This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.


ARPA-E Funds the Next Wave of Grid-Distributed Energy Integration

Jeff St. John's picture
Greentech Media
  • Member since 2018
  • 134 items added with 111,645 views
  • Jan 6, 2016


NODES program directs $33 million to “transformational grid control technology.”

Over the past year, the Department of Energy has been putting an increased focus on technology to integrate renewable energy into everyday grid operations. This work has included opening loan guarantees to distributed renewables, grants to support field tests of distributed energy integration, and future funding plans to support the development of grid modernization technologies.

Now the DOE’s blue-sky research agency, ARPA-E, is getting into the action — or, as befits its mission, ahead of the action. Last month, ARPA-E announced $33 million in grants for its Network Optimized Distributed Energy Systems (NODES) program, meant to help 12 university, corporate and DOE laboratory projects that are trying to turn grid-edge assets into networked “virtual storage” systems.

These projects are meant to “enable real-time coordination between distributed generation, such as rooftop and community solar assets, and bulk power generation, while proactively shaping electric load.” That could allow utilities to manage greater than 50 percent renewable penetration on the grid, “by developing transformational grid control methods that optimize use of flexible load and distributed energy resources.”

This is not a unique concept. Distributed energy resource management software, or DERMS, platforms are being developed to tackle this challenge in one way or another, with grid giants like Siemens and Toshiba and startups such as Spirae, Enbala, Integral Analytics and Smarter Grid Solutions providing different pieces of the puzzle.

Beyond that, there’s work being done by consortia such as Duke Energy’s Coalition of the Willing and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s transactive energy pilot project to allow lots of distributed energy assets to communicate and act in concert to solve local and system-wide grid challenges.

Some of the projects funded by ARPA-E’s NODES program would help support these kinds of ongoing distributed energy resource (DER) integration efforts, while others would go several steps beyond what today’s utility grid control platforms and DERs are built to handle. Here’s a short description of each project and its aims.

  • The University of Vermont won $1.54 million to develop and test a new approach for demand-side management, called Packetized Energy Management, based on approaches used to manage data in communication networks that lack centralized control, but also need high levels of privacy. (That’s similar to the architecture being developed by Duke Energy and other partners in support of a new standard for distributed grid communications known as Open Field Message Bus, or OpenFMB, by the way.)
  • The University of California, San Diego won $2.34 million to develop coordination algorithms and software meant to allow DERs and end loads to serve frequency regulation services — fast-responding grid services now performed by power plants and large-scale grid batteries. Utilities and grid operators are testing similar approaches using smart water heaters, pumps, refrigerators and other flexible energy assets — and UCSD’s technology could help integrate them.
  • Arizona State University won $3 million to develop algorithms that could help manage stochastic (i.e., randomly determined) inputs into traditional grid power flow models. Today’s models have a hard time making sense of inherently unpredictable resources like rooftop solar or electric vehicles. ASU’s algorithms are meant to “integrate uncertainty from renewable resources, load, distributed storage, and demand-response technologies” to “provide system operators with real-time guidance to help coordinate between DERs and demand response.”
  • Stanford University won $3.5 million to develop its Powernet technology — an open-source, open-architecture platform that will use a “Home Hub” device to link rooftop solar inverters, appliances and other end loads using smart switches that replace traditional fuses. Those hubs will serve as a central point for monitoring and control to help meet local and system-wide grid needs, while also maintaining the home’s power quality — an important consideration for a technology meant to be embedded as part of a consumer-facing commercial offering. 
  • General Electric won $3.9 million to work on creating “synthetic reserves” — aggregations of DERs that can provide the same kind of flexibility now provided by power plants and large-scale demand response. That will involve forecasting the available flexibility from lots of disparate resources for day-ahead markets, as well as the scalable controls architecture to ensure they deliver as promised — challenges faced by DERMS competitors across the board. 
  • The DOE’s own National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) won $3.9 million to build out a “comprehensive distribution network management framework that unifies real-time voltage and frequency control at the home/DER controllers’ level with network-wide energy management at the utility/aggregator level.” Loosely translated, that means linking lots of grid-edge devices with utility grid control systems 00 a complex and expensive proposition. Part of NREL’s goal is to find “computationally affordable” — in other words, cheaper — ways to go about this, “by decomposing network-level optimization into smaller sub-problems.” This project is likely to tie in with NREL’s existing work with parties like Siemens, Omnetric and Smarter Grid Solutions. 
  • Another DOE lab, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, won $2.7 million to work on a “hierarchical control framework for coordinating the flexibility of a full range of DERs,” based on two separate speeds of communication. The slower of the two will communicate data on economic incentives for devices to make their flexibility available to the grid, while the faster one will ensure that devices actually respond appropriately, and don’t interact in unexpected ways to worsen the problems they’re trying to solve. (This sounds a lot like a continuation of PNNL’s transactive energy work in the stimulus grant-funded Pacific Northwest Demonstration Project.) 
  • The University of Minnesota won $2.95 million to work on the same stochastic challenge that ASU is taking on, with a combination of “centralized cloud-based and distributed peer-to-peer networks” to provide both fast-acting and centrally controlled flexibility.
  • Northwestern University won $2.69 million to develop a “frequency-based load control architecture,” tapping the data inherent in the frequency of grid power itself to guide how DERs adjust themselves to solve grid problems. The “multi-layer control architecture” will respond to grid frequencies at the distribution grid scale to keep customers’ power clean and stable, while also tapping a centralized scheme to ensure stable frequency synchronization.
  • DNV GL won $2.15 million to develop an “internet of energy” platform that will take on the “automated scheduling, aggregating, dispatch, and performance validation of network optimized DERs and controllable load” — a short list of the main features contained in most DERMS platforms. DNV GL is tapping the technology of Geli, a startup with software to manage energy storage systems for multiple industry partners, and will test it out at Group NIRE’s utility-connected microgrid test facility in Lubbock, Texas.
  • The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association won $1.34 million to work on the low-cost side of the DER integration equation. Its GridBallast technology will “monitor grid voltage and frequency and control the target load in order to address excursions from grid operating targets” and integrate that functionality into demand response-enabled water heater controllers and smart circuit controllers.
  • Eaton Corp. won $3.3 million to support its own version of DER aggregation for grid reserves, using what it calls a “disruptive cloud-computing solution that will provide agile and robust synthetic regulating reserve services to the power grid.” As with most other approaches to this challenge, Eaton will separate tasks into locally managed and centrally controlled portions to reduce cost and complexity. 

greentech mediaGreentech Media (GTM) produces industry-leading news, research, and conferences in the business-to-business greentech market. Our coverage areas include solar, smart grid, energy efficiency, wind, and other non-incumbent energy markets. For more information, visit: , follow us on twitter: @greentechmedia, or like us on Facebook:

Hops Gegangen's picture
Hops Gegangen on Jan 6, 2016


According to this study, a super grid is a better option for Europe than a nuclear buildout.

No matter what the improvements in nuclear power plant safety, the simple fact is that the rapid pace of progress in the renewable energy field is turning nuclear energy into an economic dinosaur.”

Paul O's picture
Paul O on Jan 7, 2016

I am pleased that this technology is becoming available, however this Giddy anti-nuclear obsession makes renewables activists and proponents sound more like pseudo religious fanatics than people who are sincerely only interested in saving the climate.

Nathan Wilson's picture
Nathan Wilson on Jan 7, 2016

Their giddiness is understandable.  Thirty years ago, anyone who was both well informed and radiophobic enough to oppose nuclear power had to deal with the guilt of knowing that the policies they advocated were helping to boost usage of fossil fuels (thus contributing to the pollution deaths of hundreds of thousand of people worldwide, each year).

Now they can pretend that their renewable advocacy offsets the harm caused by their anti-nuclear advocacy, a much easier task, since in most places renewable penetration is too low to display the invevitable expensive problems high penetraction of variable renewables will cause.

Hops Gegangen's picture
Hops Gegangen on Jan 9, 2016


Personally, I’m not anti-nuclear, and I have not seen much anti-nuclear fanatacism. Here on TEC, I might say I’ve seen more pro-nuclear obsession.

My point, here and elsewhere, is that blaming anti-nuclear activists for nuclear’s problems misses the real trouble, which is the economics. 

I have a personal case in point. My default electric supplier is 1/3 nuclear. Yet I’ve found I can switch to a provider based on wind energy from Texas for a penny less per Kwh. 

Digging into the nuclear supply, it appears that “2600 highly trained professionals” maintain 4 nuclear generators — 650 each. Given uranium is relatively cheap, and the plants built long ago, I suppose that is where a lot of the money goes. You’re probably looking at $100M a year in salaries and benefits per reactor. Aside from monitoring 24/7, I suppose a lot of those professionals are busy replacing parts etc.

A wind turbine or solar array only needs an occasional visit from technicians. 


Nathan Wilson's picture
Nathan Wilson on Jan 9, 2016

Hops, your retail rate comparison of nuclear and wind does not answer the question of how the costs would compare, were it not for anti-nuclear fanatacism.  And in fact, does not does not tell us what wind would cost in absence of the fossil fuel crutch that supports it (wind is only 10% of generation in Texas’s fossil fuel dominated grid).

To understand what happens to nuclear cost without fanatacism and wind without fract’d gas, look at China (it’s actually biased against new coal due to air pollution).  China is building nuclear plants for $2.5/Watt, so to be competitive, wind farms would have to cost well under $1/Watt.

Their latest 5 year plan targets 200 GW of wind and 58 GW of nuclear in 2020; so adjusting for capacity factor, Chinese nuclear and wind will have about equal contributions.

Paul O's picture
Paul O on Jan 9, 2016


I am thankfull that you are not personally anti-nuclear. Sadly, it is nearly impossible to find a clean energy advocacy organization that is not fanatically anti-nuclear, that is my point. Whether we are talking about NRDC or GreanPeace, it is all the same.

It is difficult to imagine that these groups did not have a role to play in delaying advanced 4th generation nuclear like the IFR, which would have reduced the costs of building plants in the US while also drastically reducing so-called nuclear waste.

It is so bad that some of these organizations have even turned on the reputation of Dr. James Hansen a noteworthy early clarion call-er on the danger of Climate Change.

I’ll refer you to Nathan’s post below for the rest.

Hops Gegangen's picture
Hops Gegangen on Jan 10, 2016


If you have a radiation leak in China, the governent covers it up. If you have a radiation leak in the U.S., swarms of lawyers unleash a tidal wave of law suits. This is why I say put the reactors away from people. 

My favorite concept so far is to put the sort of reactors the Navy uses onto lightly used oil supertankers and have them out at sea making synfuel. Then you can use the synfuel in power plants and transportation. 




Mark Heslep's picture
Mark Heslep on Jan 10, 2016

A wind turbine or solar array …” *and* its coal or gas or storage plant backup; the maintenance cost is the sum of all of these.   It is highly unlikely that in the event that you electric supply is made “1/3” wind, as opposed to a couple percent, that it will still be “…a penny less per Kwh”

Hops Gegangen's picture
Hops Gegangen on Jan 12, 2016


This news just in:

Electricite de France SA, the operator of 58 atomic reactors in France, dropped to a record in Paris trading after newspaper Les Echos said the utility may have underestimated the cost of storing its most radioactive waste.

EDF fell as much as 7.3 percent to 11.59 euros on Tuesday, the lowest since the stock began trading in the French capital in 2005. 


Jeff St. John's picture
Thank Jeff for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »