NY Prize Microgrid Program

NY Prize Microgrid Program is a grant from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) that funds the development of community microgrids to improve energy reliability and resilience in New York State.

The $40 million NY Prize community microgrid competition supports local governments, community organizations, and utilities in designing and implementing microgrids capable of operating independently from the main grid during outages. The program is structured as a multi-stage competition progressing from feasibility studies through design and implementation.

Priority is given to projects serving critical facilities and communities that demonstrate the ability to generate, store, and manage power locally. The program aligns with New York's Reforming the Energy Vision strategy for cleaner, more reliable energy.

 Economic Development & Jobs ## Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) Reforming the Energy Vision — New York’s comprehensive strategy to enable self-sustaining clean energy markets supporting a cleaner, more reliable, and affordable energy system.  What Do We Want and Need?  Economic Burden on Customers Over the past ten years, we spent $17 billion to maintain our electric power grid.

We predict that number to jump to $30 billion ##  Economic Burden on Customers The rate of capacity utilization of our electric power grid is: 6 A group of interconnected loads and distributed energy resources that form a single controllable entity capable of operating continuously in both grid-connected and islanded mode. ## Not New . .

. Not Backup Generation 8 • Pipeline of ~25 feasibility studies communities in NY and beyond ## Key New York State Initiatives • Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) • REV Pilots/Demonstrations • Clean Energy Fund (10 year; multiple R&D and Mkt. Dev.

programs) • Smart Grid RD&D (9 year) • Microgrid Design Projects (4 underway) • Comprehensive Microgrid Assessments completed Microgrid Assessment (2010) Microgrids for Critical Facilities (2014)(includes case studies) http://www. nyserda. ny.

gov/-/media/Files/Publications/Research/Electic-Power-Delivery/Microgrids-for-Critical-Facility-NYS.

pdf • NY Prize Community Microgrid Competition (Open) 10 ## NY Prize – Multi-Stage Competition • The $40 million NY Prize community microgrid competition (RFP 3044 is comprised of three stages: • Stage 1: Feasibility Assessment (OPEN) • Stage 2: Engineering Design and Financial /Business Plan • Stage 3: Microgrid Build-out and Operation • Open enrollment structure to accelerate pipeline of projects 11 Critical project partners: Municipalities and Utilities All communities enter/apply to competition and are evaluated at each stage by external judges Awards to Conduct Feasibility Assessments Feasibility Evaluated Awards for Audit Grade Design Awards for Build-out/ Operation Threshold Audit Grade Design Criteria Audit Grade Design Review 12 ## NY Prize – Competition Schedule 1 Stage 1 Proposals Accepted Through May 15, 2015 Stage 1 Proposals Evaluated Weekly through May 28, 2015 Stage 2 Open/Entries Accepted July 15, 2015 /through February 2016 Stage 2 Proposals Evaluated Through March 2016 Stage 3 Open/Entries Accepted Sept15, 2015 /through December 2017 Stage 3 Proposals Evaluated Every 6 months through January 2018 Project Commissioning 24 months after contract execution RFP 3044 governs / schedule subject to change 13 ## NY Prize – Stage 1 of Competition Cultivating Community Prospects • Community teaming arrangements • Consider targeting utility “opportunity zones” • Embedded utility/community-municipal partnership • Energy efficiency, CHP, solar, other resources part of resource portfolio (leverage portfolio of current incentive programs) • Critical public facilities in mix (minimum of one must be included) • U.S. Housing and Urban Development objectives considered (impacted population involved; (weather/income) • Consider REV demonstration/laboratory 14 ## NY Prize – Stage 1 Feasibility Study •NY Prize is making up to $100,000 available, on competitive basis to conduct assessment (no cost-share is required) •Applicants expected to conduct preliminary microgrid planning to submit viable proposal(high-level assessment included in proposal) • Proposals will be evaluated, on an as-received basis, against pre-scribed evaluation criteria 15 • The overall cost and benefits of the project • The project’s contribution to public need (increasing safety and quality of life for residents in an outage situation) • The technical and operational performance of the project • The demonstrated reliability of the proposed microgrid configuration • The use of clean and renewable generation resources in the project • Overall financial and managerial capabilities of the developer Conduct Feasibility Assessment Acquire Financing, Approvals, and Construct Set Project Goals, Organize, and Educate Stakeholders 17 Facilities so vital to the state that the disruption, incapacitation or destruction of such systems could jeopardize the health, safety, welfare or security of the state, its residents • Hospitals/Critical Care • Wastewater Treatment/Water • Facility of Refuge/Shelters ## What is a Critical Facility?

18 •Focused on geographic regions that experienced extended power failures due to extreme weather events between April 2011 and April 2013 (NYC, Broome, Rockland, Nassau, Suffolk) : • Potential regulatory structures under which microgrid systems would operate • Operation of microgrid conform to or be compatible with current utility requirements and plausible ownership models • Type of microgrid configurations, incorporating various distributed generation would optimally support mission critical services for extended grid outages • Technical and regulatory issues needing to be addressed to connect the microgrid to the utility distribution network • Approaches that would be most appropriate for funding installation, operation and maintenance of a microgrid ## NYS Critical Infrastructure Microgrid Study 19 • Metropolitan Hospital Center.

• Main hospital (18 floors): Level II trauma center, capable of initiating definitive care for • Mental health building (16 floors): 120 beds • Outpatient department (8 floors): provides ambulatory care during business hours • Peak demand: 2. 4 MW to 5. 0 MW (varies seasonally) • New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) apartment complex.

• Lexington Houses - 4 buildings • George Washington Houses – 15 buildings • Total of approximately 2,000 units; 4,400 residents • Peak demand: 3. 1 MW to 6.

0 MW (varies seasonally) • Central telecommunication switching station • Peak demand: approximately 700 kW (little seasonal variation) ## New York City Case Study: ## Facilities to be Served by the Microgrid 20 ## New York City Microgrid Site 21 • Incorporates the four generators currently available – 2,775 kW • Adds six diesel generators to meet estimated demand during a major power outage - Total added capacity: 3,375 kW - Capacity of individual units: 375 kW to 750 kW • Total system capacity: 6,150 kW • Sufficient to support the following loads: - 40 percent of Metropolitan Hospital peak demand (i.e., critical load) - 50 percent of NYCHA peak demand - 100 percent of Verizon peak demand Summary – Site Microgrid Design 22 ## Site Electrical Infrastructure 23 Control & Communications Architecture Building/Facility (Location is approximate) Metropolitan Hospital GEN1 600 kW GEN2 675 kW GEN3 750 kW GEN1 750 kW B4 B3 B2 B1 B5 B6 B10 B7 B8 B14 B13 B12 B11 B9 New Gen 1x1000 kW 2x500 kW New Gen 750 kW New Gen 750 kW New Gen 375 kW MG Master Control Station • Protocol Gateway (D400) • Wireless Access Point (1) Control Station (4 Bldg ) Control Station (15 Bldg) • Device Controller • IEC 61850 • Secure Wireless CB CB Existing Generator > CB Existing Circuit Breaker/Switch CB New Circuit Breaker/Switch New Transformer Low Voltage High Voltage New Distribution Line Existing Distribution Line Padmount Transformer 24 • Initial design and planning (GE): $5.

7 million $5. 1 million in site-specific planning and administrative costs $554,000 in engineering design costs (1/5th of a total of $2. 76M in design costs, to be spread across 5 sites) • Fixed O&M costs (GE): $45,000/year Includes software licenses and 24/7 technical support Provides for routine software maintenance and upgrades • Annualized costs: $914,000/year Assumes 7 percent annual discount rate.

Upfront costs annualized over 30-year system life.

Fixed Costs for the New York City Site 25 ## Benefit-Cost Analysis – Model Overview • Structure: linked worksheets • Site overview and summary of results • Calculation of benefits during extended power outages (Fire Station, EMS, Hospital, Police, Electric Power, Wastewater, Water, Other) • Data (p ower outages/standard values, crime data) • Analyzes project impacts over a 20-year operating period • Results are reported in 2013 dollars 26 Valuation of benefits is based upon the underlying value of the public services maintained during major outages FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Benefit -Cost Analysis methodology: - A pplies standard economic values and site -specific variables to characterize the economic damages that may result if an outage interrupts fire, hospital, police, or emergency medical services - Can also be applied to value the impact of lost water, wastewater, and electric power service The model includes worksheets designed to help the user apply FEMA’s methodology to estimate the value of protecting each of these services during extended outages The model can also accommodate the valuation of benefits for other services using methods tailored to the characteristics of a particular site Benefits of Maintaining Critical Services 27 Principal benefit categories: • Energy / Economic benefits • Safety and security benefits Energy benefits include both energy cost savings and capacity cost savings.

• Energy cost savings include cost s avoided in generating electricity, as well as efficiencies realized through installation of • Preliminary BCA examined potential impact of participating in Peak Load Support Scenario • Approximate annual overall benefit: $970,000 Assumes support for 20 hours per year Capacity Cost Savings - $1.

0 million Operating Costs - $46,000 Reduction in Macrogrid Operating Costs - $14,000 29 • Cost benefits was not economically feasible at the sites analyzed. • Primarily due to the robust backup generation available at most of the critical facilities and costs associated with the electrical wiring, communication and controls • Microgrid designs are highly unique. • Difficult to extrapolate benefits and costs from one site to another.

• Cost-effectiveness improves if the system can operate regularly, rather than solely as back-up generation.

## NYS CI Microgrid Study Findings 30 NYS CI Microgrid Study Recommendations  Support microgrid development at critical infrastructure sites with favorable benefit-cost analysis  Facilities should determine if a microgrid that includes neighboring buildings and an alternate generation  Further development on microgrid technology and appropriate  Disseminate objective information, tools and other resources to encourage development of microgrid projects 31 Mike Razanousky @ michael.

razanousky @ nyserda. ny. gov