Case Study — British Columbia
One Battery. Four Jobs.
Project Payback Period: 5.7 Years
In BC, a single dispatched battery earns on four fronts at once: ESI participation, solar self-consumption, peak shaving, and outage protection. Stacked against BC Hydro and federal incentives, the math clears in under six years.
Site Profile
Commercial & industrial site
878,357 kWh/yr baseline · BC Hydro territory
Modeled By
Sponge Battery Proposal Studio
Sized from real load and solar production data
Incentive Stack
$661,092 total
BC Hydro, ITC, and accelerated CCA combined
One Battery, Four Value Streams
Peak Shaving Solar Self‑Consumption Backup Power ESI Participation
Peak Shaving · caps monthly demand, cutting the delivery line every billing cycle
Solar Self‑Consumption · up to 40% solar incentive coverage on the array feeding it
Backup Power · rides through a grid outage without the site noticing
ESI Participation · lets BC Hydro dispatch the battery for 4‑hour winter windows, backed by an 80% capital incentive
Annual Savings
$36,152
38.9% cut to the utility bill
Payback Period
5.7 yrs
net of the full incentive stack
Total Incentives
$661,092
BC Hydro + ITC + CCA
Peak Demand Cut
41.5%
195.8 → 114.5 kW avg monthly peak
Case Study · BC Battery Value Stack
01 — The Savings Story
Two levers, one bill.
Solar and battery work together to maximize facility savings. The battery banks excess solar energy that would otherwise be curtailed, then uses that energy for late afternoon peak shaving.
1
Solar Capture
Opting for a load displacement solar system can result in a 40% capital discount on solar project costs. Sponge ensures the battery is ready to capture excess solar that would otherwise be curtailed. Result: $24,549 saved a year — a 41.4% drop in energy costs.
2
Peak Shaving
Sponge strategically discharges the battery to cap the site's monthly peak, adapting its target based on weather and the demands of the ESI program. This reduces BC Hydro's per-kW monthly demand charge. Result: $14,728 saved a year — a 43.8% drop in demand costs.
Sponge dispatch power flow

Real dispatch behavior from the Sponge Battery Proposal Studio — solar production (orange) charges the battery, which discharges to offset load (teal) through the evening peak.

Where The $36,152 In Annual Savings Comes From
38.9% bill reduction
$24,549 · Solar Capture
Energy line, down 41.4%
$14,728 · Peak Shaving
Demand line, down 43.8%

Together, the two levers cut $36,152 from the annual utility bill — a 38.9% reduction.

The Bill, Before And After
$93,014
Baseline Annual Utility Cost
$56,861
Refined Annual Utility Cost
$36,152
Total Annual Savings · 38.9%
Case Study · BC Battery Value Stack
02 — How Sponge Models It
Every number, simulated first.
The Sponge Battery Proposal Studio sizes the battery against this site's own load and solar data, not a rule of thumb. It sweeps a range of battery sizes, finds where returns flatten, then builds the full comparison the client actually reviews.
The Studio Workflow
1
Upload load data
2
Upload solar production
3
Solve for battery size
Maximizes revenue per kWh deployed, not just total savings
4
Calculate inventory & payback
5
Produce comparison reports
Support your client's buy decision with clear annual return and payback comparison
Monthly Peak Demand · Baseline vs. Refined
150kW Jan Apr Jul Oct Baseline Refined

Avg monthly peak falls from 195.8 kW to 114.5 kW — a 41.5% cut — with the steepest reduction landing on the summer peak, from 346.8 kW in July down to 217.9 kW.

BC Incentive Stack
Regional IncentivesBC Hydro ESI + Load Displacement$479,388
Clean Technology ITC30% federal credit$121,949
Accelerated CCA, Year 1100% first‑year rate, 21% corporate tax$59,755
Total Incentives$661,092

Net cost against the $885,885 build: $224,793. 17.7% IRR, $498,280 NPV over 25 years.

Sponge EMC
Sponge EMC
The same algorithm that models savings in the proposal phase executes the strategy in the field.
Model Your Own Site

Every number on this page came out of the Sponge Battery Proposal Studio — run on real load and solar data, not a rule of thumb.

Run the Proposal Studio

Sample Report

Your Solar Company

How This Report Was Built

Every number in this report came out of the Sponge Battery Proposal Studio — real load and solar data in, a defensible sizing, payback, and incentive model out.

Sponge Battery Proposal Studio

The Proposal Studio’s Explore workspace, shown for illustration.

Load Profile

878,434 kWh
Total Consumption
363.7 kW
Peak Demand
100.0 kW
Average
3.6x
Peak Index

Baseline Cost Analysis

$93,014
Annual Cost
$59,295
Comprehensive
$33,620
Demand
$99
Fixed

Scenario Comparison

BaselineRefined: ESI WinterPeak Optimized 626/120Δ
Energy Performance
Total Grid Import (kWh)878,357514,743363,613 (41.4%)
Total Grid Export (kWh)000
Utilized Generation (kWh)—377,756377,756
Annual Peak (kW)346.8217.9128.9 (37.2%)
Avg Monthly Peak (kW)195.8114.581.4 (41.5%)
Utility Cost
Total Cost$93,014$56,861$36,152 (38.9%)
Energy - Comprehensive$59,295$34,746$24,549 (41.4%)
Demand$33,620$18,892$14,728 (43.8%)
Energy - Demand Response$0$3,125-$3,125
Fixed$99$99$0 (0.0%)
Program Revenues
BC Hydro ESI — 2025———
Cash Flow Analysis
Total Project Cost—$885,885—
ITC—-$121,949—
CCA Year 1—-$59,755—
Regional Incentives—-$479,388—
Net Cost—$224,793—
Annual Savings + Revenue—$36,152—
IRR—17.7%—
NPV—$498,280—
Payback Period—5.7 yr—
Cumulative Savings—$1,020,763—
Monthly Net Usage (kWh)
Jan67,38660,4276,959 (10.3%)
Feb62,27448,22114,054 (22.6%)
Mar66,44338,79527,649 (41.6%)
Apr63,72524,68439,041 (61.3%)
May74,79025,50649,284 (65.9%)
Jun78,78829,06449,724 (63.1%)
Jul109,68549,44760,238 (54.9%)
Aug97,85047,77150,078 (51.2%)
Sep76,09442,62033,473 (44.0%)
Oct60,63141,84218,790 (31.0%)
Nov58,65549,9148,741 (14.9%)
Dec62,03756,4555,582 (9.0%)
Monthly Peak Demand (kW)
Jan120.492.927.5 (22.9%)
Feb119.182.137.0 (31.1%)
Mar157.279.877.4 (49.2%)
Apr168.678.490.2 (53.5%)
May234.597.6136.9 (58.4%)
Jun243.8126.9116.8 (47.9%)
Jul346.8217.9128.9 (37.2%)
Aug306.4183.9122.5 (40.0%)
Sep258.8154.5104.2 (40.3%)
Oct159.887.472.5 (45.4%)
Nov117.586.730.8 (26.2%)
Dec116.785.631.0 (26.6%)

Refined: ESI WinterPeak Optimized 626/120

217.9 kW
Peak Demand
514,743 kWh
Total Import
0.0 kWh
Total Export
6.1%
Curtailment
134.1
FECs
$36,152
Annual Benefit
41.5%
Peak Reduction
41.4%
Usage Reduction

Monthly Performance

Assumptions

Analysis term25 yearsDiscount rate4%
Utility rate escalation4%PV degradation0.5%
Sales tax (HST)13%ITC (federal credit)30%
Corporate tax (CCA year 1)21%CCA first-year rate100%
Battery re-up year13BC Hydro Load Displacement30% of PV cost