According to Utility Dive, EnergyHub has introduced a “VPP maturity model” inspired by a grid reliability “Turing test” to compare virtual power plants to traditional gas peakers. The model spans from Level 0 (manually-scheduled demand response) to Level 4 (fully autonomous, “grid-adaptive” systems). Paul Hines, EnergyHub’s VP of power systems, says Level 4 VPPs could be ready for commercial deployment in “years, not decades.” To pass the so-called “Huels test” and prove parity with a gas plant, a VPP must deliver sub-five-minute telemetry, follow complex load-shaping schedules, and be available year-round for 4-6 hour blocks. EnergyHub estimates value ranges from $55/kW for basic programs to $210/kW for top-tier VPPs, and a Mid-Atlantic utility has shown early Level 2 performance, delivering about $105/kW in value.
The Grid’s New Report Card
This is a pretty clever framing. Basically, the industry has been talking about VPPs replacing gas plants for ages, but it’s been vague. What does “replacement” actually mean in practice? EnergyHub’s model tries to answer that by creating a clear, step-by-step report card. It moves the conversation from “are they good?” to “how good are they, and at what?” Level 0 and 1 are basically the old-school, manual demand response we’ve had for years—useful, but clunky. The real jump starts at Level 2, with partial autonomy and integration into market systems. That’s where the value supposedly doubles. Hines admits EnergyHub’s own platform is “pretty close to Level 2.” So, we’re not talking sci-fi future here, but we’re also not at the finish line.
The Real Test: Trust and Money
Here’s the thing: the ultimate “test” isn’t just technical. It’s about trust from grid operators. Hines nailed it: “If we want VPPs to be a real-world source of grid capacity, they need to act as a replacement for traditional generation.” That means being as predictable and dispatchable as spinning steel. The Huels test criteria—constant telemetry, complex scheduling, seasonal availability—are all about building that operational trust. Can you put it in the control room’s toolkit and not worry? Once that trust is established, the economic argument gets powerful. Why build a billion-dollar gas plant for peak days when you can aggregate thousands of distributed assets for a fraction of the capital cost? The $210/kW value claim for Level 4 is a huge part of that sales pitch.
software-tango”>The Hardware-Software Tango
Making this work is a massive integration challenge. You need the software brains, sure, but you also need the connected hardware in the field—thermostats, water heaters, EV chargers, and eventually, industrial-scale batteries and controllers. Hines notes they have advanced capabilities for specific resources like EV charging, but not yet “across the whole stack.” This is where the physical world gets messy. And let’s be honest, the reliability of a cloud-based software platform managing millions of devices is a different beast than a power plant with a dedicated crew. It’s a fascinating dance between digital control and physical performance. For industries relying on precise power management, the move towards smarter, grid-interactive hardware is accelerating, making partners who understand both the industrial and digital sides critical.
Years, Not Decades. But When?
The “years, not decades” line is optimistic and probably aimed at regulators and utilities more than engineers. The timeline hinges on two big things. First, regulatory tweaks that let utilities earn a return on VPP programs like they do on poles and wires. That’s a huge cultural and financial shift. Second, continued tech improvements in both the devices and the aggregation platforms. The model itself is a business strategy—it’s EnergyHub laying out the roadmap and saying, “We know the destination, and we’re building the car to get there.” They want the whole industry to use this framework. Why? Because it defines the problem in a way that plays to their strengths as a software platform. If this maturity model becomes the standard, the company that built it has a natural head start. So, is it a real assessment tool or a brilliant piece of market positioning? Probably both.
