1. California Energy Storage Alliance Successful AB 2514 Procurement Target Evaluation Janice Lin, Co-Founder & Executive Director January 14, 2013

2. Confidential CESA – Strength Through Diversity & Collaboration 2 Steering Committee General Members

3. Confidential Now is a historic time reminiscent of 1970 …. 3 In 1970, a computer was many times more expensive than a typewriter. An evaluation based solely upon typing documents would say that a computer was not worth the money. As we know, the capabilities of the computer were much greater. Investment in computers brought about huge gains for those who saw the capabilities. -or-

4. Confidential Computers have diverse and interconnected benefits 4 Computer Benefits Personal Productivity Accuracy & Speed: Word Processing & Other Tasks Multiple Abilities: Software Expansion, Improvement Mobility: Teleworking, Travel, Task Diversity Network Effects Increased Collaboration: Data Sharing & Real-Time Work Individual Potential: Info Access & Transparency Exponential Growth: System Learning & Improvement Energy storage can also enable diverse benefits throughout the electric power system.

5. Confidential Introduction and Context 5 What are we considering? »Setting thoughtful goals for an electric utility energy storage procurement portfolio. Why are we considering goals? »Allow us to proactively move toward true grid optimization by fully taking advantage of current technological and financial benefits of energy storage. »Accelerate realization of these benefits by advancing “network effects” made possible by energy storage, such as system reliability and renewable integration.

6. Confidential AB 2514 6 Assembly Bill 2514 created the focus and forum to consider an energy storage procurement portfolio: Procurement goals should be implemented if they are cost-effective and commercially available. »We think that this proceeding will very likely show energy storage to be cost-effective in many ways today, if all benefits are considered. »Many existing procurement-related rules and policies are roadblocks to fully realizing all benefits of energy storage. »Reasonable and justifiable procurement goals are a good option that can fulfill the vision of AB 2514.

7. Confidential Key Question #1 7 When do procurement goals make sense?

8. Confidential When do procurement goals make sense? 8 Procurement goals for a technology class make sense when: 1.All benefits are not monetized through existing rules and policies, but un- captured benefits demonstrate the technology’s cost-effectiveness. 2.Widespread deployment creates net benefits for society and ratepayers. 3.Increasing scale improves cost-effectiveness compared to business-as- usual alternatives. 4.The inertia of business-as-usual procurement must be overcome. 5.Near-term inaction will risk incurring substantial lost opportunity costs.

9. Confidential 1: Benefits are not fully monetized 9 Many of these benefits cannot be properly compensated at this time. Benefits span multiple procurement mechanisms and jurisdictions, often with unclear connecting pathways. System/Market Services Electric Energy Time-Shift (Arbitrage) Frequency Response (Inertia) Frequency Regulation Up Frequency Regulation Down Ramping Real-Time Energy Balancing Synchronous Reserve (Spin) Non-Synchronous Reserve (Non-Spin) Black Start Capacity/Forward Products System Electric Supply Capacity Local Electric Supply Capacity Resource Adequacy Generation Products Intermittent Resource Integration (Ramp/Voltage Support) VER/PV Shifting, Voltage Sag, Rapid Demand Support Supply Firming Transmission/Distribution Peak Shaving: Load Shift Transmission Peak Capacity Support (Deferral) Transmission Operation Transmission Congestion Relief Distribution Peak Capacity Support (Deferral) Distribution Operation (Voltage/VAR Support) Additional Grid Benefits Faster Build Time Reduced Emissions Reduced Fossil Fuel Use Increased efficiency of installed generators Increased Integration of Renewables Grid Reliability Modularity/Incremental Build Mobility Flexibility of Purpose Optionality Locational Flexibility Multi-Site Aggregation KEY Currently Compensated Likely to be Compensated Soon Unable to Receive Compensation

10. Confidential 2. Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers Fossil Fuel Base Load Generation Oversized Transmission Grid Oversized Distribution Grid Peaking & Regulation Fossil delivery infrastructure  Built for load and generation peaks that occur only a few times per year  Massive fossil fuel storage and delivery required Current Grid Infrastructure  Strategic: buffers level generation and load  Result: more efficient & reliable electrical system Future Grid Infrastructure Renewable and Traditional Generation Storage-Optimized Regulation & Transmission Storage-Optimized Distribution On-site renewables + storage »Environmental and health benefits: reduced fuel use and emissions, local air quality improvement. »Increased system reliability and power quality. »Improved grid robustness in disaster situations »Better planning: more renewables integration, less land use impacts, portfolio diversification. »California economic growth: in-state leadership in an expanding energy storage industry. »Improved utilization of existing assets. 10

11. Confidential 3: Scale increases cost-effectiveness 11 Benefits of investment in other industries – renewable energy cost curves »Other renewable energy industries have seen great cost reductions through R&D and increased scale. »Energy storage is just reaching scale to the point of large cost improvements – we should support it to maturity and achieve related benefits. IPCC 2011

12. Confidential 4: Inertia must be overcome 12 Existing rules and procurement are oriented toward traditional generation and do not encourage innovation: »Existing long term purchase agreements do not allow for ROI commensurate with benefits, and do not encourage use of new technologies and business arrangements. »Grid structure and long-term procurement planning are inflexible and unaccommodating of transformation. »Insufficient consideration is given to status quo risks: fuel price/availability, system reliability, environmental externalities, planning restrictions etc. »Ancillary resource capacity minimum requirements are excessive.

13. Confidential 5: Near-term inaction has substantial risks 13 Under business as usual, the 33% RPS will not reduce GHGs We are procuring capacity now for 2018. Those generators will last for 30+ years. Our decisions today affect the grid for the next half-century. Procuring only fossil resources exposes ratepayers to considerable fuel risk DOE EIA natural gas price projections have historically underestimated trends.

14. Confidential When do procurement goals make sense? 14 Procurement goals for a technology class make sense when: 1.All benefits are not monetized through existing rules and policies, but un- captured benefits demonstrate the technology’s cost effectiveness. 2.Widespread deployment creates net benefits for society and ratepayers. 3.Increasing scale improves cost effectiveness compared to business-as- usual alternatives. 4.The inertia of business-as-usual procurement must be overcome. 5.Near-term inaction will risk incurring substantial lost opportunity costs. Conclusion: procurement goals for energy storage should be set now; to help realize a robust, reliable, sustainable grid of the future     

15. Confidential Key Question #2 15 How should goals be established?

16. Confidential Criteria 16 Optimum goals should be based upon the following criteria »Sufficient scale to provide network benefits. »Consistency over time -- provide time to allow the market to invest. Policy cannot be changed in short run. »Sufficient volume to spur investment that will reduce cost. »Sufficient volume to overcome existing barriers. »Sufficient deployment over time to allow the technology to stand on its own in the long term. »Sufficient deployment to avoid the lost opportunity costs of inaction. »Deployment in all areas where energy storage makes sense: transmission, distribution, behind the meter. »Simplicity and clarity: »Allow stakeholders to see a clear goal to direct investment. »Allow utilities to determine where energy storage can be deployed to greatest advantage in their systems. Fundamental criteria: similar or superior benefit-to-cost when compared to other viable alternatives OR when societal benefits are both 1) significant and 2) challenging to internalize.

17. Confidential California’s RPS represents a successful example 17 »Renewable generation capacity alone has increased by 77% since the RPS began in 2004. »Prior to the RPS, capacity only increased by 33% over the previous 8 years. »California now generates almost 12% of all energy needs from renewable resources. » In contrast: »Vermont has a voluntary RPS generates <1% »Mississippi has no RPS and generates.01% EIA 2012 2004-2011: 77% Growth after RPS 1997-2004: 33% Growth before RPS

18. Confidential An appropriate portfolio 18 Specific goals for energy storage have been suggested already “The amount of regulation and imbalance energy dispatched in real time, without storage and using existing control systems to maintain system performance, within acceptable limits during morning and evening ramp hours for 33 percent renewable cases in 2020 was 4,800 MW.” “By comparison, 1,200 MW of storage added to the baseline 400 MW of regulation provided superior results...” KEMA 2010 33% RPS Regulation Options Conventional: 4800 MW Needed Storage: 1200 MW, Superior Results

19. Confidential Goal Options 19 Option 1: Statewide Mandate Option 2: Directed procurement, specific to end uses Option 3: Market Tests/Pilots Option 4: Do nothing

20. Confidential An appropriate goal structure: CESA’s Recommendation 20 Map goals to Energy Storage Rulemaking Scenarios. Allow utilities to deploy energy storage to greatest advantage within their systems, while diversifying their investments. Smarter California grid Distributed storage for local applications Demand-side management applications Limited duration storage for ancillary services Bulk energy storage

21. Confidential CESA recommends a parallel path forward 21 Option 1: Statewide Mandate Option 2: Directed procurement, specific to end uses Details in following slides Option 3: Market Tests/Pilots e.g. 50 MW in Current LTPP Proposed Decision Option 4: Do nothing  

22. Confidential Optimum goal setting methodology 22 Use CaseApplicationKey Driver 2015 Goal (%) 2020 Goal (%) Transmission Connected Energy Storage Bulk StoragePeak CapacityTBD Ancillary ServicesRegulation MarketTBD On-Site GenerationGenerationTBD VER SitedVERsTBD Distribution Level Energy Storage Distributed PeakerPeak CapacityTBD Distribution @ SubstationDistribution Deferral CapacityTBD Community Energy StorageDistribution Deferral CapacityTBD Demand Side Energy Storage Customer Bill ManagementRetail LoadTBD Behind the Meter Utility ControlledDistribution Deferral CapacityTBD Permanent Load ShiftingPeak CapacityTBD EV ChargingEV Charging StationsTBD 1.Structure goals around previously identified use cases. Creates appropriate and effective goals for each end use Accounts for different storage types needed to serve different use cases 2.Determine the key driver based upon the primary benefit. 3.Use cases which share a key driver will compete for the same goal. 4.Next Step: generate percentage-based goals based upon cost effectiveness and feasibility. Goals should be set for 2015 and 2020 per AB2514.

23. Confidential Goal ‘Examples’ 23 Use CaseApplicationKey Driver Driver (MW) 2015 Goal (%) 2015 Goal (MW) 2020 Goal (%) 2020 Goal (MW) Transmission Connected Energy Storage Bulk StoragePeak Capacity61,155 1 1%6115%3057 Ancillary ServicesRegulation MarketTBD On-Site GenerationGenerationTBD VER SitedVERsTBD Distribution Level Energy Storage Distributed PeakerPeak Capacity61,155 1 1%6115%3057 Distribution @ Substation Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD Community Energy Storage Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD Demand Side Energy Storage Customer Bill Management Retail Load50,562 2 1%5533%1659 Behind the Meter Utility Controlled Distribution Deferral Capacity TBD Permanent Load ShiftingPeak CapacityTBD EV ChargingEV Charging StationsTBD 1.2020 Net Supply, CPUC 2.2020 Managed Demand Net Load CPUC

24. Confidential CESA Supports Near Term Market Tests and LTPP Phase 1 PD 24 Market tests of selected applications should commence Q1, 2013 consistent with LTPP Phase 1 Proposed Decision -“At least 50 MW must be procured from energy storage resources” (for the LA basin) -“Energy storage should be considered along with preferred resources” Additional near term market tests should be ordered by Q3, 2013 to round out storage portfolio use case experience in California

25. Confidential 25 Recommended Process and Timeline Jan-FebMar-AprMay-JunJul-Aug Step 3a: Set Goals Discuss and set preliminary goals for cost-effective Applications Step 5 – Commission issues Final Decision implementing procurement recommendations Sep-Oct Step 2: Conduct Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Each Application Commission and stakeholders conduct cost-effectiveness analysis. Step 3b: Pilot Evaluation Applications that do not pass the cost- effectiveness threshold are evaluated for potential pilot procurement based on key criteria such as market transformation, changing market dynamics that will affect future cost-effectiveness, and as yet unforeseen value to California. Step 4 – Commission issues Proposed Decision outlining procurement recommendations Commission adopts procurement recommendations based upon the results of Step 3a and Step 3b. Step 1: Set Cost-Effectiveness Methodology Decide which methodology is most appropriate for each application Step 1a: Commence Market Tests Approve LTPP Phase 1 PD Approve SDG&E General Rate Case

26. Confidential Policy options – Cost-Effective Goals are not Sufficient 26 Multiple energy storage pathways to a cleaner grid: »Goals maintain strong focus and direction: support grid transformation and expand developer confidence. »Richer, more granular transparent pricing for energy, capacity and ancillary services reflecting full value and service delivered. »Procurement rules and policies that empower utilities to deploy energy storage with benefit-to-cost that is comparable or superior to alternatives. »Establish proxy values for societal benefits that utilities can use for benefit-cost valuations.

27. Confidential Optimum Portfolio Selection 27 This portfolio represents a good fit with the right criteria. »Sufficient scale to provide network benefits. »Consistency over time -- provide time to allow the market to invest. Policy cannot be changed in short run. »Sufficient volume to spur investment that will reduce cost. »Sufficient volume to overcome existing barriers. »Sufficient deployment over time to allow the technology to stand on its own in the long term. »Sufficient deployment to avoid the lost opportunity costs of inaction. »Deployment in all areas where energy storage makes sense: transmission, distribution, behind the meter. »Simplicity and clarity: »Allow stakeholders to see a clear goal to direct investment. »Allow utilities to determine where energy storage can be deployed to greatest advantage in their systems. Fundamental criteria: similar or superior benefit-to-cost when compared to other viable alternatives OR when societal benefits are both 1) significant and 2) challenging to internalize.

28. Confidential Appendix 28 » About CESA » Goal Reference Slides » References

29. Confidential 29 California Energy Storage Alliance: Overview CESA Mission and Membership The California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA) is a membership-based advocacy group committed to advancing the role of energy storage in the electric power sector through policy, education, outreach, and research. Our membership includes technology manufacturers, project developers, systems integrators, consulting firms, and other clean tech industry leaders. We are technology and business model-neutral, and are supported solely by the contributions and coordinated activities of our members.

30. Confidential 30 California Energy Storage Alliance: Overview Ongoing Involvement in CPUC Proceedings CESA is an active participant in CPUC proceedings. We advocate for a reliable, environmentally-friendly, and balanced grid that incorporates energy storage at multiple levels. We are involved in the following proceedings, among others: » Demand Response (DR) and Permanent Load Shifting (PLS) » Interconnection Rulemaking » Long-Term Procurement Planning (LTPP) » Renewables Integration » Resource Adequacy » RPS Content Categories » Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP)

31. Confidential 31 California Energy Storage Alliance: Overview Long-Term Procurement Planning Involvement CESA has been advocating for energy storage in LTPP processes since June 2010 » June 2010: Long-term procurement policy » July 2010: Renewable resource planning » Sep-Oct 2010: Renewable integration modeling » Jan 2011: Planning assumptions & modeling issues » April 2012: Scoping memorandum » Jun 2012: Planning standards » Jun-Sep 2012: LTPP Track 1 (local reliability) » Oct 2012: Storage workshop » Oct 2012: Loading Order Comments

32. Confidential Appendix 32 » About CESA » Goal Reference Slides » References

33. Confidential Procurement Goals Should be Measured in MW 33 MW procurement goals are ideal for several reasons: »The grid is composed of various assets with set generation, transmission, and consumption capacities. Procurement goals should be based around this common measurement metric. »MW metrics allow for recognized manufacturing targets and related production/infrastructure investments for storage companies. »As Storage Technology becomes less expensive, capacity-based procurement goals will lead to lower overall costs. »Output time frames can be application-specific (i.e. frequency regulation can require 15 minute capabilities, while demand-side-management can be measured in hours) without converting overall goals to MWh, which can be problematic.

34. Confidential Improved Generator Efficiency 34 Example: Gas Turbines and Thermal Energy Storage Effects of Inlet Air Temperature on Gas Turbine Power Output 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 404550556065707580859095100 Inlet Air Temperature, degrees (F) % of Rated Capacity RECOVERED POWER GT POWER OUTPUT ADDITIONAL POWER ISO TURBINE RATING »Gas turbines run at higher power output levels at ideal inlet air temperature. »Because of this, on a hot day the gas turbine loses output and operates less efficiently. Demand is highest during these hot weather conditions. »Thermal energy storage can use cold water to control turbine air temperature, increasing output and efficiency – especially when it’s needed most. Source: TAS Energy

35. Confidential Improved Generator Efficiency 35 »Smoothing from regulation services reduces needed operating reserves & ramping capability. »Individual generators can run at higher capacity factor, stabilize generation, and increase efficiency. Source: E&I Consulting Example: Greater System Efficiency from Optimized Generation

36. Confidential Richer Spectrum of Benefits Over Time 36 »A system which starts out providing one set of benefits may provide other benefits over its lifetime. This is especially true for flexible energy storage systems. »This transition can happen gradually or quickly to best suit the needs of the grid »This increasing spectrum of benefits reduces the risk of deploying a storage asset on the grid and provides long term value for ratepayers. System Benefits: Year 10 Frequency Response Ramping Intermittent Resource Integration (Ramp/Voltage Support) VER/PV Shifting, Voltage Sag, Rapid Demand Support Supply Firming Transmission Operation System Benefits: Year 1 Electric Energy Time-Shift Frequency Regulation Up Frequency Regulation Down Synchronous Reserve (Spin) Non-Synchronous Reserve (Non-Spin) Black Start

37. Confidential Increased Capacity Value 37 Energy storage combined with solar increases the electricity supply capacity value as much as 80%. Mills 2012

38. Confidential 2: Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers 38 Energy Storage reduces greenhouse gas emissions Eyer 2010 »Storage reduces GHG emissions by helping generation run more efficiently. »Fewer startups »Reduced partial load operation »Reduced output variability »More generation when ambient temperature is lower »Offsets need for peaking generation. »Facilitates the widespread integration of renewables.

39. Confidential 2: Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers 39 Network Effects: widespread energy storage can help enable increased use of renewable energy in California “Use of storage also avoids greenhouse gas emissions increases associated with scheduling combustion turbines ‘on’ strictly for regulation and ramping duty.” “The measurement of the relative effectiveness of storage to a combustion turbine demonstrates that, depending upon system conditions and other factors, a 30 to 50 MW storage device is as effective as a 100 MW CT used for regulation and ramping purposes.” “The 3,000 to 4,000 MW of storage which could be used to address renewables management requires a ramp rate capacity of 5 to 10 MW/second, or 0 to full power charging / discharging in 5 minutes. This equals or exceeds the ramping capabilities of most conventional generating units, and particularly the larger combustion turbines. Smaller combustion turbines in the California ISO database can meet this ramp rate requirement, but there are insufficient quantities of such units to provide the required 3,000 to 4,000 MW of fast ramping.” KEMA 2010

40. Confidential 2: Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers 40 Reduced Risk: energy storage can diversify our portfolio Karpinski 2012 »Energy storage is a key component of a new, diverse, and cleaner grid. »Energy Storage facilitates the introduction of new generation and T&D technology, diversifying the grid and reducing dependency and vulnerability to disruption. »Especially important with price and availability risk of conventional fuels.

41. Confidential 2: Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers 41 Reliability »Example: Energy storage reduces output uncertainty attributable to wind forecast errors. »Technology-specific benefits: flywheel or battery spinning reserves free up generators, distributed energy storage provides local backup reliability. »Extends to entire grid: system reliability through load following, demand side management, etc. Denholm 2008 Forecast Error for Wind

42. Confidential 2: Widespread deployment benefits society and ratepayers 42 »California economic growth: in-state leadership in an expanding energy storage industry. »Environmental and health benefits: reduced fuel use and emissions (per kWh), local air quality improvement. »Better planning: more renewables integration, less land use impacts. »Improved cost-of-service, power quality, and reliability for consumers. Additional Social Benefits

43. Confidential 3: Scale increases cost-effectiveness 43 Benefits of investment in other industries – renewable energy cost curves »Other renewable energy industries have seen great cost reductions through R&D and increased scale. »Energy storage is just reaching scale to the point of large cost improvements – we should support it to maturity and achieve related benefits. IPCC 2011

44. Confidential 3: Scale increases cost-effectiveness 44 Cost curve of solar versus natural gas plants »Solar is becoming cost- competitive with gas and coal. »Installed energy storage cost reductions are likely as economies of scale in manufacturing, project scope, and integration are achieved »As fuel costs rise, the relative benefits of energy storage will further accelerate to the point of grid parity with key peaking and ancillary services resources. 1366 Technologies, 2011 Solar Cost Reductions – Time & Scale

45. Confidential 3: Scale increases cost-effectiveness 45 Example: Published anticipated cost curve of Li Ion »We are already seeing accelerating price reductions for many forms of storage. »DOE outlines potential for ten- fold improvements for Li-ion in only ten years. »Li ion cost reductions are being fueled by volume purchases for EV’s. »Some technologies are becoming cost-competitive even sooner. Japan New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) and DOE, 2010

46. Confidential 4: Inertia must be overcome 46 Existing rules and procurement are oriented toward traditional generation. A few potential changes in California would help enable energy storage development: »Ancillary resource capacity minimum requirements should be lower. »Long-term payment mechanisms for fast response regulation and similar services. »30-60 minute continuous energy requirement should be reduced or eliminated. »CAISO’s Energy Management System (EMS) should accommodate negative power dispatch, thus accommodating energy-neutral resources. »Utilities should establish long term purchase agreements for ancillary services, which would greatly improve the ability to secure capital for storage financing.

47. Confidential 5: Inaction will equal lost opportunity costs 47 Procurement for the future should happen now. California Energy Commission, 2012 »Median age of the California generation fleet is ~30 years, and T&D infrastructure is aging. »Our decisions today will affect the grid for the next half- century. »Construction equals long-term commitment – to financing, grid structure, fuel reliance, environmental impact, etc.

48. Confidential 5: Inaction will equal lost opportunity costs 48 Volatility from renewable generation backed by Natural Gas plants reverses expected GHG reductions from renewables »GHG/Fuel use INCREASES when 33% RPS happens without grid connected storage available »Smoother energy using grid- tied storage is required to realize the benefits of renewable generation, enabling true GHG reduction CAISO 33% RPS Study of Operation Requirements and Market Impacts

49. Confidential 5: Inaction will equal lost opportunity costs 49 Business as usual subjects ratepayers to significant fuel price risk. »DOE EIA natural gas price projections cannot forecast market disruptions and historically have underestimated trends. »Excessive expansion of natural gas- fueled generation bears risks associated with natural gas availability and pipeline and gas storage capacity. »Uncertainties include: »AB 32 auction prices »Fracking regulation »SONGS restarting EIA 2010, 2000, Annual Energy Outlook, content courtesy EnerVault Corporation

50. Confidential Appendix 50 » About CESA » Goal Reference Slides » References

51. Confidential References 51 »1366 Technologies. “Solar at the Cost of Coal.” 2011. http://www.1366tech.com/cost-curve/ »Afsah, Shakeb and Salcito, Kendyl. “Shale Gas and the Fairy Tale of its CO2 Reductions.” Aug 7, 2012. http://co2scorecard.org/home/researchitem/24 (Data from US Energy Information Administration. “Monthly Energy Review: December 2012” January 2012. http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/mer.pdf) »California Energy Commission. “Age of Generating Units of California’s Power Plants as of 2011.” Retrieved December 19, 2012. http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/generating_units.html »Denholm, Paul. “The Role of Energy Storage in the Modern Low-Carbon Grid.” (Powerpoint) June 12, 2008. http://storagealliance.org/sites/default/files/whystorage/NREL%20ea_seminar_june_12%202008.pdf »Eyer, Jim and Corey, Garth. “Energy Storage for the Electricity Grid: Benefits and Market Potential Assessment Guide. A study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems Program.” February 2010. http://storagealliance.org/sites/default/files/whystorage/Sandia_Energy_Storage_Guide.pdf »IPCC, 2011: Summary for Policymakers. In: IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation [O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. »Karpinski, Dave. “Achieving a Diverse Electricity Portfolio in Ohio.” (Powerpoint for IEEE Energy Tech) May 30, 2012. http://energytech2012.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/W-S2-D-NorTech-IEEE-Presentation-5.30.12.pdf [photo edited by Alex Ghenis, December 23, 2012] »KEMA, inc. “Research Evaluation of Wind and Solar Generation, Storage Impact, and Demand Response on the California Grid” 2010. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CEC-500-2010-010/CEC-500-2010-010.pdf

52. Confidential References 52 »Mills, Andrew and Wiser, Ryan. “An Evaluation of Solar Valuation Methods Used in Utility Planning and Procurement Processes” LBNL-5933E. December 2012. http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/LBNL-5933E.pdf »Romm, Joe. “GE sees solar cheaper than fossil fuels in 5 years.” May 26, 2011. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/05/26/208184/ge-solar-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels-in-5-years/ »US Energy Information Administration. “Detailed State Data: Annual Data for 2011.” Released October 2012. http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/state/ »US Energy Information Administration. “Projected Natural gas prices depend on shale gas resource economics” August 27, 2012. http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7710http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7710 »CPUC 2020 Net Supply, Source: Summary Data of Revised Scenarios V4, Base Case, http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208- 60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xlshttp://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208- 60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xls »CPUC 2020 Managed Demand Net Load: Summary Data of Revised Scenarios V4, Base Case. http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208-60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xls http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/300D629A-B00D-411A-9208-60E33AB22497/0/SummaryDataofRevisedScenariosv4.xls