Search

EV-specific electric utility rates have a profound effect on the underlying economics motivating EV adoption. State utility regulators and electric utilities play a critical role in approving and designing rates, respectively. However, the nascence of the EV industry has resulted in regulators’ and utilities’ having very limited experience with EV-specific rate designs. This suggests there could be substantial benefit from efforts intended to provide a better understanding of how EV-specific rates are designed presently in the United States. To meet that need, Berkeley Lab researchers, with support from E9 Insight, developed a database of piloted, proposed, and offered rates among U.S. investor-owned utilities (IOUs) between 2012 and 2022. The database is comprised of 217 electric utility retail rates from IOUs in 38 states and the District of Columbia that either required proof of EV ownership or were otherwise designed for the purposes of reselling energy for use in EV charging (i.e., EV-specific rates). The analysis of the database identifies the EV-specific rate designs currently observed, infers a number of policy-driven objectives, and suggests a number of next steps for future research.

The report highlights key considerations for retail regulators in the footprints of the Southwest Power Pool (SPP) or Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) in states that previously opted out of allowing third-party aggregation participation under FERC Order 719 and that may want to explore reversing the decision due to a changing policy environment under new FERC orders (i.e., 2222) and/or tightening resource adequacy constraints.Through a document review and a series of 27 interviews with regulators, aggregators, and other industry professionals, this document provides a high-level policy overview of the retail regulator’s role in a selection of processes, rules, and regulations to better understand how states have treated and/or integrated aggregators into wholesale markets. The report summarizes findings in two sections: General Findings and Specific Policy Findings.The General Findings offer high level takeaways such as the fact that 17 of the 20 states in MISO and SPP footprints opted out of third party aggregations following Order 719. Additionally, there is only one state that is fully restructured in the MISO and SPP footprints whereas the rest are vertically integrated, and the majority of third-party aggregations in the U.S. take place in restructured states outside of these footprints. Even so, third-party aggregations do take place in MISO and SPP albeit in small numbers and in an ad hoc regulatory environment.The specific policy findings delve deeper into specific examples of state actions on the topics of jurisdiction, registration and licensing, data governance, dual participation, and dispute resolution. Tables in each category organize state actions into Tiers I-III, which roughly correspond to the possible level of involvement or possible change necessary by state regulators and/or legislators to implement these actions. The tier level does not indicate any value judgement, as each state has respective regulatory limitations and each decision comes with various tradeoffs. One main tradeoff is between simplicity and quick implementation versus comprehensive and prolonged implementation. In many cases, actions in Tier I could be implemented without significant changes by relying on the use of existing processes for an aggregator context. On the other hand, many actions in Tier III are more narrowly designed to address aggregators specifically, but often require more significant changes including the involvement of additional parties through stakeholder engagement or legislative action. In some cases, these tiers are discrete. However, state regulators may also choose to progress through these various tiers sequentially as they phase in aggregators while learning from their experience.With the ability to stack bulk system level services, distributed energy resource aggregations in MISO and SPP could provide various private benefits (e.g., increased value streams to the owner) as well as societally beneficial grid services (e.g., peaking capacity, ancillary services, and other services that increase the grid’s overall operational efficiency). In deciding how to best to enable these benefits, states and retail regulators must weigh various tradeoffs if considering reversing a previous opt out.

Technological advances and a more engaged customer population are pushing utilities and their regulators towards new strategies that promote growth and transformation. Common to many of these efforts is an interest in expanding the set of profit-generating product and service offerings, hereafter referred to as alternative commercial opportunities, beyond just buying and selling electricity. Prior work has focused on specific categories and types of alternative commercial opportunities and in specific market segments. The report fills an important gap in the literature in two ways. First, we develop a comprehensive taxonomy to categorize the alternative commercial opportunities and provide numerous examples within each category. Second, we identify six issues that regulators may want or need to address when determining if and how investor-owned electric utilities pursue these commercial opportunities. The work is intended to inform regulators and decision-makers about how to navigate these broader reform opportunities, as well as rationalize their response within the context of their state policy strategy and in comparison to their peers in other states.

This paper reports on the evaluation of the final year of a three-year professional learning intervention underpinned by a student-centred model of feedback. School leaders, teachers, and students in 13 Australian state schools participated in the research. The professional learning was contextualised in Year 3 English, with a focus on writing. Data from school leader, teacher and student interviews, researcher field notes, classroom observations and student assessments were analysed to evaluate the impact of the intervention. Findings show the professional learning intervention was positively valued by teachers and school leaders. Evidence from multiple sources suggests that although there was variability in the nature of implementation, teachers and school leaders overall reported substantial changes to knowledge, skills, and classroom practices. Importantly, the results highlight substantial improvements in student self-regulation and writing achievement, providing evidence of the intervention's positive impact.

Previous studies have reported the importance of regulation in collaborative learning. To understand and support students' learning, researchers have identified that regulation in collaboration emerges as a series of contingent activities at individual and social levels, addressing various learning foci in cognitive, motivational, emotional, and behavioural aspects. However, explanations on how different levels and foci of regulation together influence learning performance have not been made clear. To capture the complexity of regulated learning and the linkage to learning performance, this study examined the temporal sequences of regulated learning, including types (levels), sub-processes, and foci of regulation. Video and interview data were collected from undergraduate students working on a collaborative learning task. These multi-channel data were analysed by content analysis and triangulated to identify the dynamic emergence of regulation events. Process mining was employed to analyse and visualise the temporality and sequences of regulatory processes. The results showed that co-regulated content monitoring was critical in facilitating regulation and task execution at a group level. High-performing groups demonstrated different patterns in developing shared content monitoring and co-regulation of motivation and emotion in the overall learning task. Meanwhile, the variances in how the groups regulated content development and task progress across learning phases were identified. This research extends the conceptualisation of regulated learning to a dynamic multi-layered system. The methods and findings from this study have implications for developing timely and systemic support to improve group performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the effects of a teacher professional learning intervention, underpinned by a student-centred model of feedback, on student perceptions of feedback helpfulness. The study was conducted in the context of primary education English writing in Queensland, Australia. No overall differences in feedback perceptions of students in 13 intervention and 9 comparison schools were identified following the intervention. However, more detailed analyses revealed significantly greater increases in perceived helpfulness among intervention group students for six feedback strategies. This suggests the intervention changed teachers' feedback practices, enhancing student perceptions of feedback helpfulness. Student focus group data provided valuable qualitative insights into student feedback perceptions. Overall findings highlight the interrelatedness between feedback strategies across the feedback cycle for enhancing student learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The "hydrogen energy station" is one method of hydrogen production at small and medium scales. Unlike more conventional hydrogen station designs where hydrogen is simply delivered or produced on-site with a fuel "reformer" or water electrolyzer and then compressed and dispensed, energy stations would provide multiple functions in the same facility. They would integrate systems for production of electricity for 1) local uses and/or the utility grid, 2) re-use of thermal energy "waste heat" for building heating/cooling needs, and 3) purified hydrogen for refueling vehicles.Hydrogen energy stations can be of various types and configurations. Most designs to date are based around some type of fuel cell power plant for electricity production, with coproduction of hydrogen either by splitting the stream of hydrogen from a fuel reformer or electrolyzer (to power the fuel cell and provide electricity with one stream and to refuel vehicles with the other) or by using excess hydrogen from the fuel side of the fuel cell system to provide vehicle fuel.A few hydrogen energy station demonstration projects have been conducted in the past few years, and additional projects are anticipated as part of the California Hydrogen Highway Network initiative and other regional distributed power and hydrogen fuel efforts. We suggest that the interest in hydrogen as a transportation fuel offers opportunities for the development of additional hydrogen energy station projects, as we are beginning to see in California. Promoting new projects such as these will allow for the more complete exploration of the varying potential of different designs, configurations, and locations/settings for the energy station concept.Clean Energy Group (CEG) commissioned this report in order to support the Public Fuel Cell Alliance project (PFCA) and to more fully explore the potential for hydrogen energy stations to play an important role in advancing the development of clean and efficient technologies for both stationary and transportation applications.The following are several recommendations for consideration by key stakeholders that have an interest in developing strategies for promoting these new technologies and projects. These recommendations are intended initially for consideration by state clean energy funds. While it is clear that there is no simple, one-size-fits-all program for state action, these are intended to serve as a starting point for in-depth discussions that can lead to state-specific action plans and stakeholder engagement processes.Specific recommendations include:* Integrate Energy Stations Into State Hydrogen Plans: Many states have completed or are undertaking to develop hydrogen "roadmaps." These state-specific plans, which have been completed in California, Ohio, New York and Florida, provide recommendations to capture new economic development opportunities related to hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. Other states, such as Massachusetts and Connecticut, are embarking on similar planning exercises. The energy station concept should be integrated into these existing and emerging hydrogen plans. California, for example, is emphasizing the inclusion of energy station projects in early hydrogen stations for its Hydrogen Highway effort. We believe this is a strategy that can be replicated in other states. * Explore Fleet-Based Opportunities to Deploy Energy Stations: In many settings, there likely exist opportunities for states to deploy energy stations in conjunction with a specific, clustered vehicle fleet. Fleet-based opportunities reduce the need to develop regional networks of refueling stations as envisioned in many "hydrogen highway" proposals and could be implemented in partnership with military, industrial and delivery organizations. In these settings, a single energy station could support the refueling demands of a significant vehicle fleet. Initially, in order to advance these opportunities, state clean energy funds and economic development offices could support and conduct opportunity assessment studies that identify specific fleets, partners and electricity demands. * Foster Public-Private Partnership Development: Energy stations, in order to be successful, require significant partnerships with technology providers and host facilities. These partnerships can be fostered through public support from state clean energy funds, economic development offices and other key players. In particular, funding and support of coalition-building processes can have cross-cutting benefits for other hydrogen-related priorities in specific states. * Proactively Address Regulatory Incentives: Advanced energy technologies require advanced regulatory policies. Many states have implemented regulatory preferences and incentives (such as standby charge exemptions and net metering policies) that recognize and accommodate the public preference for and benefits from fuel cell, hydrogen and clean energy technologies. The regulatory strategies used by these early leaders can be replicated in other states. This kind of support is especially important for energy stations where a key component of the project is providing distributed electricity for the electric grid. Currently, many regulatory barriers prevent the wide-scale adoption of clean distributed generation and limit the ability to quickly site energy stations. State clean energy funds and others can assist by facilitating information-sharing about the best model regulations that can overcome barriers to distributed generation facilities. * Develop Compelling Communications Strategies: The concept of using hydrogen in consumer settings has been plagued with public misperceptions and lack of awareness of the significant potential benefits and remaining challenges. In recent years, many states have conducted sophisticated consumer and stakeholder research that has resulted in new communications campaigns to increase public understanding and support for clean energy technologies. Many states, for example, recently joined together to develop and fund a "Clean Energy: It's Real, It's Here, It's Working. Let's Make More" branding campaign. This kind of proactive communications strategy would yield tremendous results for the hydrogen sector, helping to organize currently disparate enthusiasm for hydrogen with a single, compelling message while also helping to manage expectations regarding the types and timing of hydrogen technologies that are likely to be introduced.

Hydrogen is emerging beyond its conventional role as an additive component for gasoline production, chemical and fertilizer manufacture, and food production to become a promising fuel for transportation and stationary power. Hydrogen offers a potentially unmatched ability to deliver a de-carbonized energy system, thereby addressing global climate change concerns, while simultaneously improving local air quality and reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels. This "trifecta" of potential benefits is sometimes missed by narrow "cost-effectiveness" analyses that examine any one of these benefits but ignore the others.The emergence of a broader "hydrogen economy" can best be thought of as a transition that will take many years to unfold. Natural gas is a reasonable source of hydrogen in the near term, as it offers modest benefits and lower costs than most other sources. However, as the costs of hydrogen technologies such as fuel cells and electrolyzers decrease through mass production and technological learning, and costs of primary solar and wind power sources continue to slowly decrease, renewably-produced hydrogen will become more competitive.Moreover, hydrogen costs will be relatively stable due to a diversity of feedstock base, with far more stable prices than the volatile oil and natural gas markets can offer. These reasons, coupled with the environmental benefits that hydrogen can offer if produced renewably and cleanly, have led most environmental advocates and states that are working to commercialize clean energy technologies to envision one articulated long-term scenario—a clean energy future that relies on fuel cells powered by renewably produced hydrogen.Many states, particularly New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Florida, Michigan, Ohio and California, are providing research and project deployment funds, tax breaks for new industry, and other measures to encourage hydrogen and fuel cell developments in their states. These program incentives are based on the assumption that fuel cells and related hydrogen infrastructure development are likely to be important to a long-term, sustainable energy future, and that these technologies hold out hope for increased economic development in American industry. In fact, while the belief is hardly unanimous, many analysts and advocates have become convinced that fuel cells are one of the few "emission-free" technologies capable of fully transforming our energy system in a way that is urgently needed to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change in the decades ahead.In order to further explore the potential benefits that hydrogen can offer, we recommend a continued research and development effort, along with strategic demonstration and initial deployment efforts. Specifically, we offer the recommendations outlined in this report for consideration as a starting point for in-depth discussions that can lead to state-specific action plans and stakeholder engagement processes.* Dedicate Significant Funding: State clean energy funds that currently support a broad suite of renewable energy technologies can commit significant, dedicated funding to develop action plans and programs that address the very real economic and technology barriers facing the production of hydrogen from renewable energy sources. In addition, there are significant opportunities to establish federal-state funding partnerships with agencies such as DOE, DOD and DHS that can leverage limited funding for hydrogen projects using renewable energy technologies. * Demonstrate the Viability of Hydrogen Storage and Production for Critical Applications: State clean energy funds and other public interest organizations have the opportunity to support projects that can demonstrate the viability of using hydrogen storage and energy conversion in critical applications, such as telecommunications and backup power, where on-site storage of hydrogen provides important power quality and security benefits. * Visibly Link Hydrogen Production and Clean Energy Technologies: Wind, photovoltaics and other projects that include clean energy technologies should be promoted as the preferred source of hydrogen production. Supporting projects that highlight the capability of producing hydrogen on-site from these sources will serve an important "ambassador" role, engendering important local and public support for hydrogen technologies. These projects can also support the acceptance of natural gas as an important transition fuel. Many states that currently support other clean energy technologies can seek opportunities to develop hybrid projects, linking together energy generation with hydrogen production and storage. * Establish Incentives for High-Value, On-Site Applications: Financial incentives that target specific applications of hydrogen technology can encourage both private and public-sector players to deploy hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. High-value and niche applications for production and use of hydrogen from renewable sources (such as backup power and battery replacement) may lead to self-sustaining markets important learning-by-doing benefits and increased public acceptance. * Proactively Address Regulatory Incentives: Advanced energy technologies can best be promoted with forward-thinking regulatory policies. Many states have implemented regulatory preferences and incentives (such as standby charge exemptions and net metering policies) that recognize and accommodate the public preference for and benefits from fuel cell, hydrogen and clean energy technologies. The regulatory strategies used by these early leaders can be replicated in other states. If hydrogen is to fulfill its role in a clean energy future, it will certainly be in conjunction with clean energy technologies that can operate in a distributed energy context. Currently, many regulatory barriers prevent the wide-scale adoption of clean distributed generation and limit the ability to store hydrogen on-site. These can be critical components of distributed generation projects that rely on hydrogen derived from renewable resources. * Accelerate Private Investment: Successfully deploying hydrogen technologies will require significant investment from the private sector. The introduction of new technologies entails crossing what has come to be called "the valley of death"—the need for capital investments to take promising technologies from the invention and technology validation stage to the point of initial demonstration, field testing, and commercialization. These early investments can be accelerated with preferential tax treatment and other incentives to judiciously use public resources to assist and share risks with industry to develop new energy solutions. Florida, for example, has proposed significant tax benefits that could accelerate ongoing investments by Fortune 100 companies such as the recent investments by Sprint in fuel cell systems. States should consider enacting similar favorable tax policies and exemptions for projects developing hydrogen from renewable resources. * Develop Compelling Communications Strategies: The potential use of hydrogen outside of the industrial sector has been hampered by public misperceptions and lack of awareness of its significant benefits. In recent years, many states have conducted sophisticated consumer and stakeholder research that has resulted in new communications campaigns to increase public understanding and support for clean energy technologies. Many states, for example, recently joined together to develop and fund a "Clean Energy: It's Real, It's Here, It's Working. Let's Make More" branding campaign. This kind of proactive communications strategy could yield tremendous results for the hydrogen sector, helping to organize currently disparate enthusiasm for hydrogen with a single, compelling message.

A study was conducted to describe an ultrasound detector characterized by a neodymium-doped glass waveguide laser with an optical demodulator. The imaging system supported improved sensitivity and conventional passive optical detection features. A gap was utilized to reduce direct acoustic coupling into the laser while the cavity was represented by the waveguide channel and a couple of end reflectors. The sensitivity of the optical detection method was dependent on the demodulation process and optical signal features.