Inaugural Workshop

Breakout Sessions

This section summarizes the activities resulting from the topic-specific breakout sessions, including the goals, current related activities, next steps identified, the lead and the other participants. Additional details on topic activities can be accessed by linking on the session title below.

F. Improve Policy Analysis Tools and Integration of Data/Tools at State and Federal Levels

Session attendees:

List of attendees not collected

Topic clarification:

• Lots of tools and information are available, but usually at the federal level.
• Applicability to states is unclear and often cannot be determined (e.g., NEMS).
• Is there a way for national models to be useful for states? Or can you only depend on regional analysis tools?
• Scenario analysis is very important; nonexpert users need to understand how to perform.

Important Decision Makers Identified:

• State policy makers, including public utility commissions, legislatures,
• Federal policy makers,
• Regional transmission organizations.

Activities Discussion/Brainstorming:

Data needs to improve policy analysis

• Need central information source on technology supply curves and fuel information.
• Need information on what the decision makers consider important to influence the structure and outputs of models.
• Too much information for decision makers can be confusing.
• Sometimes politics is more important than the analysis — renewable portfolio standards (RPS) are often created before technical or system impacts analysis is performed.
• NEMS is often used as source of technology characterization, but it doesn't capture regional characteristics well.
• Most commonly used models for policy analysis
  • NEMS,
  • MARKAL national,
  • Altos Management-1,
  • IPM (electricity sector only),
  • VISION (DOE transportation),
  • AMIGA,
  • USEPA exploratory modeling — what drivers lead to what outcomes,
  • RPA — FS/USDA,
  • Forest inventory — state foresters,
  • HYTRANS — ORNL — national model on hydrogen in vehicles,
  • ADAGE.

Performing policy analysis

• Most states do not have in-house modeling capabilities; regional entities have more
  • Need user-friendly models that nonexperts can use and understand outputs,
  • Guidance on applicability of national models for states/regions would be helpful,
  • Regional modeling is often needed because it is more applicable to the state,
  • Input-output models are OK if the state user can understand the assumptions, methodology, and outputs,
  • There are resources available: DOE Technical Assistance Program and EPA Clean Energy-Environment Program; free assistance for states.
• Additional policy analysis tools should be developed
  • Consider all future possibilities — see which technologies win under what circumstances (e.g. hydrogen),
  • Characterize product flows,
  • Scenario analysis/relationships of variables are more important than forecasts.
• Need to test variations and sensitivity — probably using the same tools
  • Best to have three scenarios that are easy to understand for decision makers, that is ideally backed by stochastic model that incorporates uncertainty,
  • Can also test different types of policies?
• Need better validation between retrospective and prospective analysis, so they converge.

Collaboration process

• There are some existing collaborations on policy that may have lessons learned:
  • NYSERDA uses GE MAPS to look at impact on existing generation plants of meeting RPS targets over 20-year period,
  • RGGI model (northeast carbon market analysis) is being managed by ICF (IMPLAN),
  • EIA has helped N.Y. state with modeling runs,
  • EPA Research Triangle Institute using ADAGE model (based on IMPLAN) and is trying to link this with integrated planning model,
  • EPA and NESCAUM (Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management) working to link MARKAL and air quality models (SMOKE and C-MAT) in New England and eventually the RGGI region (includes transport, power, commercial, industrial and residential),
  • Stanford modeling forum,
  • DOE-EPA modeling forum.
• Need better links between energy and environment modeling (even EE and RE modeling)
  • No modeling at the state level; federal guidance would be very helpful,
  • N.Y. can look at incentives and compare against purchase of EE technologies.
• Is there a way to link or integration state and national policy tools?
  • A lot of work in UC Davis and national labs to develop models from very narrow to national models. DOE-PAE sponsored.

Activities decided by the group:

Activity No. 1 — Identify and Advertise Existing Information, Tools and Resources

• Identify existing information, tools, and resources available (e.g., DOE Technical Assistance Program, EPA Clean Energy/Environment Program, etc.),
• Phone survey to understand decision maker needs clarification,
• Develop better technology-specific information to understand impact on big picture,
• Share the information and tools on a Web site,
• Perhaps put together an e-mail listserv for communication,
• Lead: DOE-PAE and NREL,
• Participants: Include environmentalists and industrial groups.

Activity No. 2 — Improve Policy Analysis Modeling

• Learn lessons from existing forums
  • Stanford energy modeling forum,
  • DOE-EPA Renewable Energy Modeling Forum.
• Develop guidance on how to structure models (i.e., develop common methodology).
• Especially for those without modeling capabilities, provide a clear and concise interpretation of applicability (by technology and region) and results at the decision-maker level, for each model and the results of any particular run, or set of scenarios.
• Specific needs:
  • A comparison of technology supply curves; how different are they?
  • Scenario analysis — at least three scenarios, if not stochastic.
• NYSERDA assesses national and state-side energy markets and informs stakeholders — other might be able to learn from their feedback process.
• DOE and EPA can help fund travel of state agencies with limited budgets.
• Lead: DOE-PAE and EPA?
• Participants: TBD

Activity No. 3 — Attempt to Integrate State and Federal Policy Analysis

• Strengthen national/state policy analysis personnel connection
  • Consolidation of DOE regional offices has created a gap,
  • Federal offices need to remember to interface with states.
• Identify/create regional models that speak to state issues
  • Linking models together is necessary to help states but difficult,
  • This forum reinforces the significance of EPA's efforts to integrate models together.
• Lead: EPA and DOE?
• Participants: TBD

Printable Version