Energy policy has emerged as one of the major fights of the 2017 legislative session, with intense battles happening over measures aimed at restoring net metering rates for rooftop solar customers and ambitiously raising the state’s renewable energy generation standards.

But outside those weighty policies, Nevada lawmakers are dealing with a host of other substantive energy policy changes that could play a major role in how the state plans and incentivizes.

Members of the Assembly Commerce and Labor committee heard six energy bills on Monday afternoon, spending hours on a wide variety of policy proposals ranging from rolling back height restrictions on wind turbines to policies directly promoting and incentivizing energy storage and electric cars.

And nearly all the bills received unanimous support from NV Energy representatives, renewable energy advocates and a host of energy stakeholders, which utility executive Pat Egan chalked up to “consistent compromise.”

Legislators still have miles to go before they finish with energy policy questions this session, but here’s a look at some of the proposed changes presented on Monday:

Long-term resource planning

Measures tweaking the process by which electric utilities submit integrated resource plans — three-year projections mapping out expected customer load and likely energy supply sources that need to be approved by the state Public Utilities Commission — received a welcome reception from renewable energy advocates and the state’s main utility.

SB146, which is proposed by Democratic Sen. Pat Spearman, would require utilities to include a distributed resource plan as part of their larger three-year integrated resource plan. Such plans, which cover “distributed resources” such as electric cars, energy storage, energy efficiency programs and more, would need to include an analysis of various costs and benefits.

The bill also allows the utility to file a joint integrated resource plan for its two subsidiary companies doing business in Southern and Northern Nevada, and slightly extends the PUC deadline to review the three-year plan.

Rebecca Wagner, an energy consultant and former PUC commissioner who presented the bill, said distributed resource plans can lead to more flexibility in looking at ways to decrease costs in their energy production and customer use projections.

Another change to the integrated resource planning process comes in the form of SB65, which is sponsored by the governor’s Office of Energy. The bill would require utilities to meet with PUC staff, members of the state’s Bureau of Consumer Protection and any other interested parties at least four months before filing a new or amended integrated resource plan.

Angie Dykema, director of the governor’s office of energy, said the change would lead to more transparency in the process and allow for earlier input into proposed amendments of the plan.

The bill also requires, rather than authorize, that the PUC only approve plans that “provide the greatest economic and environmental benefits, the greatest opportunity for the creation of new jobs in the state, diversify energy portfolios, reduce fuel and carbon-price risk.”

Energy efficiency and storage

While much of the conversation around energy tends to revolve around new ways to generate power, legislators on Monday heard two bills designed to incentivize using less energy and make more use of storage systems.

Spearman’s SB150 would require every electric utility in the state to create a cost-effective energy efficiency plan, which would need to exceed or meet goals set by the PUC for each specific utility. Utilities would be able to petition the PUC for a less ambitious efficiency goal if they can’t make it cost-effective.

Dylan Sullivan, a lobbyist for the environmental advocacy group National Resources Defense Council, said that Nevada was once a national leader but is now falling behind other states in terms of spending on energy-efficient projects.

“As cheap as solar is in Nevada right now, energy efficiency is even cheaper,” he said.

The bill would also require that no less than 5 percent of what a utility spends on energy efficiency projects go to programs that benefit low-income customers.

While it isn’t a mandate, a measure proposed by Democratic Sen. Kelvin Atkinson has companies such as Tesla hoping for an expanded window for energy storage systems.

SB204 would require the PUC by October 2018 to analyze the costs and benefits associated with energy storage units, and to set recommended non-binding targets for energy storage use by utilities if the benefits outweigh the costs.

NV Energy executive Egan said that it was likely the utility could find a use for energy storage to assist in distribution but the price of large, grid-scale storage wasn’t likely to be cost-effective in the immediate future.

“Before we get to our requirement to spend anything, let’s study the technology, see if we can get better answers on how much it costs, see if we can get better answers on where those benefits might be for customers,” he said.

The measure gives latitude to the PUC in determining the targets, a change from the initial form of the bill which would have mandated cost-beneficial energy storage use and required it to increase over time.

Incentives and windmills

Legislators heard two very different proposals seeking to spur more spending on renewable energy generation.

SB145, which is another bill sponsored by Spearman, would combine existing separate accounts for incentivizing solar, wind and hydropower development and combine them into a single account focusing on solar projects, electric vehicles and energy storage programs.

The existing program is paid for through a line on utility bills called the Renewable Energy Program Rate, or REPR, and has a proposed upper limit of more than $295 million on incentive payments. While the specific requirements for the incentives would be set by the state’s Public Utilities Commission, the bill limits eligible energy storage systems to residential and commercial units or that have a capacity to store between 100 and 1,000 kilowatts.

NV Energy executive Judy Stokey said the wind and hydropower incentives weren’t attracting enough demand, and that the bill reflected a change in what kind of renewable energy programs the Legislature wanted to spur investment in.

The measure also lowers from $2 million to $1 million the amount that the PUC can authorize between 2018 and 2023 for installation of solar generation for low-income customers.

On a slightly different track, Republican Sen. James Settelmeyer’s SB314 would repeal a county’s ability to set height restrictions on wind turbines, and instead allows local governments to deny permits on the basis of whether or not the proposed turbine presents a danger to the health and safety of the public or is not “not compatible with the character” of the nearby area.

Settelmeyer said that counties have used height restrictions to essentially block development of smaller wind turbines on private property, which need to be around 65 feet high to function effectively.