-rooftop-solar/net-energy-metering-plus

https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/products-and-services/customer-renewable-programs/private-rooftop-solar/net-energy-metering-plus



Residential Market—Policy Impacts

5 State of Hawaii Public Utilities Commission. (2017). Smart Export Program. Retrieved from https://puc.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Hawaii_PUC_Smart-Export_CGS_Fact_Sheets_FINAL.pdf6 HECO. (2018). Hawaiian Electric Companies’ new NEM Plus program allows solar customers to add storage, non-export technology. Retrieved from https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/hawaiian-electric-companies-new-nem-plus-program-allows-solar-customers-to-

add-storage-non-export-technology 7 CPUC. (n.d.). Self-Generation Incentive Program. Retrieved from http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/sgip/

Hawaiian Electric Company’s (HECO) New Residential Battery ProgramsIn 2018, HECO, which also includes the service territories of Maui Electric Company and Hawaii Electric Light Company, deployed a total of 1,859 customer-owned residential battery storage systems, a 311.3% increase over 2017. The introduction of the Smart Export Program and the Net Energy Metering (NEM) Plus Program drove these large increases.

The Smart Export Program, introduced in 2017, allows customers to install a solar-plus-storage system and deliver energy to the grid for credit during specific time windows. The premise of the program is that customers will charge their battery systems during daylight hours (between 9am-4pm) and use that stored energy to power their homes during the evening/overnight hours. If customers produce and store excess energy, they can sell it back to the grid during evening/overnight hours, allowing customers to offset the costs of energy delivered from the grid when their system is not producing sufficient energy.5 Introduced in 2018, the NEM Plus Program allows current net metering customers the ability to add energy storage and other non-exporting renewable energy systems to their existing system(s).6 This program is especially advantageous for NEM customers who are not able to supply enough energy from existing solar systems or other DER systems and are forced to buy expensive electricity from the grid.

Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP), California SGIP, California’s statewide incentive program, provides rebates to support distributed energy resources interconnected behind the customer’s meter. Energy storage qualifies under two categories of resources: small residential (<10 kW) and large-scale storage (>10 kW, up to 5 MW).7 This program incentivized customers in California to add 7,344 residential energy storage systems in 2018, accounting for 61.2% of all residential systems interconnected in the U.S. in 2018.

Figure 6: 2016-2018 Annual HECO Customer-Owned Residential Battery Deployment (No. of Systems)

Num

ber

of S

yste

ms

Maui Electric CompanyHawaii Electric Light CompanyHawaiian Electric Company

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

201820172016


https://puc.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Hawaii_PUC_Smart-Export_CGS_Fact_Sheets_FINAL.pdf

https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/hawaiian-electric-companies-new-nem-plus-program-allows-solar-customers-to-add-storage-non-export-technology

https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/hawaiian-electric-companies-new-nem-plus-program-allows-solar-customers-to-add-storage-non-export-technology

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/sgip/



Residential Customer Programs

8 Green Mountain Power. (2019). GMP Pioneers Patent-Pending System Using Energy Storage to Make Meters Obsolete. Retrieved from https://greenmountainpower.com/news/gmp-pioneers-patent-pending-system/9 National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. (2019). Battery Energy Storage Technology Overview and Co-op Case Studies. Retrieved from https://www.cooperative.com/topics/distributed-energy-resources/Pages/Battery-Energy-Storage-Overview-Report.aspx10 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (2018). Arizona Utility and NREL Launch One of the Largest-to-Date Home Energy Storage Studies. Retrieved from https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2018/arizona-utility-and-nrel-launch-home-energy-storage-study.html

Utilities participating in SEPA’s Annual Utility Survey continue to express high levels of interest in customer-sited storage. This year, 13% of 77 utilities reported having fully implemented customer-owned battery storage incentives, up from 4.8% in 2017. Utilities are continuing to experiment with different energy storage ownership and incentive models to promote storage penetration. In 2019, Green Mountain Power (GMP) introduced its Resilient Home program. The program uses a patent-pending approach for customer-sited energy storage, utilizing a Tesla Powerwall® as both a backup power supply and a smart meter. This approach will replace the traditional electric power meter and provide customers with a seamless and reliable electric delivery system. GMP is enrolling customers into the program, offering the option for customers to purchase two Tesla Powerwall batteries for a fixed monthly fee or purchase a Powerwall from another provider and enroll it under GMP’s Bring Your Own Device program.8

In late 2018, Dairyland Power (WI), in conjunction with four of its distribution cooperatives, announced a new customer-sited, behind-the-meter battery pilot program to investigate the effectiveness of small-scale distributed energy storage. The cooperatives are hoping the pilot program will inform the future development of widespread residential energy storage deployment by helping them answer questions such as: “How do actual installation times compare with the manufacturer’s projections?”, “How difficult is it to simultaneously discharge multiple batteries in residential locations?”, and “What is the potential rate impact, especially where net-metering is part of the rate structure?”.9

In 2018, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the Salt River Project (SRP) announced the launch of a three-year residential battery storage program to evaluate customer battery use and the viability of the current technology for customer-sited storage. SRP is offering financial incentives for up to 4,500 customers to install residential battery systems. The program will utilize NREL’s high-performance computing systems to track and evaluate battery use and performance data.10

Fully ImplementedPilotingPlanningInterestedNo Interest

2.6%

6.5%

54.5%

23.4% 13.0%

Figure 7: Utility Interest in Customer-Owned Battery Storage Incentives

Source: Smart Electric Power Alliance, 2019. N = 77

https://greenmountainpower.com/news/gmp-pioneers-patent-pending-system/

https://www.cooperative.com/topics/distributed-energy-resources/Pages/Battery-Energy-Storage-Overview-Report.aspx

https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2018/arizona-utility-and-nrel-launch-home-energy-storage-study.html



Non-Residential Storage Market

11 JD Supra. (2018). Codification of Colorado Energy Storage Procurement Act: Colorado Public Utilities Commission Order. Retrieved from https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/codification-of-colorado-energy-storage-61096/

189.9 MWh of non-residential energy capacity was added in 2018, an increase of 34.9% over 2017.

n California interconnected 151.9 MWh of non-residential energy storage in 2018, the most of any state and a 24.8% increase over 2017. The state’s storage market is driven by favorable incentives within the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) (see page 10). n Colorado experienced the largest year-over-year percent increase in non-residential storage deployments, having interconnected 18 MWh in 2018, up from .01 MWh in 2017. This increase was driven by legislation requiring utilities to integrate storage into their planning processes.11 nNew York saw non-residential storage deployments grow by over 100% for the second year in a row. Utilities interconnected 12.4 MWh of non-residential storage in 2018, an increase of 9.7 MWh or 359.3% over 2017.

MWh150+

10.1-20

1.1-10

0.2-1

0.001-0.1

0

Alaska

Hawaii Guam

District OfColumbia

AmericanSamoa


Figure 8: 2018 Annual Non-Residential Deployment (MWh)


Figure 9: Top Utilities By 2018 Annual Non-Residential Deployment (MWh)

Southern California EdisonPacific Gas & ElectricUnited Power, Inc.Niagara Mohawk Power CorporationSan Diego Gas & ElectricBraintree Electric Light Dept.Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.Other Utilities59.9%

16.2%

2.2%2.1%1.4%

5.1%3.6%

9.5%


Figure 10: Annual Non-Residential Deployment

0

50

100

150

200

201820172016

Non-Residential MWh

Non-Residential MW


https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/codification-of-colorado-energy-storage-61096/



Role of Storage in Addressing Demand Charges

12 NREL. (2017). Identifying Potential Markets for Behind-the-Meter Battery Energy Storage: A Survey of U.S. Demand Charges. Retrieved from https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68963.pdf13 NREL. (2017). How to Estimate Demand Charge Savings from PV on Commercial Buildings. Retrieved from https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/69016.pdf14 NREL. (2017). Identifying Potential Markets for Behind-the-Meter Battery Energy Storage: A Survey of U.S. Demand Charges. Retrieved from https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68963.pdf15 NREL. (2017). Identifying Potential Markets for Behind-the-Meter Battery Energy Storage: A Survey of U.S. Demand Charges. Retrieved from https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68963.pdf16 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. (2017). Solar + Storage Synergies for Managing Commercial-Customer Demand Charges. Retrieved from http://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/solarstorage-execsummary.pdf

Approximately one-quarter of commercial and industrial (C&I) customers in the U.S. face significant ($15/kilowatt or higher) demand charges from their utilities for electricity consumed during periods of peak demand.12 It is common for demand charges to account for more than 50% of a customer’s electricity bill.13 Traditional means of reducing demand charges include curtailing electricity use during peaks, or switching to standby fossil fuel generation (where permitted under local air quality standards).The market for energy storage as a demand reduction measure is not limited to states with high electricity rates, such as California and New York. States such as Georgia, Nebraska and Colorado have some of the highest demand charges for C&I customers, despite lower electricity rates.141516

The opportunity for cost-effective demand reduction through energy storage is not uniform by state or by utility. Demand charges affect every C&I customer differently,

depending on when and how a C&I customer uses electricity. As storage costs fall, and more battery energy storage systems (BESS) are installed at C&I sites, the potential for storage to address demand charges will fall as well, tempering this economic incentive to deploy storage.Despite this dynamic, the number of utilities interested in non-residential energy storage incentives has increased from 2017. In 2018, utilities implemented 7% more non-residential customer-owned battery storage incentives programs than in 2017, with 4.8% more utilities implementing or planning non-residential utility-owned behind-the-meter battery storage programs.

NREL estimates that more than six million C&I customers could cost-effectively use energy storage at current costs to reduce demand charges of $10/kW or higher.15 Additionally, according to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), a combination of solar and storage could nearly double the savings on demand charges from storage alone.16

Opportunities To Address Demand Charges

2017 Customer-Owned 2018 Customer-Owned 2017 Utility-Owned 2018 Utility-Owned Program Implemented 3.6% 10.5% 3.5% 6.8%Planning 8.3% 5.3% 10.6% 12.2%Interested 58.3% 61.8% 61.2% 58.1%No Interest 29.8% 22.4% 24.7% 23.0%Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Interested No InterestPlanningImplemented

0

20

40

60

80

100

2018201720182017Customer-Owned Battery Storage Incentive Utility-Owned Behind-the-Meter Battery Storage

Figure 11: Non-Residential Battery Storage Incentive Trends

Source: Smart Electric Power Alliance, 2019. N=76

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68963.pdf




http://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/solarstorage-execsummary.pdf



C&I Energy Storage Deployment17

Maharishi University of Management of Fairfield, Iowa brought a solar-plus-storage system online in late 2018 to help reduce high demand charge rates. The system features a 1.1 MW solar array paired with a 1 MWh vanadium flow battery. A software package detects when power usage rises above a set threshold, activating the batteries to supply energy during the peak period. The stored solar power reduces the demand charges the university incurs from its electric utility, Alliant Energy.18

In February 2019, Ice Energy and Southern California Edison (SCE) completed the installation of 100 thermal cooling systems at C&I customer sites; this is the first phase of a project expected to grow to more than 1,200 systems over the next two years. At completion, the project is expected to provide a total of 21.6 MW and an estimated 130 MWh of storage.19

17 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. (2019). Electric Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators. Retrieved from https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/comm-meet/2019/051619/E-1.pdf18 Ideal Energy. (2018). How 1.1 Megawatts of Solar and Storage is Transforming this Iowa University. Retrieved from https://www.idealenergysolar.com/solar-storage-transforming-iowa-university/19 PV Magazine. (2019). Ice Energy brings deep freeze to U.S. energy Storage. Retrieved from https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2019/02/13/ice-energy-brings-the-deep-freeze-to-u-s-energy-storage/20 Marizza, J. (2019, June 11). Phone Interview.

United Power, a cooperative utility in Brighton, Colorado, worked with SoCore Energy to install two lithium-ion Tesla PowerPack systems in 2018 for a total of 4.5 MW, 18 MWh of storage. The battery storage systems are utilized four or five times a month by the cooperative to shave peak demand. United Power estimates that the battery storage will save the cooperative and its members $1 million annually by lowering capacity charges from its generation and transmission supplier. The cooperative has a plan in place to also utilize the project as a “community battery,” with commercial customers invited to purchase shares of the energy storage to offset the demand component of their utility bills. 20

New rate designs and other incentives could increase the economic value of C&I-sited energy storage. Currently, energy storage can be bid into three wholesale markets; specifically CAISO, MISO, and SPP to provide ancillary services. With the proper rate design, storage could provide a range of services on the distribution grid, including absorbing the intermittent excess flow of power from renewables.17

Energy Storage in Wholesale Markets

https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/comm-meet/2019/051619/E-1.pdf

https://www.idealenergysolar.com/solar-storage-transforming-iowa-university/

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2019/02/13/ice-energy-brings-the-deep-freeze-to-u-s-energy-storage/



Utility-Supply Storage Market

394.9 MWh of utility-supply energy storage was added in 2018, an increase of 11.3% over 2017.

nHawaii interconnected 100.3 MWh of utility-supply energy storage in 2018, an increase of 74.4% over 2017. More than 99% of Hawaii’s 2018 utility-supply energy storage deployment came from one system that was commissioned by the Kauai Utility Island Cooperative (KIUC) at the end of 2018. n Florida interconnected 56 MWh of utility-supply energy storage in 2018, an increase of nearly 5000% over 2017. Two large energy storage systems interconnected by Florida Power and Light accounted for the entirety of the state’s utility-supply energy storage deployment in 2018. n Arizona interconnected 44.6 MWh of utility-supply energy storage in 2018, an increase of 346% over 2017, bringing the state’s cumulative utility-supply energy storage total to 62.6 MWh.

MWh100+

40.1-60

15.1-40

5.1-15

0.1-5

0

Alaska

Hawaii Guam

District OfColumbia

AmericanSamoa


Hawaii 100.292

Texas 58.5Florida 56Arizona 44.6

New York 40Minnesota 30California 23.9

Massachusetts 13.2Illinois 10

Indiana 4Iowa 4Vermont 4Virginia 4Michigan 1South Dakota 0.84Tennessee 0.51

Alabama 0Alaska 0American Samoa 0Arkansas 0Colorado 0Connecticut 0Delaware 0District of Columbia 0

Georgia 0Guam 0Idaho 0Kansas 0Kentucky 0Louisiana 0Maine 0Marshall Islands 0Maryland 0Mississippi 0Missouri 0Montana 0Nebraska 0Nevada 0New Hampshire 0New Jersey 0New Mexico 0North Carolina 0North Dakota 0Ohio 0Oklahoma 0Oregon 0Pennsylvania 0Puerto Rico 0Rhode Island 0South Carolina 0Utah 0Virgin Islands 0Washington 0

Figure 12: 2018 Annual Utility-Supply Deployment (MWh)


Figure 13: Top Utilities by 2018 Annual Utility-Supply Deployment (MWh)

Kauai Island Utility CooperativeFlorida Power & Light CompanySalt River ProjectLong Island Power AuthorityConnexus EnergyLos Angeles Department of Water and PowerCommonwealth Edison CompanySouthern California EdisonOther Utilities10.1%10.1%

14.2%

25.4%

2.4%

24.5%

3.2%2.5%

7.6%


Figure 14: Annual Utility-Supply Deployment

050

100150200250300350400

201820172016

Utility-Supply MWh

Utility-Supply MW




Cooperatives


AmericanSamoa


Public Power

Investor-Owned Utilities

Solar-Plus-Storage

Wind-Plus-Storage

Stand-Alone Battery

Utilities can pair solar or wind with energy storage to smooth out intermittent renewable generation. Energy storage can also make renewables fully dispatchable.

Stand-alone batteries are a grid asset that can be used for frequency response, peak shaving, and black start.

2018 Highlighted Energy Storage ProjectsThis list represents a sample of the largest energy storage projects across the country.

United Power (CO) interconnected a 4 MW, 16 MWh energy storage system. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (CA) interconnected a 20 MW, 10 MWh energy storage system. The Salt River Project (AZ) interconnected a 10 MW, 40 MWh energy storage system.Luminant Energy (TX) interconnected a 10 MW, 42 MWh battery storage system. Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (HI), interconnected a 20 MW, 100 MWh energy storage system.

Connexus Energy (MN) interconnected two large energy storage systems with a total capacity of 15 MW, 30 MWh. The Long Island Power Authority (NY), interconnected a 5 MW, 40 MWh energy storage system. Oncor Electric Delivery (TX) interconnected two large energy storage systems with a total capacity of 19.8 MW, 10 MWh.Florida Power and Light (FL) interconnected two large energy storage systems with a total capacity of 14 MW, 56 MWh.




Planned Projects

21 Florida Power & Light. (2019). FPL announces plan to build the world’s largest solar-powered battery and drive accelerated retirement of fossil fuel generation. Retrieved from http://newsroom.fpl.com/2019-03-28-FPL-announces-plan-to-build-the-worlds-largest-solar-powered-battery-and-drive-accelerated-retirement-of-fossil-fuel-generation

22 Portland General Electric. (2019). Portland General Electric and NextEra Energy Resources to develop nation’s first major energy facility co-locating wind, solar and battery storage. Retrieved from https://www.portlandgeneral.com/our-company/news-room/news-releases/2019/02-13-2019-portland-general-electric-and-nextera-energy-resources-to-develop-en

23 California Public Utilities Commission. (2018). Pacific Gas and Electric request approval of four energy storage facilities with the following counterparties: mNOC, Dynegy, Hummingbird Energy Storage, LLC, and Tesla. Retrieved from http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M238/K048/238048767.PDF

24 Xcel Energy. (2018). Colorado Energy Plan Fall 2018 Update. Retrieved from https://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe-responsive/Company/Rates%20&%20Regulations/Resource%20Plans/CO-Energy-Plan-Fact-Sheet.pdf25 HECO. (2019). Six low-priced solar-plus-storage projects approved for Oahu, Maui and Hawaii islands. Retrieved from https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/six-low-priced-solar-plus-storage-projects-approved-for-oahu-maui-and-hawaii-islands

In March 2019, Florida Power and Light announced the Manatee Energy Storage Center, a 409 MW, 900 MWh storage system that will be powered by an existing solar plant. The project is planned to be operational by late 2021.21

In February 2019, Portland General Electric Company announced plans to build the Wheatridge Renewable Energy Facility, which will consist of 300 MW of wind and 50 MW of solar, paired with 30 MW, 120 MWh of energy storage. The project is slated to be fully operational in 2021.22 Pacific Gas and Electric received approval in June 2018 for four energy storage projects to replace three power plants that would otherwise require reliability must-run (RMR) contracts. Totalling 2,270 MWh, one of the projects will be the largest lithium-ion battery installation in the world to-date, and another will be the largest utility-owned non-hydro storage project in the world. The four projects are all scheduled to be operational by the end of 2020.23

In August 2018, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission approved a plan by Xcel Energy to close two of its coal-powered plants (totaling 660 MW) by 2026. Under its Colorado Energy Plan, Xcel Energy plans to replace some of this coal generation with 1,100 MW of wind, 700 MW of solar and 275 MW of battery storage.24

In March 2019, the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission approved six large solar-plus-storage projects for HECO. In total, the six projects account for an additional 253 MW of solar and 1 GWh of storage, and will provide energy to power 105,000 homes and reduce fossil fuel consumption by 48 million gallons annually.25

SOLAR + WIND + BATTERY STORAGE


COAL PLANT CONVERSION


COAL PLANT CONVERSION

http://newsroom.fpl.com/2019-03-28-FPL-announces-plan-to-build-the-worlds-largest-solar-powered-battery-and-drive-accelerated-retirement-of-fossil-fuel-generation

http://newsroom.fpl.com/2019-03-28-FPL-announces-plan-to-build-the-worlds-largest-solar-powered-battery-and-drive-accelerated-retirement-of-fossil-fuel-generation

https://www.portlandgeneral.com/our-company/news-room/news-releases/2019/02-13-2019-portland-general-electric-and-nextera-energy-resources-to-develop-en

https://www.portlandgeneral.com/our-company/news-room/news-releases/2019/02-13-2019-portland-general-electric-and-nextera-energy-resources-to-develop-en

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M238/K048/238048767.PDF

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M238/K048/238048767.PDF

https://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe-responsive/Company/Rates%20&%20Regulations/Resource%20Plans/CO-Energy-Plan-Fact-Sheet.pdf

https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/six-low-priced-solar-plus-storage-projects-approved-for-oahu-maui-and-hawaii-islands



Energy Storage Markets By Utility TypeInvestor-Owned Utilities (IOUs) continued to dominate the energy storage market, accounting for 64.3% of energy storage deployment (MWh) in 2018. California’s IOUs once again led the way in energy storage interconnection nationally. Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric ranked first and second in 2018 MWh deployment, and interconnected 154.3 MWh and 73.2 MWh respectively. Electric Cooperatives had a productive year in 2018, interconnecting 152 MWh, an increase of 154.4% over 2017. The push to increase energy storage deployment by electric cooperatives was led by Hawaii, Minnesota, and Colorado. Within Hawaii, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative interconnected 102 MWh in 2018, ranking the utility first among cooperatives and second among all utilities for 2018 MWh deployment.Public Power Utilities experienced significant growth in energy storage deployment in 2018. In 2017, public power utilities deployed 7.8 MWh, while in 2018 they deployed 119.7 MWh, an increase of 1,435.5%. Collectively, Long Island Power Authority (NY) and the Salt River Project (AZ) deployed 70.6% of the MWh deployed in 2018.

Figure 15: 2016-2018 Annual Deployment Breakdown (MWh)

Public Power ResidentialPublic Power Non-ResidentialPublic Power Utility-Supply

Cooperative ResidentialCooperative Non-ResidentialCooperative Utility-SupplyInvestor-Owned ResidentialInvestor-Owned Non-ResidentialInvestor-Owned Utility-Supply

MW

h

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

201820172016




Investor-Owned Utilities

26 PR Newswire. (2018). Florida Power and Light augments FPL Babcock Ranch Solar Energy Center. Retrieved from https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/florida-power--light-augments-fpl-babcock-ranch-solar-energy-center-with-advanced-batteries-creating-the-nations-largest-solar-plus-storage-system-300611560.html

IOUs deployed 488.6 MWh in 2018, an annual increase of 6.8% over 2017.Florida Power and Light interconnected two large BESS in 2018. The first, a 4 MW, 16 MWh lithium-ion battery was paired with the Citrus Solar Energy Center. The second, a 10 MW, 40 MWh lithium-ion battery was paired with the Babcock Ranch Solar Energy Center.26 Southern California Edison interconnected 2,330 systems, a majority of which were small residential systems, for a total energy storage deployment of 74 MW and 154.3 MWh. Southern California Edison accounted for nearly one-fifth of all the energy storage systems interconnected across the country in 2018.

Figure 16: 2018 Cumulative IOU Deployment Breakdown (MWh) Figure 17: 2016-2018 Annual IOU Deployment by Sector

Annual Residential MW Residential MWh Non-Residential MW Non-Residential MWh Utility-Supply MW Utility-Supply MWhy2016 2.4 4.8 49.7 57 123.6 160.3y2017 12 26.2 58.5 138.6 126 292.6y2018 71.2 164.6 89.7 167.1 83.1 157

ResidentialNon-ResidentialUtility-Supply2016 2017 2018

0100200300400500

MWhMWMWhMWMWhMW


Cumulative:1,546.8 MWh

Flow Batteries PPA: 0 MWh

Flow BatteriesUtility-Owned: 13 MWh

Flow BatteriesMerchant: 0 MWh

Kinetic PPA: 0 MWh

KineticMerchant: 5 MWh

KineticUtility-Owned:

0.03 MWh

Customer-Owned:

381.7 MWh

Utility-Owned:9.4 MWh

Utility-Owned:15.4 MWh


Utility-Supply:947.8 MWh

Residential:

207.9 MW

h

Batte

ries

Mer

chan

t:24

3.4

MW

h

Batteries

PPA:113.8 MWh

Customer-

Ow

ned:

192.5 MW

h

BatteriesUtility-Owned:572.6 MWh


https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/florida-power--light-augments-fpl-babcock-ranch-solar-energy-center-with-advanced-batteries-creating-the-nations-largest-solar-plus-storage-system-300611560.html

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/florida-power--light-augments-fpl-babcock-ranch-solar-energy-center-with-advanced-batteries-creating-the-nations-largest-solar-plus-storage-system-300611560.html



Electric Cooperatives

27 Hawaii State Energy Office. (2019). Hawaii Renewable Energy Projects Directory. Retrieved from https://energy.ehawaii.gov/epd/public/energy-project-details.html?rid=13d--119af92658e80c6

Cooperative utilities deployed 152 MWh in 2018, an annual increase of 154.4% over 2017. In December 2018, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative interconnected the Lawai Solar and Energy Storage facility, a 20 MW, 100 MWh energy storage system. The lithium-ion system is estimated to replace 3.7 million gallons of fuel annually.27 In 2018, NextEra Energy Resources interconnected two solar-plus-storage systems, one in Ramsey, Minnesota and the other in Athens Township, Minnesota. The two systems have a total capacity of 15 MW, 30 MWh and provide power to Connexus Energy, an electric cooperative outside of Minneapolis that serves roughly 132,000 customers.

Figure 18: 2018 Cumulative Cooperative Deployment Breakdown (MWh) Figure 19: 2016-2018 Annual Cooperative Deployment by Sector


0

50

100

150

200

MWhMWMWhMWMWhMW


Utility-Supply:

203.8 MW

h

Cumulative:228.5 MWh

Flow BatteriesPPA: 0 MWh

Flow BatteriesUtility-Owned: 0 MWh

Flow BatteriesMerchant: 0 MWh

KineticPPA: 0 MWh

KineticMerchant: 0 MWh

KineticUtility-Owned:0 MWhResidential:6.7 MWh

Batteries

PPA:

187.1MW

h

BatteriesMerchant:

0 MWh

Customer-Owned:6.7 MWh

Utility-Owned:0 MWh

Customer-Owned:0 MWh

Utility-

Ow

ned:

18 MW

h

BatteriesUtility-Owned:

16.7 MWh

Non-Residential:

18.0 MW

h


https://energy.ehawaii.gov/epd/public/energy-project-details.html?rid=13d--119af92658e80c6

https://energy.ehawaii.gov/epd/public/energy-project-details.html?rid=13d--119af92658e80c6



Public Power Utilities

28 Newsday. (2018). Region’s largest battery on line in the Hamptons. Retrieved from https://www.newsday.com/long-island/battery-hamptons-pseg-1.20557886

29 Business Journal. (2018). SRP, NextEra unveil state’s largest $60 million grid-connected solar and battery plant. Retrieved from https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2018/05/16/srp-nextera-unveil-states-largest-60-million-grid.html

Public power utilities deployed 119.7 MWh in 2018, an annual increase of 1,435.5% over 2017.In 2018, the Long Island Power Authority interconnected the utility’s first utility-scale energy storage system, a 5 MW, 40 MWh battery in East Hampton, New York. The project is the first of two energy storage projects in eastern Long Island that will help ease peak energy demand, integrate renewable energy, and replace temporary diesel generators.28

In 2018, NextEra Energy and the Salt River Project partnered to interconnect the Pinal Central Energy Center a 10 MW, 40 MWh battery energy storage system in Pinal County, Arizona. The energy center is paired with a 20 MW solar plant that will provide energy to roughly 5,000 homes. The Pinal Central Energy Center is the first of three planned battery storage systems for the Salt River Project.29

Figure 20: 2018 Cumulative Public Power Deployment Breakdown (MWh) Figure 21: 2016-2018 Annual Public Power Deployment by Sector

Utility-Supply:

160.2 MW

h

Cumulative:177.0 MWh

Flow BatteriesPPA: 0 MWh

Flow BatteriesUtility-Owned: 8.0 MWh

Flow BatteriesMerchant:

5.0 MWh

Kinetic PPA: 0 MWh

Kinetic Merchant: 0 MWh

Kinetic Utility-Owned:0 MWh

Residential:10.7 MWhNon-Residential:6.1 MWh

Customer-Owned: 1.0 MWhUtility-Owned: 5.1 MWh

Utility-Owned:0 MWh

Batte

ries

Utilit

y-O

wne

d:85

.3 M

Wh

Batteries

PPA:

51.0 MWhBa

tter

ies

Mer

chan

t:10

.9 M

Wh

Customer-

Ow

ned:

10.7 MW

h



020406080

100120

MWhMWMWhMWMWhMW


https://www.newsday.com/long-island/battery-hamptons-pseg-1.20557886

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/battery-hamptons-pseg-1.20557886

https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2018/05/16/srp-nextera-unveil-states-largest-60-million-grid.html



Energy Storage Policy UpdateNet Metering and Energy StorageAs a growing number of customers consider pairing behind-the-meter solar facilities with battery storage, policymakers and regulators are considering the terms under which solar-plus-storage customers may participate in net metering.

n Arkansas: S.B. 145, enacted in March 2019, allows net metering facilities to include energy storage devices if they are configured to receive electricity solely from the net metering facility. n California: The California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision in January 2019, authorizing the use of power control-based options for net metering with DC-coupled energy storage facilities. nMassachusetts: The Department of Public Utilities issued an order in February 2019, authorizing solar-plus-storage systems to net meter under three configurations: (1) the storage system charges only from the net metering facility and cannot export, (2) the storage system charges only from the net metering facility and can export, and (3) the storage system charges from either the grid or the net metering facility and cannot export. nNew York: In December 2018, the New York Public Service Commission approved a modified version of the value of distributed energy resources tariff (“Hybrid Tariff”) for compensation of distributed energy systems that include battery storage. The tariff includes four options based on how the storage system is being used and only provides environmental credit value for grid injections of renewable energy.

n South Carolina: Lawmakers enacted H.B. 3659 in May 2019, which allows projects including energy storage to net meter if the storage device is charged solely from an on-site renewable resource.

In January 2019, the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission approved a unique pilot program proposed by Liberty Utilities, in which the utility will own battery storage systems located on residential customer premises. Regulators approved a settlement agreement, which:

n Reduces the size of the program from 1,000 batteries to 500 batteries. n Directs a working group to develop a “Bring Your Own Device” program for 500 additional batteries to be deployed by third parties. n Allows participants that are also net metering customers to charge their batteries from the grid when they are under the utility’s control and receive credit for all energy exported to the grid, including that from the batteries. n Approves time-of-use rate for participants, including critical peak, on-peak, and off-peak periods.

Behind-the-Meter Storage Ownership Models: New Hampshire

Fully Implemented Piloting Planning Interested No InterestResidential 15.00 2.60 10.50 47.70 24.20Non-Residential 14.30 4.50 11.00 46.10 24.00

NC CLEAN ENERGYTECHNOLOGY CENTER



Energy Storage Studies

Figure 22: Examples of States Initiating or Completing Energy Storage Studies in 2018 or 2019

Study recently initiated Study recently completed


AmericanSamoa


Source: DSIRE Insight, NC Clean Energy Technology Center

Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (S.B. 204, 2017) A final study, published in October 2018, finds that by 2020 up to 175 MW of utility- scale battery storage could be deployed cost-effectively, increasing to between 700 and 1,000 MW by 2030. Additionally, behind-the-meter storage could add up to 30 MW of storage capacity by 2030.Minnesota Commission of Commerce (H.B. 2, 2019) Lawmakers enacted H.B. 2 in May 2019, initiating an energy storage analysis.North Carolina Policy Collaboratory (H.B. 589, 2017) A final study, released in December 2018, quantifies the value of different services provided by energy storage technologies and includes a menu of policy options to prepare, facilitate, and accelerate storage deployment.

New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (A.B. 3723, 2018) Legislation enacted in May 2018 initiated an energy storage analysis that was completed in May 2019.Maryland Power Plant Research Program (H.B. 773, 2017) A final report, published in December 2018, finds three policy options to be the most relevant to Maryland: (1) removing barriers by updating rate designs and regulations, (2) supporting storage through targets and/or incentives, and (3) taking a more active role in overseeing distribution system planning.Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy (H.B. 5002, 2018) Legislation enacted in March 2018 initiated an energy storage study.





Utility Planning RulesSeveral states are reviewing resource planning rules to ensure that energy storage resources are appropriately considered in this process. A number of states are also establishing distribution system planning rules and requirements for evaluating non-wires alternatives, which can aid in planning for energy storage deployment.

nDelaware: The Delaware Public Service Commission opened a proceeding to develop distribution system planning rules in April 2018. n Indiana: The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission adopted amendments to the state’s integrated resource planning rules in August 2018, including the addition of a definition for energy storage. nMaine: Legislators passed L.D. 1181 in June 2019, which establishes a non-wires alternative coordinator as an entity with which the Office of the Public Advocate will contract. Previously, the Public Utilities Commission had designated the state’s utilities as the non-wires alternative coordinators. nMinnesota: H.B. 2, enacted in May 2019, includes requirements for evaluating energy storage systems in utility resource planning. nNevada: The Public Utilities Commission of Nevada adopted rules for distributed resource planning in October 2018. nOhio: Following the conclusion of the PowerForward grid modernization investigation, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio opened a new proceeding on distribution system planning in October 2018. nOregon: The Oregon Public Utility Commission opened an investigation into distribution system planning March 2019.

Figure 23: States Considering Changes to Utility Planning Rules Since 2018

Source: DSIRE Insight, NC Clean Energy Technology Center


AmericanSamoa






Energy Storage TargetsAs of June 2019, 5 states had an energy storage target in place. New Jersey and New York adopted new energy storage targets in 2018, while Massachusetts expanded its target from 200 MWh by 2020 to 1,000 MWh by 2025.

Table 4: State Energy Storage Targets

State Target

California

In 2010, California became the first state to establish an energy storage target, calling for 1,325 MW by 2020. In 2016, the state added a 500 MW behind-the-meter energy storage target to be split between its three major IOUs.

Massachusetts The Massachusetts legislature enacted a bill in 2018, extending their storage target from 200 MWh by 2020 to 1,000 MWh by 2025.

New Jersey New Jersey's governor signed a bill in May of 2018, establishing a 2,000 MW energy storage target by 2030.

New York The New York PSC approved an initiative, which set an energy storage goal of 3,000 MW by 2030 with an interim goal of 1,500 MW by 2025.

OregonIn 2015, the Oregon legislative assembly passed a law requiring the state's IOUs to have a minimum of 5 MWh of energy storage in service by January 1, 2020.

Source: DSIRE Insight, NC Clean Energy Technology Center.

Clean Peak StandardsA relatively new policy mechanism - the “clean peak standard” - is under consideration in multiple states across the country. A clean peak standard requires that a specified portion of a utility’s peak demand is supplied with clean energy resources.

Massachusetts became the first state to adopt a Clean Peak Standard with Chapter 227 of the Acts of 2018. The Department of Energy Resources (DOER) is currently developing rules to implement the standard and presented a straw proposal in early April 2019. The proposal includes:

n Four types of eligible resources: 1. New Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Class I resources, 2. Existing RPS Class I or II resources that are paired with energy storage systems, 3. Standalone energy storage systems and incremental pumped storage capacity, 4. Demand response resources.

n Four hours per day for each season as designated seasonal peak periods, with Clean Peak Certificates being generated according to the average output of the resource over the duration of the day’s seasonal peak period. nMultipliers based on season, actual monthly system peak, resilience, minimum load (negative multiplier), and distribution circuit locational value.

Massachusetts Clean Peak Standard





A Market Primed for Growth

30 Bloomberg New Energy Finance. (2018). World Reaches 1,000 GW of Wind and Solar, Keeps Going. Retrieved from https://about.bnef.com/blog/world-reaches-1000gw-wind-solar-keeps-going/31 SEPA. (2019). Carbon-Free Energy by 2050: Have We Reached a Tipping Point?. Retrieved from https://sepapower.org/knowledge/carbon-free-energy-by-2050-have-we-reached-a-tipping-point/32 SEPA. (2019). 2019 Utility Solar Market Snapshot. Retrieved from https://sepapower.org/resource/2019-utility-solar-market-snapshot/33 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Energy Initiative. (2018). Energy Storage for the Grid: Policy Options for Sustaining Innovation. Retrieved from http://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MITEI-WP-2018-04.pdf; Research Interfaces. (2018). Lithium-

ion batteries for large-scale grid energy storage. Retrieved from https://researchinterfaces.com/lithium-ion-batteries-grid-energy-storage/

Globally, solar and wind generation reached 1 terrawatt (TW) of deployment in the first half of 2018, representing an estimated $2.3 trillion in capital expenditure. The second TW of deployment is projected to be completed by 2023 and cost $1.23 trillion, 46% less than the first TW.30 The pace of renewable generation deployment is expected to increase as renewable technologies improve, costs continue to decline, and aggressive policy actions aimed at achieving global climate goals are implemented.31

Aligning intermittent electricity generation with demand as renewable energy penetration grows will require new approaches to operating the grid and alternative grid resources. Utility system planners are searching for these new approaches via non-traditional resources such as flexible solar,32 demand response resources, and new grid assets like energy storage.

Energy Storage TechnologiesThere exist a plethora of energy storage technologies today, many of which are in the early stages of commercialization. The capabilities, cost and use cases of these electricity storage technologies are highly variable, and most storage technologies are able to integrate with other grid resources. As renewables reach high penetration, a suite of energy storage technologies will be needed to serve the grid safely and economically. Many are displayed in Figure 25.

Lithium-Ion Battery Storage Lithium-ion batteries account for roughly 90% of the stationary storage deployed today due to significant declines in lithium-ion battery prices (see Figure 24) and characteristics such as ~90% round trip efficiency.33 The business case for certain lithium-ion battery storage applications has become more attractive as the price of lithium-ion storage assets has declined by 72.9% since 2013.

Figure 24: Lithium-Ion Battery Prices

Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2019

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

PackCell201820172016201520142013

Real

201

8 $/

kWh

204

446

185

392124

25078

21064

15149

127

-11% -35% -23% -26% -18%

https://about.bnef.com/blog/world-reaches-1000gw-wind-solar-keeps-going/

https://sepapower.org/knowledge/carbon-free-energy-by-2050-have-we-reached-a-tipping-point/

https://sepapower.org/resource/2019-utility-solar-market-snapshot/

http://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MITEI-WP-2018-04.pdf

https://researchinterfaces.com/lithium-ion-batteries-grid-energy-storage/



Technology Lock-In The energy storage industry has been quick to adopt lithium-ion technology, and it has accelerated deployment by providing a reliable and efficient technology. Lithium-ion as the dominant technology could present a risk of “technology lock-in” if storage providers focus solely on this technology to the exclusion of others. Meeting the carbon reduction and renewable energy targets set by governments and organizations around the world requires energy storage as a key element. The need for long-duration storage will likely require capabilities beyond what lithium-ion battery technology can provide. Continued research into other storage technologies will help ensure that storage solutions can match the needs of the changing grid.

Beyond Lithium-Ion Experts believe that flow batteries have the potential capability to meet the utility-scale energy storage requirements of the future. Flow batteries can rapidly recharge, are able to deliver consistent performance over thousands of life cycles, and are able to efficiently scale to many grid-scale sizes.34 35

34 MIT Energy Initiative. (2018). Energy Storage for the Grid: Policy Options for Sustaining Innovation. Retrieved from http://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MITEI-WP-2018-04.pdf 35 San Diego Gas & Electric. (2019). Innovative Battery Storage Technology Connected to the California Grid. Retrieved from https://sdgenews.com/article/innovative-battery-storage-technology-connected-california-grid

Zinc-air (ZnAir) batteries will also likely play a role going forward as they represent a technology that has a higher average discharge duration to installed cost compared to lithium-ion or flow batteries. As we look to storage technologies for longer durations, compressed air energy storage (CAES) and gravitational storage are increasingly becoming viable options for peak shaving, non-wire alternatives, and renewable energy integration. CAES heats pressurized air that expands to spin a turbine thereby generating power, while gravitational storage uses energy to raise a large mass and gravity to lower it to generate electricity.

ZnAirBattery

Ave

rage

Dis

char

ge D

urat

ion

Average Installed Cost ($/kWh)$100/kWh $500/kWh $1,000/kWh+

<2 h

ours

4 ho

urs

10+

hour

s

Li-Ion Battery

Flow Battery

NaS Battery

Ultracapacitor

CompressedAir

PumpedHydro Storage

Flywheel

Figure 25: Energy Storage Technology Comparison by Average Discharge Duration and Average Installed Cost ($/kWh)

Source: Navigant Research, 2019.

In 2017, San Diego Gas & Electric deployed a single 2MW, 8MWh vanadium redox flow battery as part of a four-year demonstration project. In 2019, the battery was connected to the California ISO, making it the first vanadium redox flow battery in the U.S. to connect to a wholesale energy storage market.35

U.S. Flow Battery Deployment

http://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MITEI-WP-2018-04.pdf

https://sdgenews.com/article/innovative-battery-storage-technology-connected-california-grid



Long-Duration Energy Storage

36 U.S. Department of Energy. (2017). U.S. Hydro Market Report. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/US-Hydropower-Market-Report-2017-Update_20170403.pdf; Please note pumped hydropower is not included in SEPA’s totals of electricity capacity.

37 Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) (2018). Department of Energy Announces Funding to Support Long-Duration Energy Storage. Retrieved from https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=news-item/department-energy-announces-funding-support-long-duration-energy-storage

38 See ARPA-E DAYS Program for a full list of the DAYS program projects and their descriptions.

Most energy storage systems connected to the grid provide essential grid services such as frequency regulation, renewable energy integration and other ancillary services. However, these systems are not designed to discharge energy continuously for more than 8 to 12 hours and thus cannot support the base load generation needed to transition to a carbon-free generation future. The U.S. has more than 265 GWhs of long-duration energy storage capacity deployed, predominantly pumped hydropower facilities.36 These pumped hydropower projects require long construction times, face backlash over environmental impact, and are dependant on the availability of specific geologic formations. The growth of long-duration energy storage technologies other than pumped hydropower is required to meet the carbon reduction and renewable energy goals many experts believe necessary to address climate change.

In May 2018, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced a $30 million grant for an Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) program to fund projects for the Duration Addition to electricitY Storage (DAYS) project group. The DAYS program focuses on the research and development of long-duration energy storage technologies capable of providing between 10 and 100 continuous hours of electricity supply.37 The ten DAYS projects include technologies such as thermal energy storage, geomechanical pumped storage and a sulfur-manganese flow battery.38

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/US-Hydropower-Market-Report-2017-Update_20170403.pdf

https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=news-item/department-energy-announces-funding-support-long-duration-energy-storage

https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=news-item/department-energy-announces-funding-support-long-duration-energy-storage

https://arpa-e.energy.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/DAYS%20Project%20Descriptions%20FINAL.pdf



Ancillary Services (seconds-minutes): The essential support services needed to keep the electric grid running efficiently. These include services such as spinning reserves, frequency regulation, and black start. Ramping (30 minutes): The action of rapidly increasing or decreasing power to align supply with demand. Smoothing (1-4 hours): The process of smoothing out intermittent power output, especially in regards to the integration of intermittent renewable energy.

Peaking (2-4 hours): The ability to supply extra power to the grid during times of peak demand. Baseload Generation (8+ hours): The ability to generate and provide power over an extended period to satisfy the baseline level of demand on the grid.

Tech

nolo

gy T

ype

App

licat

ions

Ancillary Services

Ramping

Smoothing

Baseload Generation

Peaking

Days8 Hours +2 to 4 Hours1 to 4 Hours30 MinutesSeconds to Minutes

Lead Acid

Lithium-Ion Battery

Flow Battery

Compressed Air

Pumped Hydro

Gravitational Storage


Figure 26: Energy Storage Applications



Appendix A: 2018 Energy Storage Capacity by State and Select TerritoriesTable 5: Energy Storage Capacity by State and Territory

2018 Total Cumulative Total

States MW MWH No. Of Systems MW MWH No. Of

Systems

Alabama 0 0 0 0 0 0

Alaska 0 0 0 60.8 24.5 9

American Samoa 0 0 0 1.07 7.1 3

Arizona 17.0 54.5 771 44.3 73.2 914

Arkansas 0.4 1.0 2 0.4 1.0 4

California 146.9 275.6 7,663 427.6 966.9 9,996

Colorado 6.1 21.2 214 8.8 26.8 441

Connecticut 0.4 1.1 63 0.6 1.4 86

Delaware 0 0 0 0 0 0

District of Columbia 0 0 0 0 0 0

Florida 14.2 56.5 40 18.6 63.8 96

Georgia 0 0 0 0 0 0

Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hawaii 36.8 135.4 2,009 73.6 217.4 2,969

Table 5: Energy Storage Capacity by State and Territory



Systems

Idaho 0.02 0.04 1 0.04 0.1 3

Illinois 20.5 10.5 2 135.7 69.5 15

Indiana 1.0 4.0 1 25.2 39.4 19

Iowa 1.4 4.4 3 1.4 4.4 6

Kansas 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kentucky 0.01 0.02 1 1.9 3.8 168

Louisiana 0.01 0.02 1 0.6 0.8 24

Maine 0 0 0 16.7 11.1 3

Marshall Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maryland 1.5 3.6 131 25.0 15.1 138

Massachusetts 9.7 19.8 124 12.3 26.8 134

Michigan 1.0 1.0 1 1.0 1.1 6

Minnesota 15.2 30.3 23 16.2 37.6 26

Mississippi 0 0 0 0 0 0






Systems

Missouri 0 0 0 2 2 2

Montana 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nebraska 0.01 0.01 1 0.01 0.01 2

Nevada 0 0 0 0.0001 0.002 25

New Hampshire 0.01 0.02 3 0.01 0.04 4

New Jersey 1.5 0 2 1.5 0 2

New Mexico 0.1 0.2 14 0.3 0.6 42

New York 14.9 53.0 45 37.0 66.4 71

North Carolina 0.004 1.4 2 1.0 2.9 11

North Dakota 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ohio 0.03 0.1 7 53.3 35.8 71

Oklahoma 0.3 0.01 2 0.3 0.2 14

Oregon 0.1 0.2 10 5.1 1.6 15

Pennsylvania 0.5 1.3 62 53.4 25.8 156




Systems

Puerto Rico 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rhode Island 0.1 0.2 19 0.1 0.2 19

South Carolina 0.1 0.3 10 0.2 0.4 16

South Dakota 0.2 0.8 1 0.2 0.8 1

Tennessee 0.6 0.5 1 0.6 0.6 8

Texas 33.4 59.5 39 121.7 162.4 99

Utah 0.6 1.3 77 1.1 2.0 98

Vermont 6.0 17.5 1,001 11.5 26.4 1,016

Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0

Virginia 4.0 4.0 4 4.5 5.0 75

Washington 0.3 0.8 54 6.5 12.7 293

West Virginia 0.01 0.02 1 65.6 28.7 15

Wisconsin 0.04 0.05 2 0.1 0.1 6

Wyoming 0.0 0.1 3 0.03 0.1 3Source: Smart Electric Power Alliance, 2019.



Appendix B: Top 10Table 6: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Capacity (MWh)












Table 7: Top 10 Utilities by Annual Energy Storage Watt-Hours Per Customer (Wh/C)


2 Sterling Municipal Light Department Massachusetts 523.1





7 Hawaii Electric Light Company Hawaii 95.2


9 Green Mountain Power Corporation Vermont 66.3

10 Randolph Electric Membership Corporation North Carolina 44.0




Table 8: Top 10 Utilities by Cumulative Energy Storage Capacity (MWh)





5 Commonwealth Edison Company Illinois 68.0







Table 9: Top 10 Utilities by Cumulative Energy Storage Watt-Hours Per Customer (Wh/C)


2 Village of Minster Ohio 1,997.3

3 Sterling Municipal Light Department Massachusetts 1,543.3

4 American Samoa Power Authority American Samoa 576.3


6 Glasgow Electric Plant Board Kentucky 244.4








Appendix C: Survey ParticipantsFederal/Generation & Transmission UtilitiesCentral Electric Power Cooperative

Kamo Power Northern Indiana Public Service Company

Tennessee Valley Authority WPPI Energy

Distribution UtilitiesA&N Electric CooperativeAEP OhioAEP TexasAiken Electric Cooperative, Inc.Alger-Delta Cooperative Electric AssociationAlgoma UtilitiesAlliant Energy - IowaAlliant Energy - WisconsinAmeren IllinoisAmerican Samoa Power AuthorityAnaheim Public UtilitiesAppalachian Power Company - Virginia

Appalachian Power Company - West VirginiaArizona Public ServiceAtlantic City Electric Company Austin EnergyAustin Utilities - IdahoAvista Utilities - WashingtonBaltimore Gas & ElectricBerkeley Electric Cooperative, Inc.Black River Electric Cooperative, Inc.Black River Falls Municipal UtilitiesBlue Ridge Electric Cooperative

Boscobel UtilitiesBraintree Electric Light DepartmentBroad River Electric Cooperative, Inc.Brodhead Water & Light CommissionCedarburg Light & Water UtilityCentral Electric Cooperative (OK)City of AmesCity of Crystal FallsCity of EvansvilleCity of GladstoneCity of HolyokeCity of Independence

City of MaquoketaCity of NegauneeCity of Richland CenterCity of StoughtonCity of Sturgeon BayCity of TallahasseeCity of WestbyCity Utilities of Springfield, MissouriCoastal Electric Cooperative, Inc.Cobb Electric Membership CorporationColumbus Water and LightCommonwealth Edison Company

Connecticut Light & PowerConnexus EnergyConsolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.Consumers EnergyCPS EnergyCuba City Light & WaterDelaware Electric CooperativeDelmarva Power - DelawareDelmarva Power - MarylandDenton Municipal ElectricDominion Energy North CarolinaDominion Energy VirginiaDuke Energy Ohio, Inc.



Duquesne Light Company Eagle River Light & Water DepartmentEdisto Electric Cooperative, Inc.El Paso ElectricElectric Power Board of ChattanoogaEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasFairfield Electric Cooperative, Inc.Farmers Electric Cooperative, Inc.Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light CompanyFlorence Utility CommissionFlorida Power & Light CompanyGlasgow Electric Plant BoardGlendale Water & Power

Green Mountain Power CorporationGuadalupe Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc.Hartford ElectricHawaii Electric Light CompanyHawaiian Electric CompanyHeber Light & PowerHorry Electric CooperativeHustisford UtilitiesImperial Irrigation DistrictIndiana Michigan Power - IndianaIndiana Michigan Power - MichiganIndianapolis Power & Light Company (AES)Jefferson UtilitiesJersey Central Power & LightJuneau UtilitiesKauai Island Utility CooperativeKaukauna Utilities

Kentucky Power CompanyKingsport Power CompanyKnoxville Utility BoardLake Mills Light & WaterLaurens Electric CooperativeLiberty UtilitiesLittle River Electric CooperativeLodi Electric UtilityLodi UtilitiesLos Angeles Department of Water and PowerLouisville Gas & ElectricLynches River Electric Cooperative, Inc.Marlboro Electric Cooperative, Inc.Massachusetts Electric Company Maui Electric CompanyMedina Electric Cooperative, Inc.Memphis Light, Gas and Water Division

Menasha Electric & Water UtilitiesMetropolitan Edison CompanyMidAmerican Energy CompanyMonongahela Power Company Mount Horeb UtilityNew Braunfels UtilitiesNew Holstein UtilitiesNew London UtilitiesNew Richmond UtilitiesNewberry Electric CooperativeNiagara Mohawk Power CorporationNorthern Neck Electric Cooperative, Inc.Northern States Power Minnesota (Xcel) - ColoradoNorthern States Power Minnesota (Xcel) - MinnesotaNorthern States Power Minnesota (Xcel) - North DakotaNorthern States Power Minnesota (Xcel) - South Dakota

Northern States Power Texas (Xcel) - New MexicoNorthern States Power Texas (Xcel) - TexasNorthern States Power Wisconsin (Xcel) - MichiganNorthern States Power Wisconsin (Xcel) - WisconsinNorthwest Rural Public Power DistrictNorthWestern Energy LLCNorway Department of Power & LightNSTAROconomowoc UtilitiesOconto Falls Municipal Electric UtilityOhio Edison CompanyOmaha Public Power DistrictOncor Electric DeliveryOrlando Utilities CommissionPacific Gas & ElectricPacifiCorp - California



PacifiCorp - IdahoPacifiCorp - OregonPacifiCorp - UtahPacifiCorp - WashingtonPacifiCorp - WyomingPalmetto Electric CooperativePECO Energy CompanyPedernales Electric Cooperative, Inc.Penn Power Company Pennsylvania Electric CompanyPlymouth UtilitiesPotomac Edison Company - MarylandPotomac Edison Company - VirginiaPotomac Edison Company - West Virginia

Potomac Electric Power Company - District of ColumbiaPotomac Electric Power Company - MarylandLong Island Power AuthorityPublic Service Company of New MexicoPublic Service Company of OklahomaPublic Service Electric & GasPuget Sound EnergyRandolph Electric Membership CorporationRappahannock Electric CooperativeReedsburg Utility CommissionRock Hill UtilitiesRoseville Electric

Sacramento Municipal Utility DistrictSalt River ProjectSan Diego Gas & ElectricSantee Electric CooperativeSeattle City LightSlinger UtilitiesSouth Carolina Electric and Gas CompanySouthern California EdisonSouthern Maryland Electric Cooperative, Inc.Southwestern Electric Power Company - ArkansasSouthwestern Electric Power Company - LouisianaSouthwestern Electric Power Company - Texas

Sterling Municipal Light DepartmentSun Prairie UtilitiesTaylor Electric CooperativeThe Illuminating CompanyThe Narragansett Electric CompanyToledo Edison CompanyTri-County Electric CooperativeTrico Electric Cooperative, Inc.Tucson Electric PowerTwo Rivers Water & LightUnited Power, Inc.Unitil Energy SystemsUNS Electric, Inc.Vectren CorporationVillage of Arcade

Village of BergenVillage of L’AnseVillage of MinsterVillage of MuscodaVillage of New GlarusVillage of Prairie Du SacVillage of WaunakeeVineland Municipal UtilitiesWaterloo Light & Water CommissionWaupun UtilitiesWest Penn Power Company Westar EnergyWheeling Power CompanyWhitehall Electric UtilityYork Electric Cooperative, Inc.

2019 Utility Energy Storage Market...

Documents

Transcript of 2019 Utility Energy Storage Market...