How are subsidies for energy storage projects distributed

SGIP statistics reveal that from the period in which energy storage began being included in the subsidy system until August 2018, projects that were either in the process of receiving subsidies or had already received subsidies (not including cancellations) had reached 8890.

• Despite all these variables, numerous studies as well as experience have shown that until energy markets mature, battery prices fall, and currently non-monetizable energy storage services become monetizable, state incentives are a necessary and critical key to increasing distributed storage deployment.

Instead, the updated policy would follow the example of California's PV subsidy policy by setting capacity targets for subsidy distribution, factoring in the declining costs of energy storage, considering the economic feasibility of systems, and other factors, finally distributing subsidies according to the energy (Wh) of storage systems.

• State energy storage incentive programs vary greatly in both program structures and incentive rates. The differences in structure—for example, rebates vs performance payments —make it very difficult to make apples-to-apples comparisons from state to state. • It is difficult to establish consistent parallels between rates and outcomes.

Manufacturing: Projects that manufacture energy storage systems for a variety of residential, commercial, and utility scale clean energy storage end uses. Deployment: Projects that deploy residential, commercial, and utility scale energy storage systems for a variety of clean energy and clean transportation end uses.

In addition, there are other types of energy storage incentives that have been tried. For example, storage may be added to existing renewable programs, such as solar incentive programs, or be made eligible for market-based programs such as utility renewable portfolio standards (RPS).