Fantasy Energy League Draft Follow-Up: Second and Third Rounds

Last week I recapped the first-round picks of the energy industry’s  Inaugural Fantasy Energy League, highlighting some potential reasons why our 14 participants chose the picks they did as the first selections. To recap on the background and the rules of the Fantasy Energy League, be sure to check that article out first, but for now it’s time to dive into the mid-round picks: Round 2 and Round 3!

While a misstep in Round 1 is an easy way to lose a fantasy league, many would argue that the shrewdest of picks in Rounds 2 and 3 are where seasons are truly won. But because these later picks are less ‘high-profile,’ I’ll go through them more quickly in list form and pause for commentary when a particular trend in picks arises, an interesting choice is worthy of discussion, or to interject one of the highlights of the draft once it got going– the energy nerd trash talk!

Round 2 Review

Pick 2.1 from The Windy City: Maryland Electric Power Sector

Pick 2.2 from Energy Innovation: New Jersey Industrial Sector

Pick 2.3 from This CO2 Shall Pass: California Industrial Sector

Pick 2.4 from Kiterocket Renewables: Oklahoma Electric Power Sector

Pick 2.5 from Powerhouse: Kansas Industrial Sector

For the entirety of the first round, every selection went to the electric power sector or the industrial sector, clearly seen as the two heavy hitters where the greatest emission reductions would be felt and ignoring the residential, commercial, and transportation sectors. Unsurprisingly, then, the first five picks represent these teams just selecting within the heavy-hitting sector they missed out on in the first round. In fantasy football parallels, this would be all the teams drafting running backs in the first round going wide receiver in the second round and vice versa.

Another interesting item to note here is that none of the states of these first five picks of Round 2 were states that had another sector picked in the first round. While there were a handful of repeat states within round one, an interesting takeaway from this diversity of states in the early picks is that perhaps our energy experts don’t see many states dominating over the rest in terms of emissions reductions in 2017. Rather, these states appear to have progress that is being made in deliberate ways (e.g., closing some coal plants or decarbonizing a specific energy-intensive industry) rather than any overarching policy that touches on all of the policies. If a state had implemented a strict carbon price in 2017, for example, perhaps you would see a run to get all the sectors of that state early on. But given that the clean energy transition is moving more deliberately and less all-encompassing at the state level, our picks thus far appear to reflect that.

Trash Talk Aside: The Windy City, upon making their first and second round picks at the same time, noted that they were delayed in making their picks because they found Energy Innovation’s previous pick in their junk folder. Energy Burn!

Pick 2.6 from Good Wind Hunting: New York Residential Sector

Pick 2.7 from GridLab: Illinois Industrial Sector

Pick 2.8 from Clarion Energy Women in Power: Iowa Electric Power Sector

Pick 2.9 from Emission Impossible III: Carbon Protocol: California Residential Sector

Pick 2.10 from Electrowinning: Kentucky Industrial Sector

Mixed in with three more swaps of electric power/industrial from round one to two are the first two residential energy selections. Unlike the to-date selections in power and industrial sectors where picks weren’t necessarily representing the states where the greatest clean energy transition overall but rather the states that had made the greatest strides from 2016 to 2017, the selections of California and New York as the first two residential sectors off the board are notable. California and New York are on opposite coasts, but they share a reputation for being a step ahead of the rest of the country when it comes to clean energy, energy efficiency, and general efforts towards sustainability. The fact that these states are the top residential representatives reflects their wide bevy of residential energy efforts, including Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) and Home Energy Efficiency Programs from NY State Energy Research and Development Authority in New York, and in California the prevalence of energy efficiency programs from the state, electric utilities, and gas utilities. However, this fact also demonstrates that the states making the greatest strides in 2017 were also likely the ones making the most of a residential clean energy effort overall. While the electric power sector and industrial sector have both been the focus of reducing emissions for years, the burgeoning smart home market, personal distributed energy resources like rooftop solar, and other clean tech innovations that target households rather than power plants or factories has only just begun.

Trash Talk Aside: Emission Impossible III bragged while delivering this pick that Microsoft Excel’s official Twitter account was on their side, which was indeed pretty cool, but it might be going to their heads as they proclaimed this pick their attempt to “continue this reign of glory.” Meanwhile, Electrowinning insisted that the braggarts were indeed the “Fyre Festival of the Fantasy League.” Ouch. 

Pick 2.11 from CELI: New Jersey Transportation Sector

Pick 2.12 from Rocky Mountain Institute: Texas Residential Sector

Pick 2.13 from ELECTRIFIED Planes, Trains, and Automobiles: California Electric Power Sector

Pick 2.14 from New Energy Equity: Michigan Industrial Sector

Interestingly to close out Round Two, the last four picks represent four different sectors as well as four different states. These picks all look to be volume-based picks, with Texas and California being among the largest economies and populations in the country, meaning the opportunity for energy savings in these picks is huge. Meanwhile New Jersey may be small by footprint, but having the highest population density and hordes of people commuting daily to New York City and Philadelphia presents the opportunity for great emissions reductions through electrification and improved and progressively cleaner public transit. Michigan, meanwhile, is an industrial stalwart and a move away from coal towards gas or electricity could make this last pick of the second round a steal.

Trash Talk Aside: CELI didn’t take too kindly to Emission Impossible III (EIP) calling themselves the superior sultan of spreadsheets and so they Tweeted out this image of their apparent Excel tool that they found would propel them to victory.

Meanwhile, Energy Innovation scoffed at the selection of NJ Transportation, questioning if they’ve ever even used a jug-handle exit or seen the Turnpike at rush hour. 

Round 3 Review

Pick 3.1 from New Energy Equity: Pennsylvania Residential Sector

Pick 3.2 from ELECTRIFIED Planes, Trains, and Automobiles: Illinois Transportation Sector

Pick 3.3 from Rocky Mountain Institute: Georgia Residential Sector

Pick 3.4 from CELI: Georgia Residential Sector

Pick 3.5 from Electrowinning: Illinois Residential Sector

Pick 3.6 from Emission Impossible III: Carbon Protocol: Vermont Industrial Sector

In this first batch of picks in Round 3, we see some interesting trends. First, the picks in Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Georgia could all represent some more volume plays where high energy demand and high starting-point emissions could translate to some unexpectedly high emissions reductions for a third-round pick. Second, we see a few more residential selections from states that are notably targeting homeowners for efficiency and clean energy via energy efficiency and solar incentives in Pennsylvania, financial assistance for energy upgrades in Georgia, and a host of grants, rebates, loans, and incentives in Illinois.

Beyond that, with these six teams now completing three picks each, I saw some interesting regional/demographic trends arising:

• New Energy Equity has focused on states in the Rust Belt

• ELECTRIFIED Planes, Trains, and Automobiles has consistently targeted high population states

• Rocky Mountain Institute’s selections all come from the states in the south

• Electrowinning’s picks to this point all have a Midwest tilt

• Emission Impossible III, meanwhile, grabbed states opposite in location and size in California and Vermont, but highlights states that share the same green spirit and clean energy vision

Trash Talk Aside: Unable to go a single round without dishing out the smack, Emission Impossible III couldn’t help but point out that Electrowinning incorrectly labeled their 3.5 pick as 3.4, noting it was no surprise and the competition’s picks are so bad that “they shouldn’t start worrying about ‘math’ and ‘numbers’ at this point.”

3.7 from Clarion Energy Women in Power: New York Commercial Sector

3.8 from GridLab: Florida Commercial Sector

3.9 from Good Wind Hunting: New Jersey Commercial Sector

3.10 from Powerhouse: Texas Commercial Sector

3.11 from Kiterocket Renewables: Ohio Commercial Sector

The run of these next five states was interesting because they represented the first commercial sectors off the board. Every other state saw at least one selection during the first two rounds, but it seems like no commercial sector options were deemed sexy picks. However, that could be with reason, as states often have defined plans for each of the other sectors. Switching electric utilities to a more carbon-free energy mix, improving efficiency and carbon-intensity of industrial processes, helping homeowners retrofit for energy savings and integrate renewable energy on-site, and improving gas mileage in transportation while pushing electrification and public transportation. But in the commercial sector, there are fewer (but at least some) programs awaiting business and building owners, on top of it being the smallest of the five sectors with regard to energy consumption.

But once Clarion Energy Women in Power broke the ice, the floodgates of commercial sector picks opened! And we saw a familiar trend here– high population and high-volume states going off the board first. My hunch for these picks is that there wasn’t as much data with which to make a decision, so players made their educated guesses.

Trash Talk Aside: By this point in Round 3, things are heating up and the Twitter trash talk is getting spicy and meme-able:

Pick 3.12 from This CO2 Shall Pass: New Jersey Residential Sector

Pick 3.13 from Energy Innovation: Colorado Residential Sector

Pick 3.14 from The Windy City: Tennessee Residential Sector

Lastly, we close out round 3 with residential picks across the board. As opposed to the nation leaders picked earlier in the residential sector, these picks are perhaps less convention when compared with the California and New York picks. But they do all represent states in the upper half of total energy consumption for a residential sector in 2016, meaning for the year-over-year to 2017 data we care about they should be prime candidates for savings and emissions reductions.

Trash Talk Aside: The trash talk seems to be working, as Emission Impossible III living rent-free in the head of Energy Innovation, who turned in their third-round pick with a note that they “guess we should also start the clock for Emission Impossible III’s next critical Tweet?” Wow!

Impressions from Rounds 2 and 3 and Rest of the Draft

Now that we’ve dug into the second and third rounds, we’re starting to see some real diversity in states picked, and each of the five sectors is represented by at least a handful of picks. The teams are showing their divergence of strategies, and it could honestly be anyone’s game at this point!

If you read the first-round recap as well as this one, you’re now seen the first 42 picks. The last 28, the real sleeper picks of Rounds 4 and 5, will be reviewed in the next and final post reviewing the draft.

What do you think so far– any teams have a clear strategy you can make out? Are there front runners you’d bet the house on? Are you intrigued enough to want to participate next year? Reach out to me via contact or let me know in the comments!