虚拟电厂规模化发展观察：成功部署的实际经验-Insights into Scaling Virtual Power Plants Real-World Findings for Successful Deployment

微信扫码，打开到小程序

1 Insights into Scaling Virtual Power Plants Real-World Findings for Successful Deployment January 2025 Angela Long (Rockcress Consulting) Ryan Long (Rockcress Consulting) Natalie Mims Frick (Berkeley Lab) Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 5 The Role of Leadership in Successful VPP Designs 7 Identify A Clear Vision And Goal 7 Establish Strong Leadership Supporting VPPs 9 Create Dedicated VPP Staff 10 Clearly Define and Use VPP Terminology 11 Grid and Technology Investments 14 Align Software Investment in VPP with Grid Needs 14 Establish DER Participation Guidelines 19 Adopt Technology Standards 21 Enable Enterprise-Wide VPP Adoption with Integrated Solutions 23 Consider the Need for Visibility, Monitoring and Control 24 Develop Communication Protocols 25 Program Planning and Design 28 Support Industry-Wide Collaboration 29 Establish Measurable Performance to Achieve Goals 30 Develop a VPP Procurement Process 32 Enable Robust VPP Valuation 33 Design Customer-Centric Programs 35 Use Pilots to Learn Quickly 37 VPP Case Studies 39 Eversource 41 Holy Cross Energy 42 National Grid 43 PacifiCorp 44 Portland General Electric 45 Puget Sound Energy 46 Sacramento Municipal Utility District 47 Appendices 48 Appendix A. Methods 49 Appendix B. Interview Guide 52 Appendix C. DERMS Glossary 55 Appendix D. Interview Findings Catalog 56 Prepared By Angela Long, Rockcress Consulting (Rockcress) Ryan Long, Rockcress Consulting (Rockcress) Natalie Mims Frick, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) Prepared For United States Department of Energy (U.S. DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Acknowledgments We would like to thank Ted Light of Lighthouse Energy Consulting, Elizabeth Bye and Melissa Costello of Strategy by eb, and John Hall of Jhallx Design for their significant contributions to this report. Disclaimer This document was prepared by Rockcress Consulting as an account of work sponsored by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and funded by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors and interviewees expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, The Regents of the University of California or Rockcress Consulting. Contributors We would also like to thank all the interviewees that participated in this study, which are listed in alphabetical order by first name. Adam Light, TRC Amy Findlay, formerly of Eversource Andrew McAllister, California Energy Commission Arushi Sharma Frank, formerly of Tesla Bill Burke, Virtual Peaker Bob Caplan, Puget Sound Energy Chad Larson, Puget Sound Energy Charlie Seese, Puget Sound Energy Collin Craig, PAE Engineering Darren Murtaugh, ICF David Manning, Holy Cross Energy Denver Hinds, SMUD Eric Blank, Colorado Public Utilities Commission Franco Albi, Portland General Electric Gabby Ostrov, Eversource Graham Turk, MIT Jon Fortune, Swell Energy Josh Keeling, UtilityAPI Juan Pablo Carvallo, U.S. DOE Karina Hershberg, PAE Engineering Kevin Gowan, Puget Sound Energy Kimbrell Larouche, Holy Cross Energy Laurent Sayer, Puget Sound Energy Mark Hormann, Accurant International Nick Sayan, Oregon Public Utility Commission Paul Spitsen, U.S. DOE Paul Wassink, National Grid Peter Kernan, Oregon Public Utility Commission Peter Polonsky, formerly of the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission Rick Hunter, Pivot Energy Robert Margolis, U.S. DOE Sam Hartnett, Uplight Sarah Delisle, Swell Energy Sarah Hall, Oregon Public Utility Commission Shawn Grant, PacifiCorp Stacy Miller, U.S. DOE Tolu Omotoso, NRECA Tomas Smith, Puget Sound Energy 5 5 REAL-WORLD FINDINGS FOR SUCCESSFUL DEPLOYMENT Insights into Scaling Virtual Power Plants Executive Summary Introduction Leadership Investments Planning Case Studies Appendices 1 Executive Summary Virtual Power Plants (VPPs) are a distributed, technology-neutral solution that effectively address critical grid and customer needs, such as reducing peak demand and lowering energy bills.1 They can offer clean, flexible, low-cost resources as grid needs evolve—driven by increased adoption of distributed energy resources (DERs), building and vehicle electrification, policy goals and shifting consumer preferences. VPPs are poised for rapid growth, with the potential to expand by up to 160 GW by 2030—tripling their current scale and reducing grid costs for consumers.2 However, a variety of challenges are slowing the rate at which VPPs are adopted and expanded. The Role of Leadership in VPP Success Findings 1 The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) defines VPPs as “aggregations of DERs such as rooftop solar with behind-the-meter (BTM) batteries, electric vehicles (EVs) and electric water heaters, smart buildings and their controls, and flexible commercial and industrial (C&I) loads that can balance electricity demand and supply, as well as provide utility-scale and utility-grade grid services.” 2 Downing, J. N. Johnson, M. McNicholas, et al. Sept. 2023. Pathways to Commercial Liftoff: Virtual Power Plants. Strong Leadership is Essential for VPP Success: Effective leadership from both utilities and regulators enables successful implementation and long-term sustainability of VPPs. A clear vision, and executive-level staff support help guide the integration of DERs and foster internal collaboration. Clear Vision, Goals, and Terminology Drive VPP Effectiveness: Defining a tailored vision and clear, measurable goals for VPPs enables internal buy- in and helps to address the complexities of VPP implementation. Standardizing VPP terminology across utilities, regulators, and solution providers streamlines communication and can reduce confusion during program deployment. Dedicated Staff and Cross-Functional Collaboration are Key to Implementation: Successful VPPs use dedicated teams, with a focus on consistency and collaboration across departments. These teams enable the successful integrated design, deployment, and ongoing operation of VPPs. Executive Summary Introduction Leadership Investments Planning Case Studies Appendices 2 Grid and Technology Investments Findings 3 IEEE Standards Association’s IEEE 1547-2018 is the standard for interconnection and interoperability of DERs with associated electric power systems interfaces. Investment in Software Solutions Support VPP Integration: Successful VPPs use software solutions, such as Distributed Energy Management Systems (DERMS) and Advanced Distribution Management Systems (ADMS), to seamlessly integrate DER deployment into grid operations. Investing in unified solutions that consolidate systems can improve operational efficiency, reduce costs, and allow for more sophisticated grid management capabilities, such as visibility, control and flexibility of DERs. Clear DER Participation and Communication Protocols Support Effective VPP Operations: Establishing standardized participation guidelines and communication protocols to achieve interoperability acr