This new article from senior attorney Denise Grab is featured in a special edition of the Harvard Environmental Law Journal that focuses on the Supreme Court’s FERC v. EPSA case. That decision, upholding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (“FERC”) jurisdiction over demand response, will likely support the further development of grid-edge technologies that involve two-way flows of electricity services between users and the grid. Grab’s article presents a framework for how electricity regulators should decide between proposed projects when the alternatives include a mix of grid-edge technologies and more traditional investments. She argues that the most economically efficient approach that regulators can use to decide between disparate policy options is a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis, which will allow for the maximization of social welfare.
Balancing on the Grid Edge
Regulating for Economic Efficiency in the Wake of FERC v. EPSA