CPUC Workshop on Value of Resiliency: Resiliency Standards - Definitions R.19-09-009 (Mar. 21, 2023) (2023)

Introduction

What: Value of Resiliency: Resiliency Standards - Definitions Workshop in Proceeding R.19-09-009
When: March 21, 2023, 1 p.m.

More info: www.cpuc.ca.gov/events-and-meetings/r1909009-workshop-2023-03-21

Proceeding Documents: apps.cpuc.ca.gov/apex/f

Video

Hi, thank you all for joining us.

My name is Roseanne matkevich and we're here for the microgrids value of resiliency Workshop, focusing on resiliency standards and we'll be discussing definitions and metrics Lumen energy strategy is going to be our main presenter next slide.

If you're calling in you have the uh, the sign in address is on the screen.

The password is all in caps at grmg, and today's presentations are available in the meeting, invite that were sent to the service list, along with the materials that you can download the download the materials should also have been available to you prior to registering and also after registering, if you click the file and download um Keys.

The presentation portion of this meeting will be recorded and then subsequently posted on our resiliency and microgrids web page after the presentation, while one or more Commissioners or their staff may be present, no decisions will be made at this meeting this screen and shows you uh.

If you need some help, how to ask some questions, all attendees are muted on Entry by default.

Your questions can be asked verbally during the Q.

A segments using the raise hand function located on the bottom right of this screen.

You can see where that raise hand function was available.

The host will unmute you during the Q, a portions.

If we have a number of questions available or lined up, you may be limited to two minutes to ask your question, but we are encouraging discussion today.

Please lower your hand after you've been asked after you've asked your question by clicking, on the raise hand again and then re-raise your hand by clicking, on the raise hand, button again if you need to raise your hand for a separate question this way.

We know whether you're still needing to ask the question or if you're, just forgetting questions, can also be written into the Q a box and will be answered verbally during their q, a segments.

This is what the screen should have looked like when you signed in, and this is the event material.

The event material should have been available to you.

The agenda today after we complete this portion of introducing the logistics commissioner shirelle will offer opening remarks.

I will then reframe or reframe the conversation in the context of a review of our four pillar methodology as our guiding principles, and then I will turn it over to Lumen energy strategies, who will discuss resilience definitions in the context of our integrated resource planning, we'll take a small break within the context of their presentation.

There will be some q, a opportunities within their presentation, and then commissioner shiromo will make some closing remarks and we will wrap up I'll turn it over to you, commissioner.

Sharon.

Thank you Roseanne good afternoon.

Everyone I want to thank all for attending today's Workshop.

My name is Genevieve sharoma and I'm.

The lead, commissioner, for the microgrids, proceeding at the commission.

My pronouns.

Are she her? This Workshop is the third in a series of workshops exploring the value of resilient Z for microgrids.

This Workshop will focus on resiliency definitions.

Resiliency is not the same as reliability.

It refers to the ability to mitigate the impact of a large disruptive event by reducing its magnitude, duration and recovery and extending the duration of resistance.

Resiliency is the ability to have connectivity in the face of a catastrophic event: Lumen strategy, energy and economic, consulting firm and in California energy, commission, epic, Grant recipient working on building a grid, resiliency framework that will present and facilitate the discussion on how the definitions can apply to our cpuc integrated resource planning process.

I'm.

Also, the lead, commissioner, on the ratepayer-funded research and development program called Epic uh energy program incentive which stands for well.

It stands for the electric program investment charge.

Uh epic provides 147 million dollars annually annually to the energy commission for electricity related clean energy and Safety Research.

Today's Workshop is an important discussion about the possible role of microgrids and other residency Solutions in meeting California's resiliency goals, I'm here to listen and learn and I look forward to the discussion ahead.

Thank you and back to you Roseanne, commissioner Sharma.

So as a review of the our microgrids proceeding, SB 1339 was the legislation that required the cpuc in cooperation with CEC and kaiso, to facilitate the commercialization of microgrids for distribution customers of large electrical corporations in September of 2018.

This bill was signed by the governor and in the following year and oir was issued by the cpuc, our 1909009 in the June of 2020.

We made the decision track on the track.

One was made that accelerated resiliency projects in response to Wildfire, PG e Community, microgrids, enablement program or cmep and cmet and PG e 10th Generation was um, was provided to mitigate outages during psps's in our track.

2 decision revisions to the IOU electric rules were made to facilitate more complex microgrids and the microgrid incentive program was authorized authorizing two hundred thousand dollars to support in front of the meter microgrids.

In our track three decision in July of 2021, we I shoot a decision suspending the capacity reservation component of standby charges for highly utilized and available microgrids that meet carb distribution generation criteria, air pollution standards and in track four, which is still in progress.

We are finalizing the implementation standards of the MIP program and considering the Tariff for multi-property microgrids track.

Five also in progress has is to Define and assess the value of resiliency to inform our investments in resilience strategies in the valley of resiliency.

Last year.

We had our first Workshop, where we discussed some of the aspects related to the economic and Equity impacts of large disruptions, and we used the discussion behind looking at the cost calculator developed by Lawrence, Berkeley, National Labs, the interruption, cost estimate calculator and their up upcoming tool.

The power outage economic tool in the second Workshop, we discussed the economic inequity impacts via a social burden index that is calculated through something called the ren cat or resilience node cluster analysis tool developed by Sandia National Labs in this Workshop.

We hope to explore resiliency definitions and how these definitions might be applied to integrating resiliency in a broader grid planning context as one but one of many different kinds of use case as a review, we're using the four pillar methodology, which is something that we had developed through our resiliency and microgrids working group meetings early on in this process and we're using that methodology as our guiding principles to look at our resiliency evaluation in this guiding in this four pillar methodology.

A simplified version of this is in pillar one.

We look at in the Baseline assessment pillar.

We look at what and whom do we want to protect.

Where is it and how are we doing? What threatens it right now and how well are we doing to protect those now we do this by looking at resiliency targets, checking to see what are the hazards that are threatening those targets and what current metrics we might be using to assess whether those resiliency targets are currently being met in pillar 2.

We looked at mitigation measure assessments.

What protection options do we have to improve our resiliency? What does the best job at protecting the most and what do those options cost and how do they compare amongst each other in pillar 3? We talked about the resiliency scorecard, which might look at our resiliency configuration characteristics in the context of those resiliency goals that we might have and those that support state policy goals in pillar 4, resiliency response assessment.

This is where we would look at our resilience, metrics and look historically and see if those metrics reflect an improvement in our resilience in in reaching our resilience targets and how, in the context of that understanding, whether our investments reduce the impacts on the community and we're effective in this way, what we've hoped to it Advance here is a scalable, sequential iterative methodology intended to provide a checklist to Concepts that, when used, iteratively, provide guidance towards continued improvement over development Cycles in this and future workshops we'll be looking at applying these Concepts from the perspective of three different use.

Cases grid planning large-scale grid planning such as various such as the various processes, by which a general rate case is developed.

Project level, which is such as the process by which a utility or Community microgrid is cited or developed, and problem level such as when an emerging problem is encountered, requiring a resilience solution to be sought today, we'll be investigating definitions of resiliency and Associated metrics, as seen through the lens of looking through the larger grid planning use case using the integrative resource planning process.

As our example in later workshops, we'll continue to explore these Concepts and the other issues highlighted in the preceding scoping memo through application of these other scalable use cases.

Lumen energy strategy is a CEC epic awardee working on building a resiliency framework at the IRP level.

We see alignment between their work and our goals and thus we're coordinating our efforts as we develop these Concepts scoped into our proceeding and I'll turn it over to Mariko.

At this point, I'm going to stop sharing my screen and let you take over Mariko.

Thank you, Roseanne um, thank you Jason and Julian, and thank you, commissioner, sharoma for hosting us today.

Um Roseanne, I can't share so as we're setting that up.

Um I'll.

Take you all through some motivation for a presentation.

Then we'd like to learn more about you and the audience, and after that we'll dive into our research.

Thank you, uh Marco.

You should now be able to share your screen.

Thank you here we go I'll.

Ask you all to please open your participants panel at the bottom.

Next, to the raise hand, icon there's a megaphone icon.

Please feel free to use these as I talk, you'll see a check mark for a yes response, X for no response and faster, slower icons.

Okay, this photo went viral in 2017.

You can see a person casually mowing their lawn going about their normal routine, with sunglasses on and the sky darkened, with a massive tornado swirling behind when this person was interviewed, he said I was keeping an eye on it.

Fortunately he's okay.

For us, this is a great metaphor for what has been going on industry-wide in resource planning.

For many years now, climate scientists around the world are in agreement that the climate is changing and weather becoming more extreme.

For many of us extreme weather that tests the grid has even become part of our lived experience with your yes or no icons in the participants panel.

How many of you in the last year or two have personally experienced extreme weather that impacted your life at home, in your community or in your business, several people and me as well, but the industry's planning processes are mostly going on as usual, acknowledging the hazard keeping an eye on it, but not changing Pace with the urgency of the problem.

It's the tornado in the room of grid planning.

How can we make meaningful informed, highly beneficial planning decisions to improve the resilience of critical services like electricity, considering our need to protect both critical infrastructure and our communities grid planning is already complex.

It incorporates goals of reliability and safety and sustainability.

It uses a variety of modeling and analytical techniques.

How does a resilience framework fit with our existing planning architecture or even better? How do we need to evolve grid planning, so resilience does fit in we're each affected by resilience and have a different view on what the threats are and what needs to be done.

Can we learn from each other, and by doing so, can we help each other reduce blind spots and gaps in our understanding of Hazards and vulnerabilities? Can we help each other understand where the priorities are and in California and many other jurisdictions I'm sure we have the added challenge of affordability getting worse, we need to ensure the cost of the electricity grid is not overwhelming and that it's in alignment with the benefits we're getting today owner and I present as a team awarded a research Grant by the CEC to help break institutional barriers to resilience planning in California.

Are studies called warped to resilience for weather, adapted resource planning? We've worked almost 20 years, each in integrated resource planning and portfolio, optimization wholesale markets and policies and clean energy transition, and it is Central to our study's mission to see a resilient framework like four pillars applied in a way that meaningfully transforms grid planning and we specifically Target what we see as four institutional barriers in the planning process and aim to contribute by one building a resilience framework to for our study.

That includes a definition of resilience and resilience.

Evaluation, metrics to re-parameterize the inputs and assumptions to the state's existing resource planning models to account for climate driven risks and extremes, three to develop a resilience evaluation model that is open, source available to you all and evaluates resource portfolios and plans, and then four to use that model to conduct a resilience assessment of the state's resource, portfolios and plans for today, we're here to discuss issues in this, proceeding that we think dovetail with what we're trying to do.

The amended scoping memo in this proceeding outlines five sets of issues: economic inequity impacts, resiliency standards, grid planning and investment coordination across the public entities and environmental and social justice.

Our material mostly is applicable to the second and third items, resiliency standards and grid planning and investment, but all of these issues are related and you'll see our work at times ties into other areas, so, for example, in our discussion later about outage, costs we'll consider economic and Equity impacts.

As part of that.

Your responses to these questions posed by the cpuc as stakeholders are crucial to the application of a resilience planning framework to grid planning in California and um.

None of what we say today, what owner and I say today is intended to present any formal rep recommendations to the cpuc on these questions.

It's intended to stimulate discussion and brainstorming on these issues to better understand where or how we can build some common ground, because in Grid planning there does have to be some common ground for us to stand on and really build a solid investment strategy together.

So as a starting point, we looked across the industry to better understand how grid planners with different perspectives address resilience.

Related questions will provide an overview of that material and highlight the key elements we see of a resilience definition and we'll also share our thought process for how we navigate through some ambiguities and resilience Concepts to Define, what's needed for grid planning.

So you'll see many linkages in our talk to pillar one Baseline assessment um, for example, we seek to define the function or service to be made resilient.

What's that system behind that function or service? What are the hazards threatening resilience and what do their risk profiles look like and where the system failure points, this Workshop will be interactive and we have two channels for that.

One is the Q a that Roseanne described and the second channel is audience polls.

The audience polls are totally Anonymous.

The polling software doesn't know who fills out the poll and, if you're, looking at all this and saying I'm not tied into IRP in some way, that's okay, how we're navigating from resilience concept to application um should be generalizable so think about how this might be relevant to your work and please still share your thoughts with the rest of us, we're interested to know.

So, let's start with a poll um if you're on a computer or device with a web browser.

Please open your web browser and go to the website.

Poleevee.Com forward, slash Lumen 999, that's poleevee.com forward, slash, Lumen, 999 and once you're at that website.

Just stay there for the duration of the workshop, when I, deactivate and reactivate new polls they'll show up on that same page.

If you're on a cell phone and you can't access a web browser, there is a way to participate over text message, so you can text Lumen 999 to the number 2233 and follow instructions, and if none of the above work for you um, please feel free to get a pen of and paper or jot down your ideas somehow and email us after the workshop and I'd be happy to collect your answers, anonymize them and roll them into our record of final responses, so um.

The first question is what stakeholder perspective best describes.

You I'll give you one minute to complete that um and the results will show up in my presentation.

Just confirm that yes and responses include a ISO RTO, B utility, C regulator or policy maker, D, Community, representative e customer or customer representative F, developer engineer or technical specialist, G investor, H researcher or academic I, hobbyist or J.

Other um give you a few more seconds to complete that and then we'll show the responses and um just want to get a feel for who's in the room.

Um, better understand your perspective, and you know recognizing that different types of work can yield different views on resilience and you'll see the poll will only let you answer once.

If you make a mistake or want to change your answer, you should have an option at the bottom to clear your response and put a different response in okay.

So here are the responses.

A lot of utility Representatives welcome a lot of regulator, policy makers um a lot in the other category interested to know who's there.

We have Community Representatives customer custom, Representatives, developer, engineer technical Specialists.

We have um a lot of people across the board, so welcome everyone, foreign, this poll and go to the next one.

And the next question is in your job or immediate area of work.

How important is resilience planning? Apologies! That's a little glitchy, okay and I'll.

Give again I'll.

Give you a minute to respond to that.

So the options for responses are a it's.

Not a high priority concern compared to other business and or work objectives, be some are concerned, meaning some of your colleagues are in your work circles, but it's not yet clear to me how important it is or see it addresses a clear threat to my business and or work objectives.

So you should be able to see this up on coleevee.com forward, slash, lumen99 and feel free to put your responses in I'll.

Give you a few more seconds and then we'll take a look at the results and again just trying to understand when you hear the word resilience.

How worried are you? How clearly does it impact what you do and or What's the magnitude of that input impact in your view? Okay, so let's take a look wow! That's that's great.

Most people responded that IT addresses a clear threat to my business and or work objectives.

Um a few people feel that it's it's not a high priority concern and a few more um do say that they are concerned, but it's not yet clear how much of an impact it is so great.

Thank you for letting us know so.

I'm going to do um, another poll still trying to get a sense of your perspective here, and the next poll is what best describes your current resilience planning processes.

Here we go and responses include.

There are four options: a is none or not applicable.

We've not yet adopted any resilience.

Specific planning practices, B is limited, resilience is considered, but only within our status quo planning practices.

C is emerging.

We have expanded some aspects of our planning practices to better address resilience and D is Advanced.

We've made foundational changes to our planning processes to incorporate resilience.

The question is: what best describes your current resilience planning practices practices I'll.

Give you all a few more seconds to respond to that I clicked on this.

Just when one person answered so we will update the responses to this.

In a few seconds see Marco.

The Lumen page is at question.

Why is on question five I well, um, somehow skipped skipped in this page, but others are answering.

So that's great, okay, uh.

Thank you, commissioner.

If you're on the poleevee.com forward, slash lumen99- and you see what uh commissioner sharoma is describing hit the refresh button, it should bring you back up to the um question for in your job and or immediate area of work.

Thank you, okay.

Yes, thank you for pointing that out, because I'm sure others had the same challenge so yeah.

If, if it's never, if it doesn't seem in sync with what I'm saying um just hit the refresh, it just means it didn't refresh for some reason.

Thank you.

Okay.

Let's take a look at this.

Oh okay, so most people responded.

67 of the audience responded emerging.

We have expanded some aspects of our planning practices to better address, resilience, um and and that's great uh we'd love to learn more about what challenges you face.

As you evolve, your resilience planning a few people answered none or limited um.

A lot of people are in the same position and we're here all together to get to the next level of resilience, planning um.

So, okay, I'm going to close this poll and go to the last one before I present some material.

So this one is a word cloud: it's a little bit different.

The question is: what is the greatest barrier or challenge to effective resilience planning in your view, and what you can do is you can enter a coherent sentence or you can just enter a string of words that comes to mind either way.

The word cloud breaks up your entry into individual words.

I'll.

Give you a minute to do this.

If you have two words that absolutely have to be together, you can use a hyphen or not put a space between them, but it's not it's not critical, um I think the idea of the word cloud is just to spark ideas.

Oh it's very interesting wow.

This is amazing.

Great, thank you for your responses.

Um I'd invite our hosts and other panelists to jump in with any reactions you might have from what you've seen so far from the polls it looks like uh cost is a huge concern, um with resilience, planning, awareness, funding, um lots of lots of words here that I look forward to studying so I'm, going to close this in a couple of seconds just to get some stability on this word cloud before we start talking about it, um so I'm going to pause this any reactions to this word cloud or anything that you saw before in the in the polls please, although first Oracle, yes, very, very insightful, I love these word clouds by the way they they really hone in on the um priority issues and uh, they don't have having data to understand, what's happening.

You know across the grid, uh understanding what it what residence is all about.

Of course, cost is always at the Forefront, because all of these things tend to be funded by the customers and they're our main low-income customers.

Thank you great, thank you and thank you everyone for your responses.

This is um very Illuminating.

For us so I'll ask you all to minimize your browser for now, but stay on that web page um.

The lumen evoluv.com forward, slash Lumen 999, don't close that keep it open because we'll come back to it later and it'll be on the same page.

So, let's get into the research material um.

We looked at about 60 industry documents and articles, including a variety of perspectives and we're looking to understand what does the industry think resilience means and what are the key Concepts.

So we won't cover everything in this presentation, but we will highlight the key resilience, Concepts and elements of a resilience definition and we're also looking for which Concepts do we need to Define more specifically in order to apply the IRP use case.

So again, you'll see many parallels to pillar one Baseline assessment, and if any of this interests you we do have um some references at the end of these slides.

If you want to learn more, it's sort of like uh, some key documents that we're highlighting for you.

This will look familiar to anyone making data informed decisions it might apply to grid planning work that you do or other areas of your work or life.

You can't manage what you don't measure and you can't measure what you don't Define.

This is the Achilles heel with resource resilience, planning, resilience planning right now across the industry, and we start with this observation that many of us working in this space quickly discover the industry has no standard definition of resilience and most definitions are highly conceptual and difficult to bring to action, and many studies and research papers on the topic of resilience or on grid planning in general acknowledge this Gap.

This is problematic in the IRP world, where, generally everyone agrees on the core objectives.

Those objectives are part of the system, modeling architecture and portfolio options to meet those objectives are methodically weighed against each other.

How we Define resilience for IRP must be translatable into an objective that can be modeled or represented in IRP.

It must be intuitive, concise and transparent, and it must Inspire consensus and not Discord.

In the end, the IRP models don't choose the resource portfolio.

For us, but they give us that common ground for investment decision making and strategy, and we want to keep those qualities of IRP and bring resilience into that.

So, let's jump in and take a tour of the federal landscape and we'll start back in the early 2000s.

If you remember the tragedy of 9 11, it's not the birth of the word resilience, but we did see a heightening of concern over protecting critical infrastructure, especially Communications and rolled in with that.

As a Renaissance of concern over energy security over Reliance on foreign fuel supply, Supply chains, Etc, add to the mix, a growing.com economy, digitization Automation, and now we have a whole new set of vulnerabilities around new technologies requiring cyber security in 2009, the national infrastructure advisory, Council niac releases, a report focused on critical infrastructure and defines resilience as the ability to reduce the magnitude and or duration of disruptive events.

And then they go on to say.

The effectiveness of a resilient infrastructure Enterprise depends on its ability to anticipate absorb, adapt to and or rapidly recover from a potentially disruptive event.

A few years later, a presidential policy directive comes out.

Ppd21, which many of you may have heard, of with guidance for all the federal agencies, and they say the term resilience means the ability to to prepare for and adapt to changing conditions and with style, withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions, and it goes goes on to say that resilience includes the ability to withstand and recover from deliberate attacks, accidents or naturally occurring threats or incidents.

Then in 2018 comes out with a definition um based on the niac and PPD 21 definitions.

So they say it's the ability to withstand and reduce the magnitude and or duration of disruptive events, which includes the capability to anticipate absorb, adapt to and or rapidly recover from, such events and it propagates from there.

Everyone has a slightly different take on it, the National Labs in particular, they step toward more towards application, but they're, basically they're based on those definitions, um as we get closer to application.

We also see some movement towards thinking about this from a community perspective, so nrel in its 2019 resilience roadmap, for example, they do focus on extreme weather and on Aging infrastructure, but they're heavily focused on community resilience.

That road map is has a lot of technical documentation on a community resilience planning pilot that they did so some themes in the federal definitions.

Here we can start outlining the elements we need to be able to capture um in a resilience, evaluation model, the federal definitions.

They include some refinements over time, um and and distinctions important for application, but some ambiguities remain so some initial Concepts, we see, emerge evolving from the 2009 niac report.

We see a better distinction between the hazard and event and the system that needs to be resilient against it.

So we see language like reduce magnitude of events going to withstand and reduce magnitude of events going to withstand respond to and rapidly recover rapidly from events.

That distinction is important because one, you mostly don't have control over the event itself and one you do have control over.

We also see a lot of consistency on what the resilience system does it withstands it absorbs it recovers from and it adapts to.

We see that it's implied the system performs some critical function, but the exact function is not always specified so um.

What we do see is a growing distinction between critical infrastructure resilience and Community resilience, and then the final observation we make is that it's implied that the hazard or event is uncontrollable and disruptive to the system, but the hazard, um, North severity are, are really specified.

So you see language like disruptions, a hazard, characterizes disruptions, changing conditions and deliberate attacks, accidents or naturally occurring threats or incidents.

That's pretty broad.

However.

We do see through this timeline a growing record and prominence of weather-driven events as key hazards to the energy system, and it's not that communications security or cyber security has gone away.

It's just that we have we're building up, uh growing living, lived experience of weather, driven events and catastrophes, and then we start to get some indication that, as you get closer to application um, some of the ambiguities are addressed so um again.

The National Labs like nrel, Sandia and others they're working to address gaps between concept and application, and we see more specificity um with how they talk about resilience.

So let's look more closely at that, but we'll look at that from the state perspective.

So at the state level, you do see more clarity on what the hazard or event is and what you're trying to avoid with resilience.

The National Association of regulatory Utility, Commission Commissioners narok, which includes State Regulators.

They Define resilience as robustness and Recovery characteristics of utility infrastructure and operations which avoid or minimize interruptions of service during extraordinary and hazardous event, um the cpuc in a 2020 staff paper defined resilience as the ability to mitigate the impact of a large disruptive event by any one or more of the following mechanisms.

Reduce the magnitude of disruption, extend the duration of resistance, reduce the duration of disruption or reduce the duration of recovery, and, if you all, remember the resilience trapezoid from earlier workshops in this proceeding, this is directly relevant to that and showing the different ways you can reduce disruptions to the system.

The National Association of energy officials naseo.

They had some comments relevant to resilience definition uh.

They say that uh expenditures that would be resilience related expenditures have been Guided by imprecise approaches that fail to account for the impacts of outages or anticipate high impact, low frequency events such as winter storm Yuri.

They also bring in language on balancing trade-offs of resilience Investments, so they say that new approaches to analyzing the cost and benefit of resilience Investments such as microgrids Can.

It can enable more efficient use of ratepayer and taxpayer resources to deliver better outcomes.

So now we see this dimension of needing to make efficient and effective Investments with best use of ratepayer funds, and all of this is really key to IRP application and I would highlight here the outage language.

We see this language come out of entities who are figuring out systematic planning and investment strategy for resilience.

The State agency's National, Labs, think tanks, system modelers and the resiliency in microgrids work working group that many of you have have worked on.

So one more perspective, I'll bring to you um.

This is a public power perspective.

Public Power is very close to the community.

Um, we'll have more on the utility perspective in general in the second part of this presentation, but we wanted to show this example of uh.

As you get closer to actual application, you do see more specificity on what the hazard of or event is.

What's the system you're talking about and what's the system's function, you're trying to preserve or protect the American public Power Association in 2028 2021 defined resilience as how well an electric utility or system of utilities can absorb an event that causes an outage in all or parts of its territory and restore power as quickly as possible.

They also name the scope of the hazard as high impact, low frequency events and they State objectives and that include cyber security and physical security and amongst the Public Power utilities you'll see a diversity of priorities and approaches with appa's definition.

They highlight two of their utilities, tvas approach, it is community focused, but they have a very specific intermediate impact on infrastructure, they're worried about and they Define it as how to prepare for and respond to, events that affect infrastructure, Beyond design standards, Riverside and other public utility defines resilience as process processes and roles during an emergency, so they're very focused on emergency response and I.

Think as you get closer to a specific Community, it's it's logical that you would need to tailor your approach more and more to what you see is that community's greatest need and I'll highlight the outage language language here again because specificity like this, it really jumps out when you see it from a modeling perspective, it becomes clear exactly what you're trying to avoid during a resilience event what to what you want to measure and how you need to structure a model, to compare contrast, the impacts of different events and resilience situations, and it's interesting to see as you get closer to application, what dimensions of that resilience definition! These parties tend to get more specific about.

So, let's look at the importance of that specificity by looking from a different angle, um I think we can all agree on on some examples of resilience.

I hope we can um and I'll use that to explain some of the conclusions we're coming to here.

We see a house.

The owners call the sand, Palace standing on the shoreline of Florida, with surrounding structures demolished by Hurricane Michael in 2018.

I, couldn't tell you if this house sustained power during the hurricane, but it did clearly provide shelter for its occupants and probably for some neighbors too.

So we could instinctively call this a resilient house even better.

We could call this a house that provides resilient shelter and that's the specificity, we're looking for like what we see in the state definitions and with Appa here's another example of the specificity we need.

Just last year, hurricane Ian went right through the middle of Florida.

Millions of people were on outage in the state.

It was a category four when it swept past this community.

Just in line of Fort Myers, this community is called Babcock Ranch.

This community was designed to sustain power during a hurricane.

It's microgridded powered by a nearby solar farm and you'll, even see in the picture.

Some rooftop solar on a few houses that wanted double extra backup.

The distribution lines are buried, but the land and roads are designed to flood, so surrounding communities were destroyed when hurricane Ian swept through, and this community got a lot of press for its design and resilience.

You can see here too, that the houses are also resilient but resilient to what they provide resilient shelter, resilient electricity, resilient internet and resilient water supply during an extreme event, and the point I'm trying to make here is that calling something resilient doesn't necessarily tell you the specifics of what kind of resilience it's providing and to what degree- and we see this a lot in the literature and Industry dialogue- a resilient grid, resilient pulse resilient fuel supply.

There.

You go we're resilient now, a lot of thinking and planning around bolstering resilience, attributes on a piece of the system and not as much as we'd like to see on how or to what degree that attribute ultimately impacts the final service.

When you look at the system as a whole and ultimately, what you're trying to protect and that matters where and how you invest in the context of the larger system matters, we've got limited resources, limited ability and appetite to invest.

So when we build it, let's build it right with an ion, not just a piece of infrastructure or a section of the system, but the bigger picture and what we're trying to protect- and we think this is a potential Pitfall specific to grid planning and the institutional practices we're all used to to Silo planning processes for different parts of the system.

If we want to stay true to resilience, planning best practices, we know it's not enough to just make a piece of infrastructure resilient.

You have to make the ultimate service it contributes to resilient and to do that, one, the service you're trying to provide, has to be defined very clearly and two you've got to look as comprehensively as you can at the entire system.

That's needed to supply that service and that's where we go to next foreign.

So what is the critical function or service we're trying to protect? We take all this information in the context of grid planning, decide what is the critical function we want to preserve and it's pretty clear that it's electricity service but I'll, give you a chance to um in a poll later to disagree on that, not just any electricity service and and that's the complication.

It's not electricity service to heat, swimming pools or power home theaters, but it's the level of electricity service you need for survival and livelihood, especially during an emergency and another way to look at this is um.

What's the undesired outcome we're trying to avoid the undesired outcome is inaccessibility of electricity when needed for survival and livelihood, and that's an outage at the point of consumption and the outages impacts are worsened by lack of substitution when outages are very long or they're very Broad in in terms of geographic scope, so you can't go to a neighbor Community Center for relief, they're worsened when the underlying Hazard is life-threatening in itself um or threatens other essential services once the critical service is defined.

The system that provides that service is pretty clear.

So this is a stylized graphic of the electricity grid, going from fuel supply to generation to transmission, distributed energy resources, distribution system all the way to the customers.

Failures at any point on this system have the potential to disrupt the critical service we've defined.

We all have our areas of expertise and work Focus, but just keep in mind anytime.

You cut this up and try to address resilience for one piece at a time.

There's that Pitfall of losing sight of the final objective and what the trade-offs of different resilience Investments might be.

So now that we've defined the service we're trying to protect and the system behind it, let's look at resilience hazards to better understand risks and specific situations and failure.

Points on that system that we're most worried about so stepping way back and looking broadly at hazards and systems across the us.

We looked from a an insurance perspective.

We know the insurance industry is good at tracking catastrophes and natural disasters.

They they do it systematically.

Many natural disasters, of course, are seasonal and their ongoing threats in some parts of the U.S, but when they're bad they're really bad and impacts compound in the broader emergency situation, where water supply shelter, food Communications are also threatened.

So this is an excerpt from a report from aeon on catastrophes in the U.S in 2022.

they show tropical Cyclones convective storms, which are basically thunderstorms, drought and flooding as major sources of measured economy-wide losses, and that set of Hazards hazards shows up consistently across the years.

But when we focus more on electricity infrastructure and electricity service, how do hazards and extreme events compare there? We go from a national perspective.

Hurricanes have yielded the longest and most widespread outages and just total obliteration of the grid in Puerto Rico.

Excuse me in Puerto, Rico uh hurricane Irma hit as a category five, and then hurricane Maria hit two weeks later.

As a category four many people's homes were destroyed.

Most of the Island's distribution system was destroyed, transmission and generation to a lesser extent, but some key transmission lines went down and some generations sustained heavy damage.

So we see the failure.

Points are mostly Downstream on the system close to the customer.

We also see the potential for really extensive interruptions to electricity service.

Some people in Puerto Rico went for almost a year without power in their homes.

This was, and continues to be, a huge catastrophe and other destructive hurricanes to note Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

um, the highest cost disaster on record.

That's according to Noah Noah keeps track on their website of all the natural disasters and catastrophes as well as costs associated with them.

Hurricane Katrina is at the top.

The second costliest on record is Hurricane Harvey in 2017, also according to Noah and then in terms of insurance losses.

Hurricane Ian, which we just saw last year, that was a second costliest natural disaster for insurance.

Insurers on record nationally also winter storms have have caused some of the most devastating disruptions to the electric grid into electricity service, so winter storms and cold snaps.

They they bring this additional compounding cascading effect in areas where you see a high dependency on natural gas for both Heating and electricity production, and these situations have this sort of Trifecta impact with demand.

Spiking impacts on generator equipment and then impacts on fuel operations and allocation of fuel.

So in 2021 we saw winter storm Yuri winter storm Yuri resulted in the largest control firm load shed event in U.S history.

We saw load shed in aircot, spp and miso Texas was hardest hit.

They had generator equipment and gas supply lines.

Freeze, they had issues with natural gas production Supply and they sell record-breaking spot natural gas prices.

Winter storm Elliott, which we just saw very notably strained.

The PGM grid, PGM called on 45 gigawatts of generation, That Couldn't start when called upon that was a near Miss for them.

We also saw rolling blackouts in Tennessee and in the Carolinas the outages affected: 13 million people lasting up to a couple of days after winter storm Yuri in 2021, the North American Electric reliability, Corporation nerc tried to respond as quickly as they could with improved winterization requirements and there's been a lot of controversy over those requirements.

Um.

For me, this highlights the challenge of setting requirements when you can't fully put it in the broader perspective of your ultimate objectives and economic trade-offs of your resilience, Investments.

So nerc put in place location, specific freeze, protection measures or winterization requirements and they anchored those to a cold temperature threshold.

Initially they set that cold temperature threshold as the lowest temperature, a generator had seen since 1975.

and the generators really push back on this.

They complained about the cost burden of that and they viewed it as a very extreme threshold.

Nerc then updated um the requirement to a statistical approach, so they said forget about coldest since 1975.

Let's only look back to 2000, look at all the temperatures you've seen since 2000.

and go to the 0.2 percentile of your temperatures, and we want you to winterize to that degree, and you would think that 0.2 percentile on your range of temperatures is pretty cold right, but these extreme temperatures have very long tails and it turns out that 0.2 percentile, when you compare it to the coldest temperature, is an 18 degree Fahrenheit difference.

So this rule was seen as too lenient that it's not a meaningful requirement and generators are probably already weatherizing to that level.

The ferca proved that requirement the updated one, but noted it needs work and I.

Think it's I really think it's going to be hard to get this threshold right, because you have to balance that cost of winterization with the benefits and alternatives um.

The other thing I'll note here, uh with the winter storms, is when we look at winter storms across the middle of the U.S.

It really does make a lot of sense that the resilience focus is on fuel supply and on generation, because that's what gets hardest hit.

Those are the key failure points on the system, so you'll see that's the resilience, focus and many RTO level discussions and at the ferc level, but in California things are different, so in California we see resilience hazards affecting parts of the grid, we've seen a broad range of climate and weather related threats, stressing our grid at multiple points in 2020, of course, we saw a heat wave that resulted in Rolling blackouts in California, affecting hundreds of thousands of customers and the outages lasted on the scale of hours.

In 2022 we saw even higher temperatures not as much in the rest of the western part of U.S, but definitely in California, and that was a near Miss drought.

We see it as a compounding Factor, not as much directly tied to um, surprises and demand spikes or generation unavailability, but it definitely reduces the total generation available.

It dries out the land mix, uh Wildfire weather, even worse, uh wildfires.

We see that accelerating the the risks of that accelerating.

If we roll back the clock all the way to 2007 in 2007, there were really bad wildfires in Southern California, so what we saw was 80 000 customers in San Diego were on outage, and this wasn't because of PSPs.

Some of them were on outage for weeks.

It was due to damage on the Southwest powerlink transmission system, so wildfires encroached on the transmission system and they had trouble importing power in 2019.

We saw multiple day outages due to PSPs.

That was our worst year for PSPs that affected millions of customers who were out for days at a time we also saw.

If you look at ladwp, we saw a fire called The.

Saddle Ridge fire severely impact transmission into the ladwp system and that's been a concern in their grid planning, storms and floods.

Um we're still experiencing this long parade of atmospheric rivers in California, we're still getting through that the full outage extent is to be determined.

What we've seen at times is it's affecting hundreds of thousands of people without it just lasting for days on the order of days and then in 2020.

If we look at extreme smoke um that surprised some of us, it surprised me um.

So if you remember in 2020, we had over 4 million acres of land, uh burn in California, and an important factor in that situation was a series of uh, lightning storms.

So uh we had a lot of smoke.

We had smoke coming from California going all the way across the U.S and I believe it was in Oregon.

There was a fire called the bootleg fire that got very close to um a major transmission Air Tie.

So we had a near Miss in terms of being able to meet demand when smoke, tripped, 4 000 megawatts of the California Oregon inner Thai, and when that tripped it also forced the system operator to derate the Pacific DC inner tie by 1500 megawatts, so that ended up being a major threat for cold snaps.

It's it's to be determined.

Um California is currently dependent on natural gas uh for its electricity system, potentially for heating um.

So far, what we've seen in recent memory is that uh, when the polar vortex that generates a lot of these winter storms when it gets wobbly and comes down into the U.S, it tends to go through the middle of the US and down to Texas uh.

We haven't really seen it in California, but it's an open question in my mind.

Could that sort of situation happen in California? So a few things jump out for here for us here when we're looking at resilience for California, we really do have to look across the entire grid, um any resilience planning.

We do need to consider those vulnerabilities across the whole grid, and that means when we come up with Solutions.

We also need to consider how those Solutions those Solutions fit with the grid as a whole.

How do those Solutions help or hurt with addressing outages somewhere else on the system a dollar spent on large-scale generation that might not get you the resilience Supply to customers you're? Looking for when the failure point is down on the distribution system and likewise a dollar spent on distributed resource might not get you the bulk grid.

Services.

You need further Upstream on the system to address failure points there.

So there are a lot of connections there, um that we uh we would highlight.

So this is where we landed for the IRP use case, um the different elements of the resilience definition and how we would specify it for application to IRP or grid planning in general.

What's the critical function or service that must be preserved, we say it's electricity service to end use customers even under emergency conditions, recognizing that there's some prioritization needed to avoid outages.

What's the system providing that function or service the whole electricity grid from fuel supply to end use customer? What are the hazards that can disrupt the system, environmental and weather conditions that can significantly increase demand, reduce Supply or limit delivery of electricity to customers? What are the known failure points? A couple of examples: insufficient generation, wires, outages and D rates, and then what are the most concerning sets of Hazards and failure points we would say, as a couple of examples, temperatures extremes on demand and Supply wildfire and smoke affecting distribution, sections and key transmission corridors, so that defines the scope of what we think our resilience model needs to cover.

We can't model just a piece of the Grid or we'll be missing a major failure point in their impacts, but we will face realities of time and data availability constraints, and we know that anything.

Our model can't cover um on here.

On this table, we will need to be really careful to have caveats that that's a limitation on the model, that's a major limitation on the model.

So we like to get your thoughts on all of this and we're going to do a mix of polls and Q a so I'll ask to our hosts um a request that we pause, the recording here, if that's okay and then to the audience I'll.

Ask you to please go to your browser again and open up that pulley.com forward.

Slash lumen99 thanks, Michael uh, so uh in this.

In this section, we'll we'll discuss resilience uh in the context of integrated research planning which focuses more on the about cred needs and the IRP process by design has the bird's eye view on system level needs uh.

So this accordingly I'm sorry owner for interrupting you I think the way we're doing this um the closed captioning isn't showing up for you, so um Roseanne should I stop share and have owner start share.

Yes, that would be the best option.

Okay owner, are you um able to do that? I might need um.

Apologies for that uh owner I've made you the presenter.

So if you can go ahead and share your screen, it should show up Mark just an FYI on on my view.

You're a closed captioning English showing uh well I, guess that was for your voice.

I guess you're talking about when when honor is yeah, just sneaking got it sorry about that.

Honor I just realized, as I saw it yeah no problem um this this working now or yep, and then go to slide.

47., sorry and you actually have to before you go to slideshow.

Let me know when you're on the slide and before you go to slideshow, you have to do one setting, okay, yeah, so I'm I'm there and then yeah so go up to the top to slideshow and then all the way on the right click on always use subtitles.

So sorry go up to the top and click on slideshow you're at home.

Right now on the right click on always use subtitles, and then you can start your slideshow from that current slide.

Got it all right there.

You go! Okay, sorry about that! Modestism like the two screens, I, think, okay, so yeah I, think I think we're here.

Okay, so uh! Sorry about the the delay um! So in in this section, you will we'll discuss uh resilience in the context of integrated research planning, which focuses on the on the about grad and, as I mentioned earlier, the IRP process by design has the bird's eye view on system level needs, and accordingly, this puts uh IRP in a unique position to be able to incorporate resilience, needs and value into the planning for necessary Investments at the system level uh so before we dive in I want to um.

First give you a quick summary of the of the irps in the West uh and how they interpret resilience, So based on 20 or so irps that we reviewed across the back footprint, which covers a large portion of the Region's load.

We found that most of the irps at least mention uh, the word resilience, but the scope and the maturity of how they Define it and how they discuss resilience in the plants very significantly.

We also see that climate change is increasingly recognized in the irps, and this is not only tied to GG reduction goals and efforts, but also uh for the adaptation needs and risks it creates um.

So I will not cover every single IRP reviewed here, but want to go through a few examples to just illustrate the um uh, some of the relevant teams uh starting with the California lses, the load serving entities, so in California, the public utilities Court explicitly requires the irps to strengthen the diversity, sustainability and resilience of the bulk transmission and Distribution Systems and local communities uh.

So uh, the irps, the IOU irps address this uh by a diverse research portfolio that supports system reliability and helps meeting ghg emission reduction targets and in that portfolio distributed.

Energy storage is typically highlighted as a flexible resource that improves resilience.

So this is directionally.

True, like very true.

A highly reliable bulk grid can address some of the resilience needs, but it cannot do it all.

So, as Marco explained the known environmental hazards impact, it can impact all parts of the grid, and that includes parts that are closer to the customers in the communities so distributed.

Resources are definitely uh.

You know has to be.

They have to be part of the solution, so the sweet energy storage installed in microgrids or as customer side of resources behind the meter.

They can certainly improve uh customer resilience, customer and Community resilience, but without a clear definition of resilience and a set of metrics to evaluate resilience improvements.

The IRP requirement under the public utilities court is, is very much open-ended and it's subjecting different interpretations, which makes it difficult to address uh resilience needs systematically.

So I want to acknowledge that there are many many efforts, very valuable efforts, centered around improving resilience throughout the state.

So, for example, the astute program uh, that's increasingly focused on Equity resilience, microgrid Pilots that are testing operational, uh challenge like testing against operational challenges and uh, and just making uh making it work and climate adaptation efforts and so on.

So, but all these efforts, as of today, they're largely disconnected from grid planning from the IRP analysis, so I want to just also highlight that the climate change induced whether extremes and and impacts on on the bulk credit is getting recognized, especially after the August 2020 heat waves, resulting in Rolling blackouts in the state uh.

But the climate impacts are not yet fully included in the in the planning process.

So there's some some ongoing work, but more more needs to be done so um I want to move to uh ladwp, as as our next example uh in the in in their long-term resource planning for awp includes resilience as one of the core objectives very explicitly, along with power, reliability, uh, affordability, environmental justice and equity to the plan discuss this reliability and resilience together, but it makes a very clear distinction between the two terms.

Reliability is seen as centered around having research adequacy on their commonly expected events uh, whereas resilience is seen as focused on on extremes, the extreme events with uh, typically low probability, but high impact that are often unexpected and can lead to long duration.

Interruptions on the system that can be detrimental to customers uh, so in the plan, oledwp is up front that there are no rightly adopted or standard definitions or metrics for grid resilience, and this is important and given that they offer their own working definition, um and and they Define resilience around the ability of the power system to anticipate, observe, adapt and rapidly recover from a certain set of high impact, low frequency events, so so across uh all the irps we reviewed this one was one of the few, with a very clear definition of resilience that was brought into uh the the research plans and a definition: that's that's distinct from reliability, um and in the latest uh complete plan uh that was completed in 2022 uh.

The resilience need evaluation was addressed by running uh sensitivity, analysis running a set of sense to the cases on potential extreme events driven by Wildfire risk uh.

So that was built on the recent experience back in 2019, where Wildfire caused uh transmission, outage, limiting the uh, the Region's import capability and creating stress great conditions, but going forward.

The IRP report highlights that future approaches can more comprehensively quantify resilience, impacts by using metrics like value of loss, load, ull and social burden of outages, and so in the next two slides um.

We show avistan Puget Sound as additional examples and both uh, both entities, they're subject to Washington States clean energy transition Act, which requires among many many measures, uh reduction, reductions of burdens to vulnerable populations and highly impacted communities, uh energy security and resilience.

And- and this is you know, along with the other measures, to make sure that all customers are benefiting from the transition to to clean energy future.

So the ACT doesn't Define the resilience that leaves it to to utilities to interpret prep and I will not get into the details for for today's discussion.

But it's interesting to to compare and contrast how the two entities are addressing the resilience requirements in their research planning and how that has been evolving over time.

So with that I want to just jump ahead, um to show a couple: high-level summaries, um.

So, okay, so here we show the level of maturity and resilience.

Definitions that are are currently in the irps so of the 20 plans that we reviewed across the web.

Iran uh two-thirds either did not mention resilience at all or if they did, they use it as a buzzword without a clear definition or without measuring measuring resilience, impacts.

Um one of the 25 of the research plans, the resilience as is used uh and and fit into a more traditional IRP framework uh in in those uh.

The resilience is discussed primarily in the context of system reliability, and the plans typically include examples of certain types of projects or programs improving group resilience, but without being tied to specific definitions or specific metrics yeah, and only only a couple of irps that were reviewed, uh included the clear definition of resilience uh.

The ladwp was one example, a definition that is also closely linked to reliability about it, what it is distinct um.

So here is a snapshot of the extent of climate change.

Considerations in the irps climate change is amplifying the weather extremes creating new normals, and this is increasingly recognizing the IRP studies.

Uh about one-third of the irps still do not explicitly consider climate change effects, but of the remaining two-thirds that recognize climate change induced risks to the Electric System.

The approach is to bringing in the climate change impacts into the IRP.

Studies are evolving and there are different flavors here, of course, uh.

So some uh, some irps, rely on historical trends and extrapolate them with us oftentimes more weight on more recent events that are attributed to uh climate climate change impacts, uh.

Some some studies run sensitivities, uh sensitivity, cases or scenarios deterministically to explore, needs under certain types of extreme weather, um, and then others are starting to really develop.

Uh uh, you know an approaches to more systematically bring in long-term climate projections, When developing key modeling inputs.

So so far the primary focus has been on temperature effects on electric demand, uh, so really kind of putting uh the kind of recent events that we have in California back in August, 2020 or September 2022.

There were like massive uh.

You know heat waves, that that resulted in high high demand and just created really stress great conditions.

So those are the kind of things that are really so in historical context like uh, so that that was seen as one in 40-year uh type or one in 35 year type of event, but with the climate changing you know going forward.

What would be the frequency of the type of of heat waves that we've seen in recent years? Are they going to be more frequently observed that that is uh uh? Basically, the efforts are trying to bring that in uh cool system with the climate projections.

Oh so so one one thing that I want to hash add to us uh.

Also, some some entities I mean just so.

The focus have been more on the electric demand, but entities are now starting to look at this uh more comprehensively and also including impacts on of weather events on Supply available as well and and the whole the entire grid and the potential failure modes on the grid um.

So here we just want to zoom in uh California a little bit so the IRP and the bulk grid planning ecosystem in uh in California.

It is very rich and it requires coordination among several parties and again this is not to be comprehensive, covering everything.

So this is just kind of a probably overly simplified Snapchat, but across the state so just want to highlight the the uh the linkages uh of of the different types of work across state agencies.

So among the agencies, CEC is charged with uh preparing a comprehensive demand forecast as a part of their multi-pronged hyper study.

The integrated energy policy report and their forecast is really fundamental.

It is used by the cpuc's IRP studies.

It also flows into uh, Kaiser's transmission planning process.

Lsu's planning and procurements are directly linked to both the IRP and the transmission planning efforts that are shown here and um the uh, the IRP studies uh just focused on developing lease course: research portfolio options um, while meeting two really important objectives that are at the front-end Center.

So one is system reliability, so that's based on planning, Reserve margins and need you know.

I need assessment that is tied to a one in 10 years.

Loss of load, expectation level and the second one is- is an electric sector ghg emission reductions um the emission reductions consistent with the the target range set by by carbon um, the resilience vulnerabilities, so so clean energy transition, coupled with the resilience related vulnerabilities, raise the stakes in Grid planning, so many moving parts and challenges to consider for and this this ties to a question we got from I believe Thomas um.

So there are a lot of objectives.

So resilience is one of one of the objectives, but but today's resilient Solutions not only should not only provide resilience, but it should be in line with the climate and environmental goals.

So what that means is installing, for example, at a diesel backup generator it's no longer an option under at least on their long-term View.

There are many challenges and institutional barriers associated with planning for a system uh that includes high levels of Renewables and high levels of uh distributed resources, uh the assessments of portfolio level, um needs and resource contributions to meeting those needs are becoming more and more complex.

Another factor is electrification.

Excuse me, electrification is an essential part of the clean energy transition, but it will create new uncertainties to address and will likely shift areas of vulnerabilities on the ground and kind of piling.

On top of that, the climate scientists are are finding the high confidence that climate change is making it more likely to have um multiple hazards simultaneously, resulting in in compounding risks to be addressed.

Uh both operationally and at the planning phase.

Um, so uh, the distribution of uh climate related hazards and vulnerabilities uh are highly locational um, so the average outcomes uh they're easier to predict and and plan for uh, at least relatively speaking, but but over relying on average metrics can really distort the associated risk profiles.

So, for example, I mean this might be uh.

You know obvious to many of you, but if Global mean temperature is projected to rise by 2 degrees Celsius by a certain year above the pre-industrial period, it doesn't mean that it will be two two degrees higher everywhere all the time, so certain locations will be affected more than others and the the higher temperature levels Also may increase at a different pace than the average levels uh, even the the cold snaps can can really they call uh whether events can become more frequent, so uh there's no consensus on that.

Yet, but some some scientists think that the extreme cold, cold and polar uh we'll take more text type events similar to what we've seen in in Texas last year.

It can become more frequent uh due to increased better variability created by climate change so there.

So there are a lot of things to really consider and and really get um higher resolution in in uh, both geographically and across across time.

To really understand the effects of certain type of better events and the good news is, there is significantly uh.

You know, there's a there's, an ongoing efforts, significant effort in creating those high resolution, weather data sets and projections and climate scenarios that are available and already using multiple Industries.

So there's there are many sources of uh to draw from in terms of the climate data um.

So here, as I mentioned earlier, the IRP process by design has the bird's eye view on system level needs and in a unique position to really bring in resilience into system level planning for great Investments uh.

So to do that, we identified four four gaps: uh to really bring in resilience into the IRP planning, so the first one is a need to have a formal definition of resilience that the stakeholders can agree on and a definition that can translate uh.

You know the associated metrics consistent with that definition, those metrics into the irp's optimization.

The second one is I need to identify and and model key resilience, vulnerabilities and potential um failure points now across the grid and across locations, and do that, while considering whether specific situations- and you know concurrent and compounding events that Michael mentioned earlier, the third Gap is to really look at the whole grid for Solutions and and grid here, as it extends all the way to the customer, and it includes uh in front of the media resources and distributed resources as well and to look at the whole grid for Solutions, and that means more more planning integration across multiple grid, domains about grid and distributed resources, and this is in line with the direction that the cpuc is is taking and a new rulemaking I think that came up uh end of last year, calling for increased coordination among IRP and various Dr proceedings.

So this is really important, uh step to Bringing resilience and the last Gap is a need for comprehensive evaluation of the resilience impact, while also considering value stacking opportunities.

So I have an example on this towards the end of uh our presentations, so we'll kind of uh drill into that a little bit more through that that example, so because the environmental hazards impact all parts of the grid, many of the resilience mitigation measures they just have to be closer to the customers and communities, because if the distribution section is on outage, for example, and and um due to a PSPs related like wildfire risk, uh leading to PSPs outages, uh, there's very little, the default credit can offer for that.

For that type of event, uh, traditionally the resilience Solutions like diesel generators used for backup power.

It provided only Downstream benefits to only the customers and communities they serve and they were needed and used only rarely when their power there were power interruptions there's a result about grid planning could be done totally separately because they didn't really need to know about those resources.

Just they didn't affect uh, didn't provide any any value or service to the bulk grip and about Credence could be totally isolated from from the operations of those resources, but fast forward to today, like today's resilience, Solutions include resources like storage or hybrid resources, of like solar paired with storage uh that are very, very flexible, and they can not only support uh, customer and Community resilience, but they can also provide uh benefits to the about grid and support the clean energy transition that the state needs uh and what that means is when we go back to development planning now it just needs to consider contributions of these resources.

These distributed resources, um and also it needs to consider the limitations of these resources that are tied to resilience, related services, uh and and so considering the value stacking opportunities.

It's also important, when looking at local uh resilience Solutions uh for two reasons, because one is it can reduce the net cost to provide resilience uh, which means it.

You know it at the economic viability of the resilient Solutions can improve right when you think about value stacking and also the it can impact the relative rankings of Alternatives that are considered so, for example, if one type of project can only support customer resilience and another project can do that, but also provide a great services.

On top of that, that would be an important consideration that uh is directly tied to one of the key uh, like the cost considerations that that all of our stakeholders Highlights today so I'll I'll, have to integrate resilience into uh research planning uh.

So here we provide a potential framework on how to do that and again, as micro said earlier, like the so this the disc.

This is only for discussion purposes at this point, so not meant as formal recommendations to cpuc or the existing processes that collect uh feedback and recommendations um.

But what I want to highlight here is the need for a comprehensive resilience assessment, which caps into excuse me uh, which Taps into several related, but currently disconnected efforts, so that resilience assessment would bring in the resilience framework and a set of uh societal, metrics or or tools from the cpc's resilience and microgrid efforts.

Uh.

It would bring in important information on vulnerability profiles and potentially some guidance on climate scenarios from various uh utility-led efforts, such as climate adaptation, vulnerability assessments, risk assessment, mitigation, phase, ramp, uh, wildfired mitigation plans among the few uh.

So going back to the climate projections, utilizing those the high resolution, climate projections and scenarios, it would re-parameterize electric demand, forecast and Supply available with assumptions to reflect properly climate change and impacts and and the effects on extreme weather conditions uh, and do that on a probabilistic way, uh with uh, with higher special granularity compared to the approaches today, unless it would bring in research portfolios from the current grid, planning studies and evaluate the resilience of of those portfolios.

Um, so of these models, the outputs can be a set of resilience, impact metrics, yet to be determined by the set of metrics that are consistent with the framework being developed under this resilience and microgrids efforts.

So these metrics can include some variations on loss of load, metrics and statistics on expected, unserved energy, but not just for for the system level as a whole by showing the details by location by type of Hazard and and type of grid failure modes that are really important to to keep track of.

It could also layer in uh social burden, indices and and potentially value flows, load estimates that are tailored to to California and to inform great planning decisions.

These outputs would need to eventually flow back to grid planning studies.

They can also be used to inform certain uh distributed energy resources per policies and program design where um value of resilience is an important factor.

Key consideration.

Uh is how to characterize and model the grid, contributions of certain resilience mitigation measures under Blue Sky conditions, which might be as important as as the performances under the the black Sky conditions when they're looking at uh.

You know the cost and the value of the of the of these Solutions had a big picture at the system level which I'll discuss next um.

So going back to the cpucc's formula for uh pillar methodology, um that Roseanne uh summarized today.

So under those four pillar methodologies, CPC identified contributions to grid and state policy goals on their Blue Sky conditions to be a key factor to consider um, just um or for a performance-based design, and as I described earlier, these Blue Sky services to the grid.

It may reduce the net cost of providing resilience, but at the same time it might also limit the capacity that's available during those unexpected kind of blind sky.

Black Sky events and the hazard has a hazardous conditions.

So if you knew exactly when and where the hazards would take place, there'll be no issue.

We could, you know, just plan for that and switch the service more back and forth, but that's not the reality.

So, given the uncertainties around the types, timing, location and impacts of the hazards, it becomes a very complex decision that depends on risk, exposure and risk tolerances and that there are many approaches here, but the range of approaches can include uh, prioritizing resilience above anything else, which would leave very little if any uh room for Blue Sky services.

So this would be you know all for that solution.

Under this use case, this would be the use case providing the highest resilience, but it would also uh uh lead to higher costs or higher net costs.

Another approach could be to set a minimum resilience Target based on some criteria and then offer the remaining capacity of the resources to the grid once that Target is met, but this would balance and help keep control over the resilience levels and priorities, but it would also start utilizing some of the resources capacity towards uh, helping with evolving grid needs.

So the third one is it's just a variation of that approach.

Uh would be to dynamically assess the risk levels and determine the capacity that might be made available for Blue Sky services.

Excuse me so so this would require more effort, a continuous risk assessment and monitoring, but it would also help maximize value stacking and then here um on our last slide.

This is an example to illustrate the value stacking problem.

That thing is really important, so here the chart shows three different risks over time.

The renewable curtailment risks and reliable system.

Reliability risks are faced by the bulk grid and the wildfire and Associated PSPs outage risks are primarily faced by the customers and the communities, so the risk profiles overlap but they're not fully coincident, so the renewable curtailment risk at the system level is the highest in spring.

When we have when the solar output is as high and the electric demand is still relatively low, which uh creates renewable oversupply challenges and sometimes uh curtail clean energy that jeopardizes uh the really push for clean energy transition, uh system, reliability, risks, uh tend to be highest in summer, at least for now, under the current system and the demand, and then the Wildfire risk starts in summer, but then it Peaks uh later in Fall, due to higher winds, wind speeds that are seen so so so under that setup, you know, if you consider three separate use cases uh the use case, a would prioritize resilience and always keeps uh the result.

The resource on on standby and accordingly have the highest resilience and the use case b would recognize.

Wildfire risks are minimal during um the first half of the year, so over uh, the capacity of the resource to the grid to help with renewable integration and then use Case C would extend the duration of grid services to also cover summer months uh during which the system reliability needs are the highest.

So so, when we look at you know the uh, the three options and again there there's there are many more and more detail.

This is a simplified example, but really to determine which use case best.

The customer and Community needs.

It is necessary to evaluate the the residual risk profiles and the economic trade-offs uh very carefully.

So if you go from use case A to B and C, it leaves some some residual exposure against PSPs events and, and that needs to be weighed against the economic value gained by supporting green meat so best type of use cases.

It could vary for different communities based on their risk profiles and preferences, but having the toolkit to really understand the risk.

Exposures and the economic trade-off that I mentioned for addressing those exposures at different levels.

Uh is a necessary step for bringing in uh resilience into into resource planning.

So with that I'll I'll pause and see.

If we have any um questions before we go to q, a I'm going.