The Future of Electric Power
in the United States
Committee on the Future of Electric Power in the U.S.
Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract No. DE-EP0000026 of the U.S. Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-68444-6
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-68444-7
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25968
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021938586
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2021 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. The Future of Electric Power in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25968.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON THE FUTURE OF ELECTRIC POWER IN THE U.S.
GRANGER MORGAN, NAS,1 Carnegie Mellon University, Chair
ANURADHA ANNASWAMY, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ANJAN BOSE, NAE,2 Washington State University
TERRY BOSTON, NAE, Terry Boston, LLC
JEFFERY DAGLE, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
DEEPAKRAJ DIVAN, NAE, Georgia Institute of Technology
MICHAEL HOWARD, Electric Power Research Institute
CYNTHIA HSU, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
REIKO A. KERR, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
KAREN PALMER, Resources for the Future
H. VINCENT POOR, NAE/NAS, Princeton University
WILLIAM H. SANDERS, Carnegie Mellon University
SUSAN TIERNEY, Analysis Group
DAVID VICTOR, University of California, San Diego
ELIZABETH WILSON, Dartmouth College
Staff
K. JOHN HOLMES, Study Co-Director, Board Director/Scholar, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (beginning January 2020)
BRENT HEARD, Study Co-Director, Program Officer, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (beginning January 2020)
BEN A. WENDER, Study Director, Senior Program Officer, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (until December 2019)
ELIZABETH ZEITLER, Associate Director, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
REBECCA DEBOER, Research Assistant, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
MICHAELA KERXHALLI-KLEINFIELD, Research Associate, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
KASIA KORNECKI, Program Officer, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
CATHERINE WISE, Associate Program Officer, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Business Partner, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
NOTE: See Appendix C, Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest.
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
BOARD ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
JARED COHON, NAE, Carnegie Mellon University, Chair
VICKY BAILEY, Anderson Stratton Enterprises
CARLA BAILO, Center for Automotive Research
DEEPAKRAJ DIVAN, NAE, Georgia Institute of Technology
MARCIUS EXTAVOUR, XPRIZE
T.J. GLAUTHIER, TJ Glauthier Associates, LLC
PAULA GLOVER, Alliance to Save Energy
NAT GOLDHABER, Claremont Creek Ventures
DENISE GRAY, LG Chem Michigan, Inc.
JOHN KASSAKIAN, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
BARBARA KATES-GARNICK, Tufts University
ARATI PRABHAKAR, NAE, Actuate
JOSÉ SANTIESTEBAN, NAE, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company
ALEXANDER SLOCUM, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
GORDON VAN WELIE, NAE, ISO New England
DAVID VICTOR, University of California, San Diego
JOHN WALL, NAE, Cummins, Inc. (retired)
ROBERT WEISENMILLER, California Energy Commission (former)
JETTA WONG, JLW Advising
Staff
K. JOHN HOLMES, Director/Scholar
HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Manager
REBECCA DEBOER, Research Assistant
MICHAELA KERXHALLI-KLEINFIELD, Research Associate
BEN A. WENDER, Senior Program Officer (until December 2019)
ELIZABETH ZEITLER, Associate Director
BRENT HEARD, Program Officer
KASIA KORNECKI, Program Officer
CATHERINE WISE, Associate Program Officer
Preface
Electricity is essential to modern society. We use it to light our buildings and streets and warm and cool the places where we live and work. Electric power ensures our supplies of food and clean water, powers commerce and industry, enables communication and computing, runs gas, transportation, water, and other networked infrastructures, keeps hospitals open and operating, helps to process our wastes, and many other things.
In light of these critical roles that electricity plays, in its 2018 appropriations for the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Congress directed the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to appoint an ad hoc committee of experts to “conduct an evaluation of the expected medium- and long-term evolution of the grid. This evaluation shall focus on developments that include the emergence of new technologies, planning and operating techniques, grid architecture, and business models.”1
The present report is the most recent in a series of consensus study reports that the National Academies have produced on key issues specifically related to electric power over the course of the past decade. The earlier reports were:
- America’s Energy Future, 2009
- Electricity from Renewable Resources: Status, Prospects, and Impediments, 2010
- Terrorism and the Electric Power Delivery System, 2012
- Analytic Research Foundations for the Next-Generation Electric Grid, 2016
- The Power of Change: Innovation for Development and Deployment of Increasingly Clean Electric Power Technologies, 2016
- Enhancing the Resilience of the Nation’s Electricity System, 2017
While the membership of each of these committees has been different, there has been enough overlap in participants from one to the next to provide continuity, while also adding new participants who have brought valuable new perspectives and insights.
In addition to chairing the present study, I have had the honor of chairing the committees for the 2012 report on terrorism and the 2017 report on enhancing the resilience of the system. In both of these, as in this study, I have
___________________
1 The full statement of task—which, in addition to a very general call to assess how the grid may evolve in the future, also includes a specific request that the committee address issue of technologies, planning and operations, business models, and grid architectures—can be found in Appendix A.
had an outstanding committee that both worked very well together, while bringing a wealth of informed insight from years of experience with the many institutions, and provided perspectives that are relevant to the operation of this critical infrastructure. Fortunately, the present committee had met a sufficient number of times in face-to-face meetings to have developed good rapport before SARS-CoV-2 forced us to move all our interactions entirely online. And, of course, it was electricity that made those online meetings possible!
No single planner or designer is responsible for the U.S. power system. Indeed, while years ago a few entities were responsible for designing and operating most of the grid, over the course of the past several decades, this has changed. Driven largely by policy choices that have placed much greater emphasis on markets and competition, and the sometimes divergent interests of federal, state, regional, and local authorities, it has become ever more challenging to answer the simple question: “Who is in charge of planning, developing, and ensuring the integrity of the future power system?”
To a large extent, it is an incremental and piecemeal process, driven by multiple independent parties operating differently in the various parts of the country, that is shaping how the grid has been evolving, and how it will evolve in the future. At the same time, it is clear that there are a number of technical developments and legal and regulatory changes that could facilitate a variety of new and beneficial developments, some of which could be quite revolutionary. Rather than trying to peer into a clouded crystal ball and attempt to predict the future of the grid, our committee has instead focused on identifying, describing, and recommending developments that could support beneficial evolution of the nation’s power system across a wide range of futures, while also suggesting a number of needed remedial actions.
The committee’s understanding of key issues facing the grid has been enriched by presentations made at two workshops: “Communications, Cyber Resilience, and the Future of the U.S. Electric Power System” (Appendix E); and “Models to Inform Planning for the Future of Electric Power in the U.S.” (Appendix F). Our work has also been informed by webinars that the committee organized on approaches to modeling power flows, grid architectures, and the different power marketing administrations operating in different regions across the United States.
Last, the committee members and I, together with our excellent supporting staff, want to thank the many outside experts—including experts from the U.S. Department of Energy and several other federal agencies, state regulators and their staffs, original equipment manufacturers and suppliers and their respective associations, and nongovernmental organizations—who contributed significantly of their time and efforts to inform this study, either by giving presentations at meetings or by responding to committee requests for information.
The completion of this study would not have been successful without the assistance of many individuals who engaged in helpful discussions with committee members and provided valuable information during the committee’s data-gathering process. A list of presenters from workshops and webinars can be found in Appendix D. The committee would especially like to thank the following individuals for their consultations and input: Laura Diaz Anadon, Cambridge University; Gilbert Bindewald III, U.S. Department of Energy; Maureen Clapper, U.S. Department of Energy; Gregory Falco, Johns Hopkins University; David Hart, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation; Paul Hines, The University of Vermont; Annabelle Lee, Nevermore Security; Craig Miller, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association; Galen Rasche, Electric Power Research Institute; Kelly Sims Gallagher, Tufts University; Varun Sivaram, Columbia University; Paul Skare, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Saleh Soltan, Amazon; Stephen Walls, U.S. Department of Energy; and Tim Yardley, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
It is our committee’s hope that, over the decades to come, this report will help to make America’s critically important electric power system safer and more secure, cleaner and more sustainable, more affordable and equitable, and more reliable and resilient.
M. Granger Morgan, Chair
Committee on the Future of Electric Power in the U.S.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by William H. Press, NAS, University of Texas, Austin, and Clark W. Gellings, NAE, Clark Gellings and Associates, LLC. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION: FRAMING THE ISSUES
3 LEGAL AND REGULATORY ISSUES THAT SHAPE THE ELECTRIC SYSTEM
4 THE PERSISTENT UNDERINVESTMENT IN ELECTRIC POWER INNOVATION
5 TECHNOLOGIES AND TOOLS TO ENABLE A RANGE OF FUTURE POWER SYSTEMS
6 CREATING A MORE SECURE AND RESILIENT POWER SYSTEM
7 HIGH-LEVEL NEEDS AND SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
B Committee Biographical Information
C Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest
F Workshop Summary—Models to Inform Planning for the Future of Electric Power in the U.S.