an open systems framework for interdependency...
TRANSCRIPT
An Open Systems Framework
for
Interdependency Planning & Management
Presented by Dr Ges Rosenberg,
University of Bristol Systems Centre
Governance and Regulation Session held on Tuesday 2nd December 2014
Research Collaboration
Bartlett School of Planning
OMEGA Centre for Mega Projects in Transport & Development
Infrastructure comprises an evolving continuum of interconnected
systems which is required to meet changing needs in both time and
space, and therefore infrastructure delivery projects cannot be conceived in
isolation from existing legacy infrastructure, from future known
infrastructure needs, or from the developing culture and socio-economic
policies within which they exist.
Interdependence can be a
valuable asset that should be
continually appraised and developed
throughout the planning, appraisal,
design and operational life of the
related infrastructure. For example,
when interdependence is considered
holistically then concepts such as
infrastructure corridors can be
seen to be an economically attractive
proposition.
That effective, efficient governance and ‘stewardship’ of infrastructure
requires a shift away from an individual asset management perspective,
and requires a wide range of institutions and enterprises to collaborate in developing a framework of efficient policies, plans, processes and
institutions.
Framework Requirements
• Promote and support collaboration on infrastructure
• Identify opportunities to create enhanced value: risk
sharing and social, economic and environmental
opportunity
• Innovation: broad identification and assessment of
interdependencies at inception of the project
• Rapid and early conceptual modelling supporting
cross-sector, interdisciplinary creation of options
Framework Principles
• Continuum of Open Systems:
• ‘System of Systems’
• Manage complexity:
• ‘Soft’, complex context: social, economic, regulatory,
environmental and policy (PESTLE)
• Explore Hard Infrastructure System Boundary:
• Engage stakeholders in search for innovative options
(co-benefits)
• Stewardship & Governance
• Diverse ownership/investment
• Legacy & new infrastructure
Integrated System Design
ProvidePast FutureInnovate
Legacy Infrastructure
Replace, Reuse, Recycle, Modify,
DisposeCurrent Project
Evidence HindsightPredictionStatisticsLiteratureCase Studies Models
Evidence Foresight
VisionValues
OpportunitiesRisks
ScenariosModels
TIME
Process
Soft People & Purpose
HardProducts & Function
Performance
Past Needs &Legacy Assets
Future Needs &Future Assets
Rationale
Objectives
Appraisal
Monitoring
Evaluation
Feedback
Implementation
Infrastructure Example
Rinaldi, S. M., Peerenboom, J. P., & Kelly, T. K.
(2001). Identifying, understanding, and analyzing
critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE
Control Systems Magazine, 21(6), 11–25.
doi:10.1109/37.969131
Little, R. G. (2003). Toward more robust
infrastructure: observations on improving the
resilience and reliability of critical systems. 36th
Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the (p. 9 pp.).
IEEE. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2003.1173880
Oil
Transport
Water
Electric
Power
Natural Gas
Telecoms
Fuels &
Lubricants
Fuel for
Generators &
Lubricants
Fuels &
Lubricants
Fuel for
Generators
Fuel Transport
& Shipping Shipping Shipping
Water for Cooling
& Emissions
Reduction
Water for
Production,
Cooling &
Emissions
Reduction
Water for
Cooling
Power for
Compressors,
Storage and
Control Systems
Power for
Switches
Heat
Communications Communications Communications Communications Communications
Fuel for
Generators
Power for
Pumping
Stations, Storage
& Control
Systems
Power for
Signalling &
Switches
Power for Pump
and Lift Stations
& Control
Systems
Water for
Production,
Cooling &
Emissions
Reduction
Fuel Transport
& Shipping
EtF Timeline Sectors E
nerg
y Electricity
Renewables
Heat
Fuels
ICT
Broadband
Mobile
GNSS
Tra
ns
po
rt
Wate
r
Waste
Em
issio
ns
Road
Rail
Ports
Air
Landfill Recycling
Disposal
Legislation
Environmental
Flooding
Water Use
P: Energy sector provides necessary electricity for operating and cooling
ICT sector equipment (e.g. Server Farms)
P: (1) Energy sector provides necessary fuel (hydrocarbons) and lubricants
to Transport sector; (2) Energy sector provides necessary electricity for
electrified rail and Electric Vehicles in the Transport sector
P: (1) Energy sector is a source of general waste transferred into Waste
sector; (2) Energy sector is a source of Nuclear Waste
P: (1) Energy sector activities (e.g. Shale Gas) can transfer pollutants which
contaminate ground water; (2) Energy sector provides necessary electricity
to Water sector for pumping etc.; (3) Energy sector requires Water for
cooling plant
D: Transport Corridor
G: Co-location. Energy sector utilities and Transport sector roads share
physical space
O:(1) Energy and ICT sectors can collaborate to create energy efficient
equipment; (2) Energy and ICT sectors collaborate on sharing data
(hindered by ownership issues)
O: Energy sector requires payment from Water sector for electricity
provided to power pumps
P: ICT sector provides necessary resources to Energy sector P: ICT components in space can become or produce space Waste P: ICT sector requires protection from flooding provided by Water sector
D: ICT sector provides resources for Smart Grid, Smart Metering, Demand
Management, Control and Billing to Energy sector
D: (1) ICT sector can potentially provide digital capability to reduce need
for physical Transport; (2) ICT sector provides resources and capability for
Transport sector activities: (a) Congestion charging (b) Boris bikes (c.)
Multimodal journey management (d) Global positioning (e) Comms (f)
Tracking (g) Stock control (h) Road use charging
D: ICT sector provides the capability for Waste and recycling 'tagging'
D: (1) ICT provides the capability for Smart Metering and management
of/within Water sector; (2) ICT provides the capability for digital control
of/within Water sector
G: Price control?????????
G: (1) Some ICT Plants and Services are geographically linked to the
Transport network; (2) Co-location of some ICT physical assets (e.g.
telecoms cables) and some Transport assets (e.g. roads)
O: (1) ICT sector provides necessary control and communications systems
to Energy sector during set-up; (2) ICT sector and Energy sector can
collaborate to reduce ICT energy footprint; (3) ICT and Energy sectors
collaborate on sharing data.
O: (1) ICT sector provides data management capability to Transport sector;
(2) ICT sector and Transport sector collaborate on sharing data. (3) ICT
sector provides capability for Transport sector to perform Logistics Route
Planning; (4) ICT sector provides capability for general operational usage
within Transport sector
O: ICT sector and Waste sector collaborate on sharing data O: ICT sector and Water sector collaborate in sharing data
P: (1) Transport sector provides the capability to move Shale Gas; (2)
Transport sector provides the capability to move fuel to power stations; (3)
Transport sector could transfer excess heat from vehicle tunnels into
Energy sector
P: (1) Capacity Issues????; (2) Transport sector provides capability for JIT
delivery for ICT sector
P: (1) Resource efficient raw mat. use; (2) Transport sector provides the
necessary capability to move Waste; (3) Transport sector creates Battery
Waste which requires disposal
P: (1) Transport sector can potentially provide (a) an obstruction to Water
or (b) facilitate its transfer; (2) Permeability of materials can facilitate
flooding
D: Transport and Energy sectors share intelligence information D: Transport sector relies on ICT sector for Road use charging capability.
G: Co-location of Transport and Energy assets
G: Co-location of Transport and Water assets to provide utility corridor
O: (1) Journey times. Freight; (2) Requires network for Electric Vehicle
charging; (3) Sector policies must be aligned to achieve goals (i.e. uptake
of Evs and reduction in domestic energy use)
O: Transport and Waste sectors can collaborate to change behaviours on
emissions (Nudge, wink, hug etc.)
O: Transport and Water sectors can collaborate on flood management
planning rules
P: (1) Waste and by-products can potentially provide a resource for the
Energy sector including processes such as Anaerobic digestion; (2) Waste
can potentially provide a source of rare Earth metals needed by the Energy
sector; (3) Security of supply. Re-use rather than source <<???; (4) Benefit
from waste usage and disposal. Truck ???erents increases<<???
P: Waste sector requires Transport sector for (1) Movement of hazardous
waste; (2) Movement of general waste; (3) Movement of specific materials
that cannot be disposed locally (e.g. Japanese knotweed)
P: (1) Waste sector can potentially produce contaminated water which is
transferred to the Water sector; (2) Waste in landfill can potentially cause
more Water runoff
G: Short circuitsG: Co-location of Waste facilities and Water resources can potentially
result in ground water contamination
O: Waste disposal plans may need to be in place before new power
stations are approved (especially Nuclear)
O: Separation of Waste at source and separation of Waste at a dedicated
facilitate have different transport needs (and affect Efficiency versus
Quality)
P: (1) Water provides a potential means to generate electricity; (2) Water
provides a necessary means of cooling Energy plant; (3) Water provides a
potential means of Energy storage; (3) Bulk Water transfer<<<???
P: Water sector provides flood protection for Transport sector assets
D: Water sector relies on ICT Sector for Smart Meters and Demand
Management
G: (1) Co-location of Transport assets and Water sources increase the risk
of flooding (2) Water utilities disrupt Transport network by digging up
roads (3) Water sector utilities can degrade road system due to sub-
standard re-instalment
O: Water sector provides payment to Energy sector for PumpingO: Water sector collaborates with ICT sector for real time data exploitation
to maximise efficiency, energy use and resilience
Energy
ICT
Transport
Waste
Water
P: Water required for cooling plant within the Energy sector
P: Energy sector activities (e.g. Shale Gas and other 3rd parties)
transfer pollutants which contaminate ground water
P: Energy sector transfers electricity to Water sector for
pumping
D: Transport Corridor
O: Energy sector requires payent from Water sector for
electricity provided to power pumps
P: Water provides a means of Energy storage
P: Water transfer (bulk) [-ve]. Flooding investment [+ve]
P: (1) Water provides a means to generate electricity (2) Water
provides a means of cooling Energy plant (3) Water provides a
means of Energy strorage
O: Water sector provides payment to Energy sector for Pumping
Water
Energy
Energy-Water Sector Interdependencies
High Speed 2, Phase 2
“The aim of the HS2 project is to
deliver hugely enhanced rail
capacity and connectivity between
Britain’s major conurbations.”
“The evidence base also indicates
that the enhanced capacity and
connectivity provided by HS2 would
be likely to facilitate and catalyse
regional and local economic
development.”
From: High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s
Future – Decisions and Next Steps
January 2012
HS2 – Water Sector Opportunities
1 2 3 4 5
A Climate Change
May result in increased
rainfall in North &
decreased rainfall in
South
May result in increased
rainfall in North &
decreased rainfall in
South
B Flood Protection Affects the resilience of
the railway
C Intra-Region Transfer
D Bulk Transfer
E
HS2 embankments
provide opportunity for
flood detention storage
Provides potential route
(for 50-100cm pipes)
for Strengthening inter-
company connections.
Whole route unlikely to
be optimal solution.
Provides potential route
(for 2m diameter
transfer pipes),
Although strategic need
is uncertain & whole
route unlikely to be
optimal solution
HS2
HS2 Results • Interdependencies supported:
• Inter-regional (supply zone/catchment-level)
water transfer
• Local energy networks
• Enhancing IT infrastructure capacity
• Flood protection opportunities
• Implement through:
• Passive provision at consultation and in
Hybrid Bill
Some Conclusions from Whole Study
• Project sponsors or owners:
• Identify interdependencies and engage
stakeholder at the inception;
• Further opportunities during design and during
implementation.
• Benefits of an open systems approach:
• Creativity from broad cross-sector participation
• Holistic and ‘open systems’ possible because
matrices are not constrained
• Matrix-based layout supports structured and
systematic search for interdependencies
Some Conclusions from Whole Study
• Interdependency planning to identify potential
synergies
• Opportunities to enhance project through co-benefits
as well as manage adverse interdependencies
• Recognise and meet relevant policy goals
• Transformative nature of mega-projects means:
• Value in flexibility & provisioning when future
uncertain
• Trade-offs and balanced judgments
Recommendations
• That a stewardship function is established by Government
with the purpose of overseeing the integration of
infrastructure planning, delivery and operation.
• That an open systems approach be used to underpin the
Green Book Interdependency Planning and Management
Process.
• That there will be a need to embed learning and maturity
modelling in order to inform the development of policy and
practice.
• That business models and practices are needed which
seek to promote openness and collaboration in the creation
and operation of infrastructure.
References 1. Rosenberg, G; Carhart, N; Edkins, AJ; Ward, J; (2014) Development of a Proposed Interdependency Planning
and Management Framework. International Centre for Infrastructure Futures: London, UK.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455020
2. Carhart, N; (2014) Identification of High-level Infrastructure Interdependencies for the Lower Thames Crossing.
International Centre for Infrastructure Futures: London, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455371
3. Rosenberg, G; Carhart, N; (2014) Review of Potential Infrastructure Interdependencies in Support of Proposed
Route HS2 Phase 2 Consultation. International Centre for Infrastructure Futures: London, UK.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455383
4. Ward, EJ; (2014) Phase 2 Desk Study Report of Northern Line Extension. International Centre for Infrastructure
Futures: London, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455361
5. Carhart, N. and Rosenberg, G. Towards a Common Language of Infrastructure Interdependency. Presented at
the International Symposium for Next Generation Infrastructure, IIASA Vienna, October 2014.
6. Rosenberg, G. & Carhart, N. (2014). A Systems-based Approach to Creating Value from Infrastructure
Interdependencies. In: Campbell P. and Perez P. (Eds), Proceedings of the International Symposium of Next
Generation Infrastructure, 1-4 October 2013, SMART Infrastructure Facility, University of Wollongong, Australia.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14453/isngi2013.proc.39