Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Virtual Power Plants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee considers bill to scale virtual power plants for utilities to meet rising demand
Summary
Representative Kraft presented legislation to require investor‑owned utilities to procure a portion of peak capacity via virtual power plants (VPPs), prompting support from the Department of Commerce and solar advocates and questions from utilities about costs and implementation details.
Representative Kraft introduced a bill directing investor‑owned utilities to target a portion of their peak capacity to be satisfied by virtual power plants (VPPs), a distributed aggregation of rooftop solar, batteries, smart appliances and demand response that can be dispatched like a conventional resource.
The bill sets a target (the draft language described a 10% peak resource target) and directs the Public Utilities Commission to establish tariffs and implementation rules, while offering an off‑ramp if targets prove infeasible. Kraft described VPPs as a way to avoid costly transmission upgrades and provide rapid, local resources to meet rising electricity demand.
Department of Commerce staff supported the concept. Sydney Lee told the committee VPPs are “an important tool” that can increase available resources quickly by using distributed generation, storage and demand response and can reduce pressure for large transmission projects. The department noted a precedent: the PUC recently approved a utility‑owned distributed capacity procurement in an integrated resource plan.
Solar and clean‑energy advocates urged the committee to ensure third‑party aggregators can participate fairly. Patty O’Keefe of Vote Solar used a beehive analogy to explain VPPs and said the bill should include guardrails to avoid utilities both administering programs and favoring their own resources. Solar industry representatives and Solar United Neighbors voiced similar support, noting that VPPs can be lower‑cost alternatives to conventional generation.
Investor‑owned and smaller utilities raised implementation concerns. Representatives of Excel Energy and Otter Tail Power told the committee they are developing proposals or pilots through the integrated resource planning process and asked for time and careful design to avoid cost shifts to customers. Excel‑area staff said they are preparing distributed capacity proposals for the PUC and asked that the committee not foreclose the PUC process.
Customer advocates and rooftop‑solar trade groups supported enabling legislation but sought protections to ensure competitive third‑party participation and to avoid utilities capturing market value without appropriate cost‑effectiveness tests.
Formal action: the bill received an informational hearing and no committee vote was taken. Representative Kraft and stakeholders agreed to continued development of implementation details in consultation with utilities and regulators.
