Published an op-ed yesterday with Greentech Media on the Brooklyn-Queens Demand Management Program, as a companion to intervenor comments I filed earlier in the month (the charts in here are worth a look if you want more detail).
Why did I write it?
BQDM has become a standard talking point on what NY's "REV" regulatory reform is and does. The program is more or less REV's proof of concept: "$200 million vs. $1 billion", as one environmental ngo lead put it. But that happy story isn't in the official numbers. And additional serious hiccups over the last couple months have gotten no coverage, even in recent feature articles on Con Edison's innovative programs and detailed presentations by senior policymakers.
The facts in the regulatory record and on the ground with DER developers just didn't reflect these talking points.
"AN EXOTIC PAYDAY LOAN"? Forecast annual revenue requirements 2014-2075F for BQDM and its traditional substation alternative.
It may risky or even dumb to speak out against programs that promote distributed energy (this company's bailiwick). But I have to believe a more engaged policy dialogue will improve our chances at making NY's electricity system sustainable and a real example for other states, other megacities, the world.
Thanks so much to Julia Pyper and Stephen Lacey at Greentech Media, who took time to understand the issue and get the piece out there; brilliant friends for their thoughtful notes on the piece; and readers who have already sent back great, engaged feedback.