Decision-makers Persuading Themselves What Energy Options They Want to Adopt

An earlier article in this series – What a Decision-making Process for Achieving 100% Renewable Energy Might Look Like – showed that a fourth step in a decision-making process for adopting a renewable energy option might look decision-makers persuading themselves what energy options they want to adopt to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users.

*  *  *  *

Decision-makers persuading themselves what energy options they want to adopt might look like decision-makers creating a decision-making process — for achieving 100% renewable energy — that looks like this:

First, decision-makers might think of a decision-making process that looks like this:

1. decision-makers identify energy options available for adoption
2. decision-makers evaluate benefits of those energy options
3. decision-makers compare benefits of those energy options, and
4. decision-makers persuade themselves what energy options they want to adopt to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy

as a process for composing a plan (a ① “planning process”) that states what energy options in what amounts they want to adopt now, and what energy options in what amounts they might want to adopt later, to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy.

Second, decision-makers might use such a planning process to compose a ② plan that states what energy options in what amounts they want to adopt now, and what energy options in what amounts they might want to adopt later, to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy.

Third, decision-makers might decide on a process for procuring an energy option (a  ③ “procurement process”) that they want to adopt, to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy.

Fourth, decision-makers might use such a procurement process to: ④ adopt an energy option, deliver its benefits for energy service users, measure its actually-delivered benefits and achieve 100% renewable energy.

*  *  *  *

Decision-makers creating such a decision-making process for achieving 100% renewable energy – and persuading themselves what energy options they want to adopt – might look like this:

*  *  *  *

 ①     What Might a Planning Process for Achieving 100% Renewable Energy Look Like?

A planning process for achieving 100% renewable energy might look like decision-makers in consensus on a planning process through which they:

1. identify energy options available for adoption
2. evaluate benefits of those energy options
3. compare benefits of those energy options
4. persuade themselves what energy options they want to adopt now, and what energy options they might want to adopt later, to adopt to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy.

*  *  *  *

②      What Might a Plan for Achieving 100% Renewable Energy Look Like?

A plan for achieving 100% renewable energy might look like decision-makers in consensus on a plan that states:

• what energy options in what amounts they want to adopt now, and
• what energy options in what amounts they might want to adopt later,

to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy.

Such a plan for achieving 100% renewable energy for an electric power grid — that orders energy options for adoption according to decision-makers’ evaluations and comparisons of the benefits of such options – might look like this:

(Disclaimer: The figure above is only a conceptual illustration.  It is not meant to show any actual evaluation or comparison of benefits delivered by the options shown in the figure.)

Such a plan for achieving 100% renewable energy on a ground transportation system — that orders energy options for adoption according to decision-makers’ evaluations and comparisons of benefits delivered by such options – might look like this:

(Disclaimer: The figure above is only a conceptual illustration.  It is not meant to show any actual evaluation or comparison of benefits delivered by the options shown in the figure.)

*  *  *  *

③      What Might a Procurement Process for Achieving 100% Renewable Energy Look Like? 

A procurement process for achieving 100% renewable energy might look like decision-makers in consensus on what procurement process they want to use to adopt an energy option that they want to adopt now.

A procurement process for adopting an energy option and achieving 100% renewable energy might depend on what decision-makers are responsible for making what decisions to adopt what energy options.

Decision-makers responsible for making a decision to adopt an energy option might be said to fall into three categories:

(1)       decision-makers at a utility who make planning and procurement decisions to adopt an energy option

(2)       decision-makers at a private enterprise who make decisions to design and market an energy option that customers want to buy

(3)       decision-makers at a government agency who make planning and procurement decisions to adopt an energy option.

Here are what procurement processes used by decision-makers in those three categories might look like:

(1)       A procurement process used by decision-makers at an electric utility might look like one of two processes:

• a procurement process for adopting distributed energy resource (DER) options, or
• a procurement process for adopting non-DER options:

Procurement process for adopting DER options. If the energy option is adopted at the distribution-level of the utility’s energy service system (that is, the energy option is a distributed energy resource (DER) option), then a procurement process for adopting the DER option might look like a combination of:

• an interconnection review process (interconnection standards and procedures) to ensure delivery of expected performance benefits by the DER option, and
• a tariff that apportions expected economic benefits of the DER option between the provider of the DER option and all of the utility’s energy service users.

Hawaii Story: In Hawaii, a customer self-supply (CSS) system is a DER option consisting of a user-provided non-export PV generation system plus a user-provided energy storage system and having a capacity of ≤100 kW. Decision-makers in Hawaii have established an interconnection review process – consisting of interconnection standards and interconnection procedures (initial review, supplemental review, interconnection requirements study) applicable to a CSS system – to ensure that adoption of the CSS system delivers distribution-level performance benefits. That is, the interconnection review process ensures that electric power flows attributable to the CSS system do not cause physical properties (such as voltage) of electric power flows on the distribution circuit to go outside specified reliable ranges.

Decision-makers in Hawaii have established a tariff for energy supplied by a CSS system. The tariff imputes zero value to energy supplied to the grid by a CSS system because a CSS system is prohibited from exporting energy to the grid. Under the tariff, the value to the user of energy supplied by the CSS system is the user’s avoided cost (in $/kWh) of energy that the user does not have to purchase from the grid because the user is being supplied with energy by the CSS system. The “zero-value” tariff – for energy supplied to the grid by the CSS system — apportions economic benefits of a CSS system between (a) the user of the CSS system who realizes an economic benefit equal to the difference between (i) the user’s avoided cost value of the energy supplied by the CSS system to the user, and (ii) the user’s incurred cost of providing the CSS system and supplying that energy; and (b) the utility and all its electric power users who (i) realize avoided cost savings from load reduction and load leveling supplied to the grid by the CSS system, and (ii) pay $0/kWh under the “zero-value” tariff for those avoided cost savings.

Procurement process for adopting non-DER options. If the energy option is adopted at the system-level of the utility’s energy service system (that is, the energy option might be considered a non-DER option), then a procurement process for adopting the non-DER option might look like a combination of

• a system impacts study to ensure delivery of expected performance benefits by the non-DER option, and
• a competitive bidding process that apportions expected economic benefits of the non-DER option between the provider of the non-DER option and the utility (and all of the utility’s energy service users)

Hawaii Story: In Hawaii, a PV generation facility that exports energy to the grid and is adopted with the grid at the system-level (that is, the transmission or sub-transmission level of the grid) might be considered a non-DER option. Decision-makers at Hawaii’s principal electric utility, Hawaiian Electric, have a practice of performing a system impacts study to ensure that such a PV generation facility delivers performance benefits. That is, the system impacts study ensures that electric power flows attributable to the PV generation facility do not cause physical properties (such as frequency) of electric power flows on the grid to go outside specified reliable ranges.

For a PV generation facility more than 5 MW on the island of Oahu – or more than about 2.72 MW on the islands of Hawaii or Maui – the dollar amount (in $/kWh) paid by the utility for energy supplied by such a PV generation facility is determined through a competitive bidding process. The competitive bidding process apportions the economic benefits of such a PV generation facility between (a) the provider of the PV generation facility who realizes an economic benefit equal to the difference between (i) the dollar amount received from the utility for energy supplied by the PV generation system (in $/kWh), and (ii) the provider’s incurred cost of supplying that energy to the grid (in $/kWh); and (b) the utility and all its electric power users who realize an economic benefit equal to the difference between (i) the utility’s avoided dollar costs (in $/kWh) attributable to energy supplied by the PV generation facility, and (ii) the dollar amounts (in $/kWh) paid by the utility for that energy.

(2)       A procurement process used by decision-makers at a private enterprise to get an energy option adopted might look like sale of the energy option in a market to customers who want to buy and adopt the energy option because they value the benefits delivered by the energy option:

Hawaii Story: Solar water heaters are a renewable energy option for heating uses that have been widely marketed, sold and adopted in Hawaii. Solar water heaters are adopted through a procurement process in which private enterprises sell solar water heaters in the Hawaii market to customers who want to buy solar water heaters because customers value the benefits delivered by solar water heaters.

(3)       A procurement process used by decision-makers at a government agency to adopt an energy option might look like contractual provisions and a competitive bidding process designed to ensure that adoption of the energy option results in delivery of its expected benefits for energy service users:

Hawaii Story: Decision-makers at Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transit prescribed “General Conditions for Design-Build Contracts” to procure design and construction of sections of Honolulu’s electric-powered rail transit system. The “General Conditions for Design-Build Contracts” contains provisions ensuring that work is performed in compliance with contracts. The “General Conditions for Design-Build Contracts” contains competitive bidding provisions, request for proposal provisions and change order provisions for managing design and construction costs.

④      What Might Adopting an Energy Option to Achieve 100% Renewable Energy Look Like?

Decision-makers adopting an energy option to achieve 100% renewable energy might look like decision-makers placing the energy option in service, and commencing delivery of its benefits for energy service users.

Decision-makers adopting such an energy option also might look like decision-makers measuring the benefits actually delivered by the energy option, and comparing those actually-delivered benefits with benefits that were expected when decision-makers decided to adopt the energy option.

Hawaii Story: Decision-makers at Hawaii’s principal electric utility, Hawaiian Electric, proposed an Evaluation, Measurement & Verification (EMV) process to determine actual customer load reductions and true avoided system costs attributable to the utility’s proposed Demand Response Program.

*  *  *  *

If a decision-making process for achieving 100% renewable energy – and decision-makers persuading themselves what energy options they want to adopt — looks like:

①      decision-makers in consensus on a planning process through which they:

1. identify energy options available for adoption,
2. evaluate benefits of those energy options,
3. compare benefits of those energy options, and
4. persuade themselves what energy options they want to adopt now, and what energy options they might want to adopt later, to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy,

②      decision-makers in consensus on a plan for achieving 100% renewable energy that states:

• what energy options in what amounts they want to adopt now, and
• what energy options in what amounts they might want to adopt later,

to deliver greatest benefits for energy service users and achieve 100% renewable energy

③      decision-makers in consensus on a procurement process:

• to ensure that an energy option delivers performance benefits, and
• to apportion economic benefits of an energy option between energy service providers and energy service users

④      decision-makers in consensus on:

• adopting an energy option and placing it in service
• delivering the energy option’s benefits to energy service users
• measuring benefits actually delivered by the energy option, and
• comparing its actually-delivered benefits with benefits expected at the time when decision-makers decided to adopt the energy option

then, what might swiftly achieving 100% renewable energy look like?

*  *  *  *

Wondering what swiftly achieving 100% renewable energy might look like?

My new book, You Can Reverse Global Warming, is the first-ever book to show a decision-making process for swiftly achieving 100% renewable energy and reversing global warming.

For a limited time, you can download a complimentary advance copy of You Can Reverse Global Warming at www.erikkvam.com.

Got questions about how you can swiftly achieve 100% renewable energy?  About how you can reverse global warming?  If you do, I hope that you will send me a message at extraordinary@erikkvam.com.

*  *  *  *

In the next article in this Reversing Global Warming series, I’ll show you what a decision-making process for swiftly achieving 100% renewable energy might look like.

Thank you for reading this article.  I’m grateful for your comments.