FROM: Ostroff Associates

DATE: November 5, 2020

RE: Climate Action Council – Power Generation Advisory Panel

Chair
• John Rhodes, New York State Department of Public Service
Members
• Corinne DiDomenico, Assistant Director, Large Scale Renewables, New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority
• William Acker, Executive Director, New York Battery and Energy Storage Consortium
• Cecilio Aponte, III, Senior Analyst, Origination, sPower
• Elizabeth (Betta) Broad, Outreach Director, New Yorkers for Clean Power
• Rory Christian, President, Concentric Consulting, LLC
• Lisa Dix, Senior New York Representative, Beyond Coal Campaign, Sierra Club
• Annel Hernandez, Associate Director, New York City Environmental Justice Alliance
• Kit Kennedy, Director of Energy & Transportation, Natural Resources Defense Council
• Shyam Mehta, Executive Director, NYSEIA
• Emilie Nelson, Executive Vice President, New York Independent System Operator
• John Reese, Senior Vice President, Eastern Power Generating Company
• Stephan Roundtree, Jr., Northeast Director, Vote Solar
• Jennifer Schneider, International Representative and Legislative and Political Coordinator for
New York, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
• Darren Suarez, Manager of Public and Government Affairs, Boralex Inc.
• Laurie Wheelock, Litigation and Policy Counsel, Public Utility Law Project
Presentation by Macy Testani:
Rory Christian: Is it safe to assume certain parts of the system are leakier than others, and what are the
differences between those systems?

Macy Testani: That range is what the current science says, within that system, typically the larger leaks
occur in older pipelines like in NYC. There is very little incentive for utilities to fix leaks because they are
not the ones who pay for leaks.
Bill Acker: Do you have information about the breakdown of the leakage between the pipelines and the
end point of use leakage?

Testani: NYSERDA did a report a few years ago on in-state leakage, looking at processing facilities and
extraction of gas down to end use. it breaks out upstream, midstream and distribution. Would have to
double check those results.

John Reese: It seems there needs to be an impact analysis of when you stop repairing, given this is a near-
term, high-impact issue, when do you make the decision to either repair them, or not because they are
going to be gone in a matter of years.

Testani: We do have methane mitigation potential from the natural gas system project at NYSERDA, it’s
still under development currently.

Christian: You mentioned utilities have no incentives to fix infrastructure, are there any regulatory
requirements for them to do so?

Testani: I don’t believe so. I know because they don’t pay for them, they don’t have the incentive.
Regulatory ownership over those pipelines is unclear.

John Rhodes: The local distribution is owned clearly by utilities who are under certain regulations, which
relate mostly to safety, and I’m not sure how methane leakage figures into that. It is the case that they do
prioritize the leakiest pipes.

Betta Broad: Could you talk more about how the State is fully adopting this 20-year timeline, and how
that’s actually being implemented and how that will impact everything across the board as far as cost
and VCAs etc. Just wonder what the timeline is for shifting the timeline.

Testani: The timeline is near-term, NYSERDA and DEC have been collaborating, that first draft of the
inventory I believe goes into the scoping plan and will be in draft in January.

Broad: Is the idea that by the end of next year the 20-year timeline would be how costs are determined?

Testani: I know that in our current projects whenever we deal with emissions, we look at both, because
it is a CLCPA requirement. In the methane project for example we have both examples.

Kit Kennedy: I think this issue of addressing methane leakage is important for us to take on, and I think
we need to do it in a way that doesn’t extend the life of the system because we will have to get off gas to
meet our goals. Think we need to dive into the question of how much longer we will need gas in New
York.

Cecilio Aponte: Maybe there are two different problems here. Thinking about the differences between
the distribution system and where the leakage occurs is important. I think we need to understand how
the problem breaks down. Are we going to move to a top down approach that may change the baseline
emissions?

Testani: Right now, we are using the bottom up inventory, but as we move towards making those
decisions, we will take the most informed approach.

Acker: The other thing methane has going for it is it is more reactive so we consume more in the
atmosphere each year, which leads to another potential solution: you could react the methane. Has there
been any research looking at solutions other than stopping the leaks?

Testani: We have not looked at reactivity.

Emilie Nelson: Regarding the request for input, I agree with Kit’s point. Considering the reliability issues,
we have discussed those in our subgroups.

John Williams: Was going to get into the approach we are considering for the advisory panels to
consider, and the nature of recommendations. A lot has to do with what you’ve been talking about –
near-term activities, there is a requirement in the CLCPA – We need to think about what 40% reductions
look like, and what 80% reductions look like. 50-70% of new heating systems have to be heat pumps by
2030, so that is not only normalizing how we think about new heating systems, but those are only new
systems, we still have to think about the broad sweep of the entire market.

Broad: You said we would need 50-70% of new construction run on heat pumps by 2030?

John Williams: Pathways is showing that 50-70% of new system sales will need to be heat pumps. It’s a
question of what the speed, depth, and market changes will have to be to get us to our goals.

Broad: It seems like we need to be a lot more ambitious than that.

Reese: In your assumption of 50% heat pumps, you’re assuming we are at 70% renewable megawatts
providing for those heat pumps?

Williams: Correct.

John Williams Presentation:

Stephan Roundtree: Have we defined benefits yet?

Williams: It is under development. Also want to understand other effects that could be highly
advantageous to these communities.
Nelson: One of the challenges could be that there are multiple directions that our input may go in, so it
may help us identify what the other panels are looking for. If we have information on what they are
looking for. With respect to resilience, my organization has information on looking into the future, cyber
security. But if that’s not the area this group is focused on than my input wouldn’t be needed.

Rhodes: Don’t know.

Reese: Would like to be involved in adaption and resilience.

Rhodes: On external engagement, we have consumer groups, labor groups, EJ groups, utilities – we’ve
heard from people who want to be cautious about privileging utilities in anyway. We are close to getting
a team of utility people to talk to, but still in process.

Acker: Would suggest considering talking to a group involved in modeling and looking at full
decarbonization of the electricity grid.
Rhodes: Looking for feedback on recommendations:

Nelson: For the first bullet, I think we need to think about connecting renewable pockets to the
transitional grid. It’s important to think about how to build out that connection, or else the idea of
having the energy deliverable will be at risk.

Reese: I’m assuming when you say transmission it is implicit that it is transmission and distribution?

Rhodes: Yes.

Kit Kennedy: Want to identify a few more issues, one would be the biocide mitigation policies, which we
are concerned will drive up the costs of renewables. Siting is still an issue. We have high hopes for the
new siting laws. Community education is another thing that needs to be overcome. Access to all for
renewables is an issue that ties into equity – how can we make sure all communities have access to
renewables.

Darren Suarez: Transmission issues upstate, potential opportunities to have large renewables in the City
itself, there are new and innovative technologies to look at.

Lisa Dix: It’s my understanding there are issues with dispatching storage. How does storage fit into this?
Need to think about barriers to storage. The new siting reform bill really talks about build-ready sites
and how existing sites with gas peakers can be used to facilitate large scale renewable energy.

Acker: Important to recognize the distinction that our challenge is having renewable delivered to New
York City. The solution to that is probably a mix of transmission and virtual transmission/storage on
either end. When we get to a carbon-free grid, transmission alone is not a great solution. There is an
advantage to thinking now how we can use storage and virtual transmission to NYC.

Aponte: Siting issues, land and community engagement barriers aren’t here.

Shyam Mehta: Would push back on siting issues? CUNY did research on rooftop siting, and there is a
report coming out by the Long Island Solar Road Map Consortium and LIPA that estimates low-impact
siting potential of 5-10 gigawatts. There are barriers to siting on the distributor side. Big thing upstate is
the process by which property tax is negotiated. There’s a lack of predictability and time in that process.
Need a standardization of the property tax process.

Reese: We need some clarification on what we mean by peaking resources – is the intent here the DEC
definition? Currently, most gas units are actually oil burning as well and as we look at infrastructure
definition, we probably should mention that.

Christian: Need to think about how much longer will we actually be needing natural gas, and what kind
of fuels will be alternatives.

Acker: Think it’s important to recognize we are redesigning a system, not redesigning the parts to do
exactly what the old parts did. As we talk about peaker plants, we need to think about how the system
works the multifunctionality that can meet needs. If we put in energy storage to act as transmission, that
serves a really important function and the function of the peaker plants.

Dix: Getting concerned about the assumption that we have a system that may need gas replacement – it’s
my understanding we are getting to zero carbon by 2040. There are a couple things I want to include in
barriers, as we look at gas dockets, I see some regulatory issues. It doesn’t seem authorities have any
consistency in how the CLCPA is being applied to new gas. Think we may need to dig into regulatory
consistency. On cost, we’ve got old outdated oil and fossil gas peakers and they are receiving over $1
billion in ratepayer subsidies just to sit there. Should look at a systematic approach and not get into a
reliability rabbit hole.

Nelson: With respect to the transition away from fossil fuels, I think that a lot of the challenge is not
really just a peaking issue, but an overall energy production issue. We’ve talked about the demands of
winter, need to think about sustained periods of weather that are not conducive. That could happen on a
seasonal basis for quite a long duration. Should incentive new technologies and innovation and not rely
on today’s technology as we look out to 2040.
Laurie Wheelock: If there is a way to evaluate programs for clean energy jobs that exist while creating
new programs, that would be great. Agency cross-communication needs to happen as well. Also need to
look at eligibility and income assistance programs.

Reese: One of the challenges will be PSC. Rates will have to be structured in a certain way. How costs are
allocated is a critical issue.

Annel Hernandez: Wanted to add more, the piece around consumer awareness should provide more
specifics. It’s not just encouraging solar programs but encouraging stronger community decision making
and community ownership whenever possible.

Mehta: There is siting potential for rooftop projects in NYC and Long Island. Siting isn’t the only barrier;
it has a lot to do with interconnection upgrade costs and permitting processes.

Dix: One thing missing is how will we intentionally dig into the requirements under the CLCPA that there
are investments in communities, and make sure that is part of our task. Who is keeping track of this at
the state level? There should be transparency in how investments in communities are being tracked.

Kennedy: On peaking units, want to flag the recently announced agreement between NYPA and others to
study the peaking units owned by NYPA.

Broad: On access to clean energy jobs – that will tie into community engagement and education and
hope we can prioritize statewide education about the CLCPA.

*The panel did not have time for E3’s presentation on the impacts of electrification