Dyson College of Arts and Sciences

exposed the fragility of this approach. Hospitals, wastewater treatment plants and certain multifamily housing complexes are among those types of facilities that are required to have some measure of onsite generation available to supply emergency power when required. It's become increasingly evident that relying on rarely used emergency generation to provide ample power during longer-term outages may be a risky strategy for several reasons including: Unexpected equipment failures; Run times are constrained by the availability of diesel fuel—refueling in impacted areas during emergencies may be difficult or impossible; The percentage of loads served by emergency power may be far less than what would be desired. To have a really well-functioning hospital, one has to invest in onsite generation significantly beyond the code requirements. Section Three discusses the resiliency and economic advantages of continuously provided, combined heat and power over backup/emergency power. In this section we provide some examples of the historical experience of the performance of appropriately designed CHP system during significant outages in the Northeast and elsewhere nationally. The point is made that continuously operated CHP (and other forms of DER, including microgrids with CHP) are a superior choice for providing resiliency services. In addition to providing more resilient power, CHP can provide an economic return to the site owner. Whereas emergency and backup generators are akin to an insurance policy; you buy them and hope you never use them. This section concludes with a listing of case studies. Examples are provided that demonstrate the ability of properly designed, configured and operated DER systems to assure a continuity of energy services when the power grid is out of service. Combined heat and power (CHP) in particular, provides "heat resiliency" as a byproduct of greater electric power reliability at a site. Section Four examines the divergence between private benefits and societal benefits and its implications for creating significant missed opportunities to capitalize on DERs potential to make communities more resilient. When DER at a public building, hospital, or campus makes that site, and adjacent neighboring sites more resilient, there are "spillover benefits" to society at large. There are costs to making buildings, campuses, and in the case of microgrids, whole neighborhoods, more resilient. However, there is no commensurate payment for these spillover or societal benefits. Where the welfare of others is improved by a private investment, a good case can be made for public incentives that insure that the right level of investment will be made. The potential social benefits of DER as a resiliency measure has recently been recognized by policymakers. The Northeastern United States has become the epicenter of activity nationally in policy initiatives that promote the wider deployment of DER to enhance state and local emergency planning and response functions and provide a greater capacity to meet societal needs during emergency events and in recovery from such events. The fifth section of the report will discuss nationally innovative programs, such as the Connecticut Microgrid Pilot Program, New York Prize and other programs of a similar nature in Massachusetts and New Jersey. 29

• Cover