Biblio

This study examines the results of field experiments of transactive energy systems (TESs) in order to identify challenges that occur with the integration of TESs with existing software, hardware, appliances, and customer practices. Three types of challenges, and potential responses and solutions, are identified for the implementation phase of TESs: systematic risk to existing building functions, lack of readiness of users and connected systems, and lack of competitiveness with existing demand-management systems and products.

Transactive Energy (TE) is an emerging discipline that utilizes economic and control techniques for operating and managing the power grid effectively. Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) represent a fundamental shift away from traditionally centrally managed energy generation and storage to one that is rather distributed. However, integrating and managing DERs into the power grid is highly challenging owing to the TE implementation issues such as privacy, equity, efficiency, reliability, and security. The TE market structures allow utilities to transact (i.e., buy and sell) power services (production, distribution, and storage) from/to DER providers integrated as part of the grid. Flexible power pricing in TE enables power services transactions to dynamically adjust power generation and storage in a way that continuously balances power supply and demand as well as minimize cost of grid operations. Therefore, it has become important to analyze various market models utilized in different TE applications for their impact on above implementation issues.In this demo, we show-case the Transactive Energy Simulation and Analysis Toolsuite (TE-SAT) with its three publicly available design studios for experimenting with TE markets. All three design studios are built using metamodeling tool called the Web-based Graphical Modeling Environment (WebGME). Using a Git-like storage and tracking backend server, WebGME enables multi-user editing on models and experiments using simply a web-browser. This directly facilitates collaboration among different TE stakeholders for developing and analyzing grid operations and market models. Additionally, these design studios provide an integrated and scalable cloud backend for running corresponding simulation experiments.

This study reviews the development of shared (community) solar and community choice aggregation in the U.S. states of California and New York. Both states are leaders in energy-transition policy in the U.S., but they have different trajectories for the two forms of energy decentralization. Shared solar is more advanced in New York, but community choice is more advanced in California. Using a field theory framework, the comparative review of the trajectories of energy decentralization shows how differences in restructuring and regulatory rules affect outcomes. Differences in the rules for retail competition and authority for utilities to own distributed generation assets, plus the role of civil society and the attention from elected officials, shape the intensity of conflict and outcomes. They also contribute to the development of different types of community choice in the two states. In addition to showing how institutional conditions associated with different types of restructured markets shape the opportunities for decentralized energy, the study also examines how the efforts of actors to gain support for and to legitimate their policy preferences involve reference to broad social values.

Although there is great media attention to connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) and strong public interest in the technology, it is still under development. Their deployment to the broader public will require new regulations and road traffic rules that are also under development, and there is not yet a globally harmonized approach. This paper reviews the main safety and liability issues for CAVs with a focus on the rules developed for on-road testing to date in Australia, the United States, and Germany. It also reviews government policies from Victoria, Australia, and California, the United States, and it provides an appendix on European Union (E.U.) regulations. After a review of similarities and differences regarding safety and liability provisions, the study suggests how the current provisions can be brought together toward a globally harmonized approach to safety issues that builds on best practices in the three countries.