As renewable resources rise to new heights in cities and states nationwide, it’s good to remember we still have a distance to climb. Getting to 100% clean energy by any definition within 30 years or less will take a full toolbox of renewable generation on every scale, along with emerging innovations in load flexibility and storage. It’s a thrilling challenge. But there’s no need to raise the mountain, by ignoring energy efficiency options. It’s a good time to remind ourselves that the cheapest, smartest energy is the energy you don’t use, thanks to energy efficiency improvements. 

I’ve adhered to this principal for decades. And I’ve had the pleasure of diving back into energy efficiency periodically, as I’ve led periodic updates to consumer outreach materials for the American Public Power Association. These include guides that APPA member utilities can provide to their residential and small-business customers, and a new version in Spanish.

The biggest surprise in our recent research? Over the past five to ten years, energy efficiency has become the success story that hardly anyone knows. And many public agencies, utilities and non-profits are complicit—if inadvertently—because they have not replaced outdated information from websites and handouts.

As a result, it’s all too easy for clean energy skeptics to leverage damaging disinformation. Last fall, President Trump introduced a roll-back of lighting efficiency standards with a rambling commentary on compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). In addition to his complaints about the price of these “new bulbs,” the President said, “(and) if they break it’s considered a hazardous waste site.” This exaggeration, referring to a small amount of mercury in the CFL lamps, was unwarranted, but more to the point, CFLs were already practically gone from the market. By the first quarter of 2019, CFLs accounted for less than 5% of all light bulb sales, according to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Top manufacturers, including GE, had stopped making them. Today, the market is flush with LEDs that come in an array of color tones and brightness and offer features from three-way switching to remote controls. In 2017, U.S. EPA Energy Star partners published an early report on this remarkable market transformation, called The Light Bulb Revolution.

According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), the current rollback on lighting standards could cost U.S. consumers an extra $14 billion on energy bills annually and raise energy generation needs.

But here’s the thing: utilities and our clean energy allies still use the CFL as the icon for energy efficiency and “green living.”  Just Google “energy efficient light bulb cartoon.” Or grab a chart off a similar Google search, comparing light bulb choices. You’re likely to get an eight to 10 year old graphic, estimating LED prices at $10 to $25 a piece. Local agencies still use these charts and cite them at outreach events. Yet the cost of LEDs today is less than one-tenththeir cost in 2012, and the quality and versatility of LEDs is incomparable to earlier generations of these lamps. If we experts don’t spread the good news about energy efficiency, who will?

Energy advances related to other appliances and electronics are similarly under-reported and consequently, their potential benefits are under-realized. For example, big-screen TVs were frightening energy hogs in the early 2000s. But today, large-screen plasma TVs are no longer on the market. They’ve been replaced by backlit LED TVs and new technologies, such as new High-Dynamic Range (HDR) TVs and Organic Light-Emitting-Diode (OLED) TVs. Gamers need to know they have new affordable options—and that a few minutes spent on their system’s control settings might save them enough to pay for a new game release. Unfortunately, this information is not top of mind for gamers or for any energy user—and readily available information is out of date or buried on the U.S. EPA website.

One Google search I found especially disheartening was a search for updates on plug loads, or what we used to call “Energy Vampires.” It was President George W. Bush who first popularized that term in the early 2000s and took aim at electronic devices that sucked electricity whenever they were plugged in, whether operating or not. After the term showed up in a State of the Union address, policymakers and manufacturers stepped up, and today, electronics from laptops to smart speakers draw a relative pin-prick of power. (According to ESource, the Google Home smart speaker draws about 2 Watts in idle mode and the Echo draws just under 3; most charging devices draw less than 1 Watt.) Yet I’m going to bet a lot of energy agencies are still handing out factsheets about the shameless energy demand of fax machines, VCRs and Ti-Vos. You can flash back, looking at a still-posted Lawrence Berkeley National Labs (LBNL) website on standby energy needs, which has references listed from as far back as the 1990s, and none more recent than 2008.

Granted, our federal agencies are not making it easy to get the good news out today. Nor are they helping to address new challenges, such as the need for clean electrification, load flexibility, resilience and other concerns The U.S. EPA Energy Star Program escaped the ax for 2020 with the budget passed by Congress and signed late last year. Yet the plan is to roll back standards and create evasive efficiency loopholes for everything from lighting options to air conditioners, furnaces and dishwashers. It is further to “privatize” Energy Star in step with year-on-year reductionsproposed for the program’s estimated $46 million budget. Already, it is harder to find the Energy Star prominently displayed and explained, when you shop for whatever you’re about to plug in. I’d suggest that every organization that has a stake in this game should set aside a little time to audit the energy efficiency information it is sharing, to highlight the good stuff, and most especially, to wipe badly outdated stuff from the web.

Advocates say they are formulating legal strategies to delay the demise of energy efficiency standards, but the first step is to make sure the media and your energy customers have the facts. Reportedly, appliance and electronics manufacturers would like to stick to the plans they’ve been ramping up for years, to help meet clean energy and modernization goals. Let’s do what we can to preserve their chances to win in a free and fair market. Update your facts. And give a skeptic a warm, bright LED, preferably with the current price tag attached. Let’s spread the word that clean energy is not only do-able; it’s close at hand.

Contact us today, to discuss an audit and update of your energy outreach materials.

This blog is cross-posted with the Community Solar Value Project site, but it is timely as it refers to a poster that Cliburn and Associates will be co-presenting at Solar Power International this month. It begins with my favorite image of people working in silos (see below). Unfortunately, you may see a similar image in your own community—or in any organization that is striving to succeed with community solar-plus. As we carry that work forward, Cliburn and Associates and our colleagues at Extensible Energy have led a gentle, persistent campaign to move all the folks needed for highly integrated solutions out of their silos and into more effective and fast-acting collaborations. But sometimes, as our Poster* suggests, gentle persuasion needs a boost in the form of policy action.

Taking a critical look at the small number of existing community solar-plus projects, we recognized that most solar-plus projects are still in the realm of consumer-owned utilities (COUs, such as electric co-ops and munis). That is primarily because COUs face fewer state-policy barriers to innovation. Yet there are some emerging IOU projects, too, which we also examined. We identified four major barriers to community solar-plus success:

1. Less favorable net metering policies for community solar or customer-owned systems persist, and there is little if any guidance for solar plus storage;

2. Lack of standardization in procurement methods for energy storage systems, especially with regard to establishing complex multi-partner storage-operation contracts;

3. Full requirements wholesale power contracts for COUs often limit the local utility's ability to generate their own energy or to hold PPAs. At the same time, many wholesale suppliers are reluctant to provide local DERs;

4. COU’s represented by G&Ts or joint action agencies must revisit agreements to promote both innovation and equity among members.

Notice that none of these has much to do with a need for technology innovation. The closest we come to a missing technical link would be to improve the operation (perhaps standardization?) of storage operating software, so utilities could more readily integrate battery storage with existing DR programs. Tech wizards I have not met yet are probably out there shrugging. “Sure, we can do that.”

But the rest of these barriers have to do with policy. For example, here in New Mexico, I met last year with a team that was drafting community solar legislation. We agreed that allowing community solar to co-locate with storage would be forward-looking for utilities and stakeholders. But if the community solar developer were a private "third party," then more guidance would be needed in order to work with the utility. Would the arrangement affect the community solar "share" value? Virtual net metering, using time-of-use rates or incentives, could be part of that answer. But, diving deeper...? These are complicated questions. Alas, that legislation did not pass last session, but it will come up again.

According to Vote Solar, states like Massachusetts and Hawaii have recently taken steps to provide additional value for community solar plus storage. Under the Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target Program, co-located energy storage that meets performance requirements receives a $0.045 cent per kWh storage adder. Hawaii encourages community solar to be interconnected with a range of DERs to deliver 85% of the system's output during on-peak times from 5 to 10 pm. In exchange for meeting minimum performance requirements, these facilities can earn a Peaker Credit Rate via a clearing price auction. For states like Hawaii that have high penetrations of renewables, it is critical to develop policies to incentivize dispatchable power at times of peak grid demand and to discourage solar over- production. Additional incentives could be provided for aspects of strategic siting and design, local resiliency, and community empowerment. In coming months, more policy innovation in leading states could provide examples that state regulators and local utility boards can follow.

Why does it matter? Utilities are already acquiring a tremendous amount of storage, largely without the community solar element. In Q1 of 2019, the amount of utility energy storage was 5 times that acquired in Q1 the year before. But the utility’s focus can be narrow. Based on price alone, centralized solar-plus or even batteries disassociated from solar may appear to be the top choice. The aforementioned community-based DER benefits need policy support—at least until more of these benefits are accurately and routinely monetized under regulation. Community solar represents a force to preserve interest in local solar; it has been credited as the major force behind commercial solar growth the past several years. Once regulators and utilities start to work across silos—even if required to do so—they can unleash more value in the synergies associated with community solar-plus.

*Note: Cliburn and Powers co-authored this assessment and recommendations with Achyut Shrestha of North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center (NCCET) and Marta Tomic of Vote Solar. We are grateful for their insights and collaboration.

Have you ever had a life experience that put your priorities in order? That is, of course a personal question, which does not immediately bring to mind the transformation of the utility industry and the successful integration of solar plus storage into the grid. Yet, my long history of working in this field has given me the strange authority to say that yes, making progress in these technical areas and on the policies that support them are priorities for me and for this firm. But as a woman in energy for all of this time, I have sometimes flexed to accommodate other top priorities, too.

Last year, in 2018, I spent some of my time as a caregiver for an aging parent, and I spent another chunk of my time as an energy professional at the top of my game. Well, not constantly at the top–keeping up this website was one task that fell off the tray. But I was fortunate to have ongoing clients and colleagues who helped Cliburn and Associates to keep building our reputation for a passion for the work, plus compassion for the people behind the scene, and a view (though sometimes a bit distant) of the rich quality of life that drives us.

As we enter 2019, the focus of our work is even clearer. Cliburn and Associates has long noted that the utility transformation is largely "a people problem." Today's energy integration challenges require working across departments and disciplines, and sometimes working earnestly with stakeholders who have widely varying views. We have technical expertise and economics expertise–but technical and economic solutions also have organizational, political and ultimately human dimensions. It is quite a puzzle, to solve 21st-Century energy challenges! But that is why it has always been my good fortune to spend a a large–and well-focused–chunk of time working toward new energy solutions.

By the way, we just posted a new blog to the Community Solar Value Project website, which is where some of Cliburn and Associates' most recent work may be found. That blog is on a theme related to communications–specifically applying lessons from the latest JD Power Utility Outlook to the opportunities that utilities can unleash when they embark upon a well-designed, high-value community solar program.

Not so long ago, I was presenting about the benefits of offering community solar together with other energy options, as one way to engage with utility customers in reinventing utility service for the age of renewables. Understand that I was addressing the Peak Load Management Alliance, so my audience already had experience pushing the energy-information rock uphill. Some in the audience wished that their favored solutions, from new rate designs to  energy storage systems, were as popular as solar panels. They were ready to consider working with utility solar managers and solar developers on new, packaged solutions.

Their viewpoint—which I share—was that if (in fact) the utility is engaging less than 15 minutes per year, either personally or digitally, with the average customer, then they’d better make it relevant, and (I mean this in the healthiest way) they’d better make it viral.

Of course I know that not every utility is going to offer community solar packaged with other options; our CSVP Solutions Toolkit is specifically designed for customization, so you can meet whatever your immediate and long-term program needs might be. But I also know it is time for customer engagement to be about much more than real-time outage reports and paperless bills. And I will tell you why.

Check out the latest ESource PowerWalking update, a series of man-on-the-street interviews created by the inimitable Bill LeBlanc. The latest interviews are almost as funny as they were in 2011… suggesting, if not exactly proving, that utility customers still need much better understanding about everything electric, with the possible exception of the today's widely-held notion that “Solar energy is … the thing of now.”

Does the content of your engagement with customers matter? I’d say, yes, because even though JD Power tells us that customers are more satisfied with their utilities than ever, those barely grounded customer relationships are wired for disruption.

According to the most recent Smart Grid Consumer Collaborative (SGCC) Consumer Pulse and Market Segmentation Study, the smart grid is reasonably well known; I’d hazard to guess that most people are more comfortable thinking about smart grids, smart appliances and energy apps than they are with the disembodied kilowatt-hour. For example, the SGCC study found that 58% of customers are interested in rooftop or shared solar, and 56% are interested in smart thermostats. It found sweeping interest (75%) in energy storage systems that could provide backup power for their homes.

When interviewed by GreenTech Media last year, SGCC President Patty Durand said, in effect, that today’s utilities should be ready for the teachable moment, whenever customers call, text, or scroll through. Utilities should be the trusted advisor, helping to identify the best option or options for customers, even if their initial interests are a little vague. SGCC research showed that 44% of utility customers surveyed identify with the statement, “Smart technologies fit our environmentally aware, high-tech lifestyles.” Doesn't that sound like somebody your utility could see as more than a customer—perhaps as a partner in your ongoing transformation?

I’ve been looking for an updated metric on how much the average conversation with a customer service representative costs the utility; if you have taht citation, contact me. But even without a quotable number, it’s safe to guess that every encounter with a customer is precious. And it's safe to guess that it’s not just passive engagement, but empowerment that most customers seek.

You can push too hard or too fast, of course. But in many regions, community solar attracts those prospective partners, who are self-selected for wanting to do something meaningful, for themselves and for the community at large. Get ready to talk to these customers about how they can share in beneficial solar plus demand response, low-tech storage or batteries, and talk to them about what reinventing the utility for this new Century means. Whether you ultimately decide to package your offers, or to put out a menu a la carte, it’s time to educate program staff and customer representatives to work with customers, who already want to to be what SGCC calls your Green Champions.

We hope you enjoy sources from the pages cited, and contact us to get started today.

For most of my long career, I've focused on promoting renewable energy. Distributed renewables, to be exact, along with the energy efficiency and load management strategies that minimize the cost and maximize the effectiveness of this approach. I was an early proponent of utility solar, telling a crowd at the ASES Solar 2006 conference that utilities would be smart to take a strategic approach to distributed solar, possibly leasing well-sited roof-space for their own systems or working out PPAs, which were still at that time prohibited in several states. I recall asking, wouldn't it be better if the utility helped to solarize a whole school, rather than hitching up a half-dozen kW or so? The audience response was sharply divided. Except for some notable exceptions, the utility folks remained skeptical for their reasons, and most of the others were opposed, for theirs. I stressed that we needed gigawatts of solar–soon–in order to meet climate goals. I proposed that utilities were best-positioned to deploy lots of solar affordably, and that while I remained a stalwart solar advocate, I no more wanted to buy a solar system for house than I wanted to buy a gas plant to put beside it.

Well, last month, we got solar on our roof. It's a great little system–about 3 kW, which is a badge of honor for having done my energy-efficiency homework. It has a nice new inverter, and is easy to build out, when I decide to get an EV. It even looks sharp. But it's a little bittersweet, because if I'd had a high-value, utility-based community solar option, I'd be twice as proud.

Here's why: Our highly professional solar vendor sent a sales guy out twice. Then, once my husband and I signed the contract, the solar designer came out. There was a flurry of additional paperwork, including the building permit and interconnection application, and news that we would have to pay extra to match the AMR meter at our house. Three guys came out for the install, which was great–they were done in about five hours, despite an unexpected snow storm. Another guy came to check it out. Then there was the county inspector. Then the meter installer. Then some folderal about turning it on. Six weeks later, some paperwork got lost in the mail, but once that turns up, we will be done. Solarized. Understand that I am a satisfied customer, but also keenly aware of why I'm working on a Department of Energy SunShot project, aimed at solar soft-cost reduction.

The utilities (and the regulators that so greatly influence them) have a great opportunity here to find the sweet spot between one-off solar projects like mine and giant centralized solar projects that preclude many flexible-grid benefits. I am agnostic about utility ownership (though I kind of like the benefits of utilities working with innovative, customer-focused biz partners). I think utilities would be surprised by customer readiness for additional clean electrification and load management options (not just EVs, but also controlled water heaters, pre-cooling, and smart appliances), and customers might be surprised by the delightful feeling of participating in a community solar project that offers shares that just about anyone could afford. 

I would go so far as to say that community solar itself could be an interim step, before utilities learn to incorporate high-percentages of distributed solar and other DER on the system, as their standard operating procedure. Yes, I know, I've been wildly optimistic about solar before. My vision is not quite realized in my own backyard, but I think it's coming. Maybe by the time I get that EV, I'll be able to offset its electricity needs by buying in to a community solar project instead.