New York on March 31 issued the first iteration of a plan to move the state toward greater use of flexible resources to meet future power needs while preserving reliability and affordability.
The plan is part of the Grid of the Future proceeding (Case 24-E-0165) initiated by the Public Service Commission in April 2024. (See NY PSC Launches Grid of the Future Proceeding.) It is intended to guide development of a more expansive process for distributed system implementation plans (DSIPs) prepared by the six investor-owned utilities as they implement a distributed system platform (DSP). The second iteration of the plan is expected by the end of this year.
Earlier this year, as part of the same effort, Volumes 1 and 2 of the Grid Flexibility Study prepared by The Brattle Group were released by the Department of Public Service and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. (See Study Finds Considerable ‘Grid Flexibility’ Potential in New York.)
The First Iteration of the Grid of the Future Plan was prepared by DNV Energy Insights USA and was released along with Volume 3 of Brattle’s Grid Flexibility Study, which provides supplemental analysis.
A central goal of the Grid of the Future proceeding is to meet the state’s ambitious clean energy goals at a manageable cost while maintaining system reliability. Flexible solutions such as distributed energy resources and virtual power plants are potential means to accomplish this.
The plan seeks to develop a DSIP process better aligned with the Grid of the Future proceeding, and to provide short- and long-term recommendations to ensure that DSIP filings are aligned with the state’s 2030 and 2040 goals.
After a series of reviews, DNV offered several conclusions:
-
- The DSIPs as currently prepared do not provide outcome- or goal-oriented information and do not contain clear objectives or metrics, so it is difficult to assess whether a utility is progressing toward a functional DSP.
- Reporting, detail and organization are inconsistent among the DSIPs, and some answers to complex questions are incomplete; collective action among the utilities resulted in more comprehensive answers.
- New York’s regulatory environment is not an undue obstacle to development of a DSP; instead, the most significant headwinds are grid investment costs and market design, which hinder efficiency and slow adoption. The most significant tailwinds are data access and standardized interconnection requirements.
- Some of the capabilities critical to a DSP are fully deployed and integrated but many have not been automated, are not well-integrated or are not deployed utility-wide.
DNV offered recommendations along the themes of reorganization, clarity and standardization:
-
- Department of Public Service staff should clarify their guidance to utilities to elicit clearer and more consistent responses, and to reduce the inconsistencies between DSIPs.
- Multipronged questions should be eliminated; content organization should be prescribed; and explicit expectations about answers should be offered.
- Technical topic areas can be further streamlined and reorganized to better reflect the evolving needs of a DSP.
DNV also offered recommendations to transform the DSIP process from a regulatory check-in to a strategic tool to guide utilities, regulators and stakeholders:
-
- Future versions of the DSIPs could focus on the value and intended outcomes of the processes and activities rather than just documenting them, and could include specific metrics to track progress.
- More detailed and streamlined guidance that includes standardized templates and metrics would make DSIPs more consistent and digestible, as well as easier to compare.
- Addressing gaps identified by the capabilities in the DSP framework will ensure DSIPs are comprehensive; including a focus on market design and implementation will allow reporting on grid edge capabilities.
The authors expect the Second Iteration of the Grid of the Future Plan to provide more specific recommendations. It is due to be released by Dec. 31, although the First Iteration and the Grid Flexibility Study both were delivered after their original target dates.