You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
“Geologic hydrogen” companies make up a hefty portion of the latest Activate Fellowship class, announced Tuesday morning — a reliable harbinger of investments to come.

The hype around clean hydrogen has come in waves, with investors and policymakers betting that the versatile molecule could help decarbonize everything from fertilizer production to long-haul shipping and heavy industry. Different production methods have come in and out of vogue: Around 2020 it was using carbon capture and storage, then electrolysis powered by clean electricity and subsidized by generous tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act. More recently, venture capitalists have poured money into the search for naturally occurring deposits hidden underground.
So far, none of these approaches has delivered cheap, low-carbon at any kind of scale. Yet enthusiasm for this latest frontier — so-called geologic hydrogen — has continued to build.
Much of that excitement stems from an even newer concept, alternately known as engineered geologic hydrogen or engineered mineral hydrogen. This is the idea that if naturally occurring hydrogen deposits — which require a precise mixture of geologic conditions — prove too rare or difficult to find, scientists can engineer those subsurface conditions themselves, producing this valuable molecule straight from the earth wherever the right iron-rich rocks are found. Essentially, the approach trades exploration risk for engineering risk.
“I think it’s really a natural evolution,” Sophie Broun, CEO of the seed-stage engineered hydrogen company Anning Corporation, told me. “It’s the evolution that we’ve seen play out from oil and gas — conventional to unconventional — from geothermal to [enhanced geothermal systems], and now we’re seeing it in geologic hydrogen.”
Broun is a member of the new class of Activate Fellows announced on Tuesday morning. The two-year fellowship provides early-stage founders with funding for research and development, as well as a network of fellow founders, mentors, investors, and corporate partners. It’s helped seed cohorts of companies that have gone on to form brand new industries, from clean cement startups Brimstone and Sublime Systems to thermal energy players Antora Energy and Electrified Thermal Solutions.
Dan Recht, Activate’s chief fellowship officer, thinks that the nascent geologic hydrogen industry — which includes both natural and engineered deposits — is next. “This process of seeing these up and coming sectors and industries is routine for us at Activate,” he told me. “At the end of our selection process we now have a pretty good sense of, oh, the U.S. is going to have a geologic hydrogen industry.”
Of the 50 fellows selected this year, nine work in energy. Of those nine, three are hydrogen companies: geologic hydrogen startups Anning and Hydrify, as well as Brint Tech, which is developing hydrogen leak detectors. Anning is squarely an engineered hydrogen company, aiming to stimulate the production of the molecule underground using an undisclosed technology, while Hydrify is building tools to better locate where natural hydrogen deposits already exist.
Like Broun, Recht sees a clear parallel with the geothermal industry, where Fervo Energy is manipulating the subsurface to create the conditions necessary for geothermal power production and Zanskar is using artificial intelligence models to identify previously overlooked conventional geothermal resources. Anning could become the Fervo of hydrogen, while Hydrify could be its Zanskar, he told me. The parallels also extend beyond the companies themselves: The drilling techniques that underpin geothermal development — largely adapted from the oil and gas industry — stand to be just as critical to unlocking geologic hydrogen, which could give this emerging tech a similar bipartisan appeal.
Natural hydrogen company Koloma is by far the best capitalized startup in this space, having raised around $400 million from big-name backers such as Breakthrough Energy Ventures, Amazon’s Climate Pledge Fund, and Khosla Ventures. That said, it has yet to publish any results indicating it’s discovered commercially significant new deposits. That relative silence from the industry’s biggest player has helped fuel the dreams of the even-more-nascent engineered players such as Anning, Vema Hydrogen, Addis Energy, GeoKiln and Eden GeoPower, who think they can achieve quicker, more consistent breakthroughs.
“By being able to deploy the engineered solution, we’re able to be repeatable and scalable, and ultimately, that’s what customers and infrastructure providers need,” Broun told me. Being able to produce hydrogen closer to where it’s actually used could slash transportation costs, often one of the most expensive parts of the hydrogen value chain as the gas typically must be compressed or liquified before transport. “Being able to place that engineered system at a location that’s much more within your control, I think that that is a far stronger or more appealing business case in many cases,” she explained.
Anning raised a pre-seed round last year, and is now raising a $6 million seed round, which would put it more or less on par with other early players in the engineered hydrogen subsector. Vema has raised the most thus far, bringing in an oversubscribed $13 million seed round last February from a group of climate-focused investors including Extantia Capital and Propeller, and is now raising its Series A.
Vema drills its wells into iron-rich rock formations known as ophiolites, then injects water and a proprietary catalyst to trigger serpentinization, a natural geochemical reaction between water and iron minerals that produces hydrogen gas. While this process would typically unfold over millions of years, Vema says it’s aiming to speed up that reaction by a factor of 10,000 to generate commercial quantities of hydrogen on a human timeframe. The resulting hydrogen gas would then flow back to the surface through the well, where it would be purified before its delivery to customers.
The company’s senior vice president of operations, Colin McCulley, told me he expects that it can all be done for less than $1 per kilogram, the so-called “magic number where you start to compete with petroleum-derived hydrogen.” And Vema’s CEO, Pierre Levin, told TechCrunch that once the startup dials in its tech, the price will eventually drop to less than 50 cents per kilogram, making it definitively the cheapest form of hydrogen yet developed.
The company is currently conducting pilot testing in Quebec, home to the well-mapped Thetford Mines ophiolite deposits. But while Vema has yet to release any early results from this pilot, it’s already laying the groundwork for rapid commercialization. Late last year, Vema signed a conditional 10-year offtake agreement with the off-grid data center power startup Verne to supply up to 36,000 metric tons per year of hydrogen, with delivery expected to begin “as soon as 2028.” Then last week, the startup inked a nonbinding memorandum of understanding with Montreal-based sustainable aviation fuels developer SAF + International Group to supply 4,000 tons of hydrogen annually, also beginning “in approximately 2028.” The group will make that fuel at a facility co-located with Vema’s planned Quebec production site to minimize transport costs.
A report shared with me last month from the Cleantech Group, a San Francisco-based market intelligence and advisory firm, cast some doubts on that timeline, however. It called the 2028 target “over aggressive,” given that Vema will need to build a first of its kind facility to fulfill its deals with Verne and SAF + International Group.
“This is the Earth. This isn’t like your lab space where you can exactly control the pressure and temperature and conditions that exist downhole,” Diana Rasner, author of the report and the firm’s group lead for materials and chemicals, told me. “You’re going into territory you can’t see, or that you don’t know how it behaves day to day, let alone like on the scale of what you would think hydrogen production needs to be.”
Even McCulley admits that it’s a stretch, telling me that, “If we have realistic complexity in our project, it will be difficult to deliver on this timeline.” But he thinks the ambition is essential to demonstrate near-term demand and secure commitments for larger projects down the road. He expects the industry to really hit its stride between 2035 and 2040, by which point he says Vema could be looking at a fourth or fifth large-scale commercial project at costs competitive with fossil fuel-derived hydrogen.
But Vema is now facing competition from startups pursuing markedly different approaches to the same problem. Because heat is a natural accelerant of serpentinization, a company called GeoKiln is forgoing chemical catalysts altogether in favor of underground electric heaters designed to stimulate and speed up hydrogen production. Meanwhile, Eden GeoPower plans to apply high voltage electricity to fracture surrounding rocks, which also releases heat and exposes fresh reactive rock surfaces.
Then there’s Addis Energy, which is betting that ammonia production offers a stronger commercial proposition. Hydrogen is often an intermediate molecule in the process of producing ammonia, which is widely used in fertilizers and has become newly interesting for low-carbon shipping fuel. Addis aims to skip that conversion step entirely by injecting water, its own proprietary catalyst, plus a nitrogen-containing compound into the subsurface, triggering a chemical reaction that directly produces ammonia — a molecule that’s simple to transport using existing shipping infrastructure.
Eden raised a $12 million seed round in 2023, backed by a mix of oil and gas industry investors and sustainability-focused funds, while Addis raised a $8.3 million seed round late last year led by climate tech VC At One Ventures.
But investing in the space, Rasner told me, isn’t something everyone in the VC community is comfortable with these days. “It’s not to say that they didn’t believe in it,” she said of investors who did eventually pull the trigger. But it certainly wasn’t an easy decision. As promises of affordable, low-carbon hydrogen production have come and gone, there’s an undeniable aura of uncertainty around the industry, a feeling that has only grown stronger since the Trump administration curtailed clean hydrogen subsidies and froze funding for the previous Biden administration’s hydrogen hubs initiative.
With natural hydrogen players such as Koloma yet to deliver on their early momentum, Rasner told me many would-be backers are approaching the sector with a general attitude best summarized as, “You’re going to be able to do the thing that a lot of the big names in this space haven’t been able to prove out yet, but on your own terms? What’s the catch?”
Recht, however, naturally has a more optimistic outlook. The subsurface has long supplied the minerals that underpin our modern economy, and now it’s increasingly being tapped for geothermal energy as well. In his view, it’s only natural that it might be able to deliver the long-promised hydrogen economy.
“It turns out we’re really good at digging stuff up out of the ground cheaply. If you look at what has humanity decided to do with the past century, it’s to get good at that.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
On electrolyte factories, Josh Shapiro's flip, and Canadian clean power
Current conditions: Firefighters are encircling Belgium’s largest fire on record, just the latest blaze in Europe as historic heat waves roast the continent • The Canadian wildfire smoke that billowed into Michigan this summer cost the state nearly $6.7 billion • The string of storms that now includes the habagat, or southwest monsoon, hammering the Philippines has displaced 5.2 million Filipinos so far.
The Trump administration is barreling forward with a plan to open close to 45 million acres of wilderness in national forests to road construction and logging, removing protection The New York Times said has been in place for a quarter century. The U.S. Forest Service’s proposal would rescind a Clinton-era rule enacted in 2001 to bar roadways from routing through certain areas. The repeal is a major victory for Republican states and industry groups that lobbied for years to revoke the protections, and even unsuccessfully sued more than a dozen times to strike down the so-called roadless rule.
The new push comes a day after Customs and Border Protection paused work on a border barrier in Big Bend National Park after a flurry of videos showing bulldozers marring the protected landscape drove what the public lands-focused news site Public Domain called “a furious backlash.”
You know those thin white lines that trail behind airplanes? If you’re among the hordes of internet-poisoned conspiracy theorists, you may be certain these are called chemtrails, deliberately sprayed aerosols containing some secret mind control substance. In reality, these are condensation trails, or “contrails,” clouds of vapor that condense around soot particles from jet engine exhaust. Though they are not spreading any nefarious biochemical agents, contrails do take a climate toll, trapping outgoing infrared radiation like a blanket and adding to the greenhouse gas effect. Now Google is stepping in with a new program called Operation Blue Skies, in which the tech giant will partner with the British government and airlines to deploy its artificial intelligence technology to help create a zone in the North Atlantic free of any contrails. “While they may seem harmless, these warming contrails account for roughly one third of aviation’s total climate impact,” the two program managers in charge of effort, Paul Hodgson and Chaim Langermann, wrote in a blog post. “Our AI-powered forecasts have enabled flight crews and air traffic controllers to make targeted adjustments that avoid contrail-sensitive regions while remaining within normal flight operations. Now, we’re taking the next major step: expanding beyond individual airline trials to coordinated contrail mitigation across an entire flight corridor.”
The technology could, in theory, lay the groundwork for solar radiation management. Some conspiracists, without real evidence, suggest that contrails are, in fact, already a furtive government experiment to modify the atmosphere with aerosols that reflect the sun’s light back into space, a leading concept for how to artificially cool the planet and buy more time to tackle the causes of climate change. Those efforts are inching closer to reality — just read my colleague Robinson Meyer’s reporting on the world’s first major private geoengineering company’s fundraising or my reporting on when the startup revealed its proprietary reflective particle. Technology that could help coordinate flights to spray aerosols in the atmosphere, or can deliberately keep planes out of certain airspace, may prove central to deploying geoengineering at any real scale. Perhaps a public effort to explain contrails and deal with their actual downsides will earn more trust to experiment with things like solar radiation management. I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Solid-state technology could revolutionize batteries by making them charge faster, last longer, and pack more energy into less space. But the electrolytes needed for the ceramic or polymer interior that store and deliver the battery’s charge are not widely produced in the U.S. On Tuesday, the startup Anthro Energy broke ground on a new factory in Louisville, Kentucky, that is designed to produce enough battery materials for more than 300,000 electric vehicles. The facility is scheduled to start production in 2028, and will provide a definitive domestic source of materials that are otherwise largely sold by Chinese companies, David Mackanic, co-founder and CEO of Anthro Energy, told TechCrunch. The plant itself is a testament to the success of the Biden administration’s two landmark laws. It received $24.9 million from the Department of Energy under the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and another $18.4 million in investment tax credits under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Back in February, I told you about Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s middleground approach on data centers. Instead of advocating a full-on moratorium on building the facilities, as progressives Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed a month later, the centrist Democrat laid out “selective” new conditions for large data centers seeking Harrisburg’s approval, including recycling of cooling water, as the state became a hotbed for projects. Now Shapiro is making an about face. In what The Philadelphia Inquirer called “a major shift from his initial embrace of the increasingly unpopular projects,” the governor signed a sweeping executive order Tuesday requiring local approval for data centers to receive state permits. The move is not a moratorium. But the extent of the backlash — seven in 10 Americans now oppose data centers in their backyards, per Heatmap Pro’s polling — may mean the need for a local green light serves as an effective ban. The order also removes Amazon’s controversial $20 billion data center complex between Luzerne and Bucks counties from the state’s fast-track permitting program, which is now unavailable to any such projects. “I have no other choice than but to take this executive action to protect the good people of Pennsylvania from these predatory developers and from these projects that would negatively impact our communities,” Shapiro said after signing the order.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced plans Monday to invest roughly $50.2 billion into upgrading the nation’s hydroelectric fleet and building new wind turbines, part of the Liberal government’s effort to build “a stronger, more independent, and more sustainable country.” Under the pact with provincial governments, Ottawa will upgrade and expand the behemoth hydroelectric Churchill Falls Generating Station, develop another hydroelectric project on Gull Island in Labrador, build onshore wind turbines, and construct new transmission lines. “Canada is extending its unique advantage in clean, reliable, and affordable power. Because when we master energy, we master our destiny,” Carney said in a statement. The investment comes as Canada is refurbishing and expanding its fleet of CANDUs, a natively-designed type of pressurized heavy water reactor that can run on raw uranium, as I previously reported here.
Romania, one of only seven countries with a pressurized heavy water reactor as part of its fleet, is struggling to generate electricity from its nuclear plants as the rivers Europe depends on for cooling water run low amid the latest heat wave. On Monday, the country’s Ministry of Energy brought a giant coal plant back online to meet surging demand as the nuclear stations idle, according to the Romanian news site Economedia.
Octopus Energy is, by its own press release’s pun, “stretching its tentacles beyond the home and onto the open road.” The U.S. subsidiary of the British renewable energy giant is making Octopus Charge, Europe’s largest electric vehicle charging platform, a public network in the U.S. The company’s app will allow drivers to chargers on the go. “Driving electric should be simple, wherever the journey leads,” Nick Chaset, chief executive of Octopus Energy U.S., said in a statement. “Drivers shouldn’t have to juggle multiple apps and accounts just to charge their cars.”
The last week of Wisconsin’s politics show the risks of the data center issue for Democrats — and decarbonization.
This is an edition of Heatmap Daily, an evening review of the day’s news written by our executive editor. Sign up for it here.
That was my takeaway after last week’s Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial primary, where the liberal candidate David Crowley edged out a victory over the progressive insurgent Francesca Hong.
Hong, a socialist, had run an aggressively anti-data-center campaign, pledging to pause their development across the state and then “control-alt-delete” them with regulations. Yet as my colleague Jael Holzman recently detailed, Hong lost many of the state’s jurisdictions that have fought data centers the hardest. Port Washington, the site of an acrimonious battle over a $15 billion Oracle and OpenAI facility, went for Crowley by eight points. Hong could not even secure a majority in the small town of Wrightstown, even though voters passed a data center ban by referendum on the same night.
I found the result illuminating. I’ve spent much of the past few months covering the size and scale of the data center backlash. Yet viewed at a remove, the Hong-Crowley result looked like nothing so much as a traditional post-2016 Democratic map, with Hong taking progressive college towns like Madison and Crowley winning more moderate black and rural voters. You would have to squint hard to locate an emergent anti-AI axis in the results. And more critically, you would find little evidence that the data center backlash is changing how voters define themselves ideologically. If Americans hate data centers — and polling shows that they do — then the results suggest that there are limits to their antipathy.
I stand by that conclusion. Yet since then, data centers have become an even bigger issue in Wisconsin state politics, dominating the first week of the general election. In doing so, they’ve demonstrated the risk that the data center backlash poses for Democrats — as well as for decarbonization.
The saga began when Crowley, newly victorious, told NBC News that one of the issues where he “disagreed most” with Hong was data centers: He wanted stronger guardrails on new and existing data centers but didn’t support a moratorium, he said, because he didn’t want to forbid communities that want them from accepting the facilities. Tom Tiffany, the Republican gubernatorial nominee, pounced, sharing a deceptively cut clip of the interview (to put it generously) and framing Crowley as both pro-corporate and tragically woke. If Crowley most disagreed with Hong about data centers, Tiffany asked, does he agree with her about “abolishing the police or prisons?”
Tiffany followed up with a TV ad labeling his opponent “Data Center David Crowley.” “My priority is protecting Wisconsin families, taxpayers, farmland, and water, not turning our state into a data center hub for the 'entire globe," Tiffany said.
This move succeeded in splitting the left. The socialist influencer Hasan Piker — who endorsed and campaigned for Hong — criticized Crowley for not endorsing an outright moratorium on data centers. “david crowley i know you hate me but please don’t do this!” he said [sic].
Let us interject here to say: Crowley and Tiffany have many overlapping policies about data centers — and as we shall see, Crowley’s policies would be more restrictive. Neither candidate supports a data center moratorium, but both say that they would allow communities to veto a local proposal, ban the use of non-disclosure agreements in data center development, and require data centers to cover the cost of their grid upgrades. One of their most salient divisions is on tax policy: Tiffany now supports ending a state tax carveout for some data center equipment, while Crowley would preserve it.
Where the two candidates really disagree is not about data centers at all — it’s about clean energy. Tiffany has argued that data centers are, like renewables, a form of industrial development overtaking agricultural land. He wants to restrict them accordingly.
“We should not be converting our beautiful farmland here in Wisconsin to industrial-scale wind, solar, or data centers,” he posted on Facebook in June. “As the next governor of Wisconsin, I’m going to make sure we stop the conversion of our beautiful farmland in Wisconsin to these industrial sites.”
Tiffany has attacked Crowley, in fact, for saying that data centers should use 100% renewable energy, because that will require the conversion of even more farmland to energy development.
This isn’t a new hangup for Tiffany: He has long sought to block renewables from getting built on farmland. Since 2022, he has repeatedly sought to end federal tax incentives for solar and wind projects built on private agricultural land, and he has opposed individual solar projects in the state that he claimed used too much farmland. (The Trump administration, as part of its broader war on clean energy, has also cut some subsidies for solar on “prime farmland.”)
In other words, Tiffany is using data centers as a kind of trojan horse to restrict clean energy development. By appearing to seem more anti-data-center than Crowley in theory, he is going to be more anti-solar in practice. The stakes here are real for the clean energy industry and for decarbonization more broadly. As governor, Tiffany could implement his longstanding preferences by naming new members to the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, which oversees the state’s utilities. In a letter sent last year, he urged the commission to look more favorably at coal.
What remains notable about this story — and lost in much of the commentary — is that Crowley is not even a moderate on data centers. On some fronts, he would regulate data centers more aggressively than the Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed would, even though the former has been branded as a pragmatist and the latter as a progressive.
Crowley, of course, wants data centers to use 100% renewable electricity and cover their full grid and infrastructure upgrade costs. El-Sayed hasn’t made the same commitment on clean energy. Crowley says data center developers “must build … with union labor,” while El-Sayed would require only that the facilities must be built by contractors with state-registered apprenticeship programs. I even think Crowley’s insistence on local control over data centers is a more expansive commitment than El-Sayed’s demand that communities must get a “meaningful say.” (El-Sayed’s language around water, by comparison, is more specific and binding, requiring data centers to use “closed loop systems.”)
You could say this is all a function of framing: It is Crowley who has declined to endorse a data center moratorium, while El-Sayed railed against data centers repeatedly on his campaign. On a vibes basis, El-Sayed is the more anti-data-center candidate. But policies are not made by atmospherics alone. And it is notable that socialists like Piker have endorsed El-Sayed’s approach while begging for Crowley to go further — when Crowley had the stricter policy all along.
A new report from a coalition of energy and data analytics organizations offers recommendations for the country’s demand response leader.
By many measures, California is the most advanced U.S. demand response market. Its aggressive clean energy targets, widespread home electrification, and near-universal smart meter deployment make it a natural testbed for programs that call upon distributed energy resources — from home batteries and electric vehicle chargers to smart thermostats — to ease grid strain and pay customers for helping out.
The state has been running these initiatives in one form or another for decades, starting with agreements that paid commercial and industrial customers to cut their power during periods of grid stress. Over time, those programs expanded to households, allowing ratepayers to let utilities cycle their air conditioners on and off and, eventually, control their smart thermostats too. But the theoretical potential of California’s demand response strategy has far outpaced the realized grid benefits.
“Load flexibility has underdelivered for a long time,” Ric O’Connell, executive director at the grid policy nonprofit GridLab, told me.
A new joint report from GridLab, data analytics firm Kevala, and the energy consulting firm Energy and Environmental Economics released on Tuesday argues that California’s early-mover advantage has, in many ways, become a liability. While the technology to run more effective, streamlined demand response programs has finally arrived, decades of legacy initiatives have left the state and its confused consumers tangled among dozens of fragmented offerings, outdated compensation structures that don’t reward active participation, and rules that make it unnecessarily difficult for small, household devices to participate in wholesale electricity markets.
“The communications, the control, the metering — none of that stuff was really available 10 years ago, and you just sort of paid people to sign up,” O’Connell told me. “And then we didn’t really switch it as the technology became available for better measurement.”
But now that the technology is better, the report points out that the opportunity is bigger than ever: California has an unprecedented base of smart, connected devices — including millions of EVs, electrified buildings, and home batteries — that, if properly harnessed, could help smooth out the state's electricity demand and avoid the kind of costly new infrastructure buildouts that drives up everyone's rates.
One of the primary recommendations in the report, titled “Unlocking California’s Flexible Load,” is to pay customers for the actual value they provide to the grid — such as how often and for how long they reduce or shift their electricity use during demand response events. While that may seem obvious, historically, utility and state programs have paid customers simply for signing up and remaining "available" to cut power use — regardless of whether they actually deliver when called upon. That model made some sense before smart meters and other tools could verify performance, but today it often just wastes money while failing to deliver meaningful load reductions.
Changes like this could help California capture far more of the value demand response has long promised. A 2024 GridLab study with The Brattle Group found that virtual power plants — networks of distributed resources that collectively act like large, traditional power plants — could save California utilities and consumers $550 million per year while meeting more than 15% of the state’s peak electricity demand.
The potential is especially striking with EVs. Their charging patterns can already help shift overall electricity demand to less grid-constrained hours, while bidirectional charging may one day turn them into giant grid batteries capable of sending power back to the grid — an increasingly common capability known as vehicle-to-grid, or V2G. The report reveals that if just 10% of California’s projected 9.7 million EVs participated in V2G programs, they could supply nearly a third of the state’s 2036 long-duration battery storage target, according to a press release about the report.
As the report also makes clear, though, getting there will require more than simply changing how the program pays customers. Another major recommendation is consolidating the programs and streamlining how they’re administered. O’Connell said the utilities running their own programs — long held back by institutional inertia — are beginning to recognize the inefficiency problem, waking up to the fact that “the person doing the smart thermostat program is in a different department than the person who’s doing the behind the meter battery program,” he told me, explaining that he’s already working with Con Ed in New York to consolidate its offerings. Based on his conversations with California’s utilities, he said he expects them to announce consolidation plans soon, as well.
It can be a hard sell to get the investor-owned utilities to put real muscle behind these programs, however, as they make money by building new infrastructure like large power plants, not by avoiding the need for it through demand flexibility.
“I think in many ways the IOUs have been indifferent to load flexibility. It’s not core to their business,” O’Connell told me. But with political tension over affordability mounting, customers increasingly worried about electricity rate hikes, and huge new large loads like data centers seeking to connect to the grid as quickly as possible, utilities are facing more pressure than ever to make better use of the infrastructure they already have.
Another core recommendation is designed to ensure that demand flexibility programs actually benefit all customers by capping customer compensation below the total cost that the utility avoided in new infrastructure buildout. For example, if a customer’s individual participation in such a program saves a utility $100 in spending, they should receive less than $100 for providing that flexibility. This is designed to ensure that all California customers end up saving on their utility bills, regardless of whether they’re able to flex their loads or not.
This particular recommendation comes in response to a problem the state encountered with its legacy rooftop solar compensation system, Net Energy metering, which ran from 1996 to 2022. The program pays existing solar customers, who have been grandfathered into the program, well above the actual value of the power they export to the grid, thereby shifting billions of dollars in costs onto customers without solar.
Lastly, the report recommends creating a simpler path into wholesale electricity markets. While sophisticated players —- think large businesses or major demand response aggregators such as Voltus or Sunrun — can sell load reductions directly into those markets, the process remains too complicated and paperwork-heavy for smaller aggregators bundling together resources such as household EVs and batteries. For now, the report argues, those smaller players should keep enrolling customers through simpler, utility-run programs while regulators work to make wholesale market participation more accessible.
Ultimately, O’Connell hopes the report can help California move past the institutional battles that have historically held demand flexibility back. “One of the problems with California is there’s no kind of neutral,” he told me. “We were trying to be that neutral party that’s like, here’s the roadmap to get everyone to actually unlock this potential.”
The goal, he said, was to “name all the problems of the past” — and, in doing so, give California’s utilities, regulators, aggregators, and customers a clearer path forward.