Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
1
EUROPEAN TASK FORCE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SMART GRIDS INTO THE EUROPEAN
INTERNAL MARKET
European Commission
Directorate General for Energy
- SGTF EG3 -
Model 3: THIRD PARTY (NEW)
DATA FACILITATOR & DATA SHARING
June 2012
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
2
1 MARKET MODEL DESCRIPTION
This model consists on a 3RD party data, an open IT centralized platform or central hub that
provides processed data to different smart grid stakeholders. Processed in a manner that provides
data ready to add value to its interfaces, while promoting data and processes standardization, and
likely interoperability.
The final goal of this model is to provide benefits to consumers while supporting the development
of dynamic smart grid scenarios, market opportunities and finally competition, as requested in the
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
3
Third Package1. With that in mind, the 3RD Party Data (Facilitator & Sharing) central hub model
should set up a technical framework that considers the holistic electricity system and enables price
transparency as well as equal access to data for allauthorized parties.
Starting point: Despite final goals are unique, (e.g. unbundled is a common mandate for all EU
Member States), different Member States count with different electricity systems, inherited by
diverse natural situation and resources, as well as market rules, prices and stakeholders own
technologies and processes development. Equally some Members count with more or at a different
stage smart technologies and processes than others, against the task of quick retail market
development. Equally, different balancing markets and renewables integration challenges, will also
determine Member States‟ urge, steps and path of the implementation of this model to fostering
the smart grid development. Therefore the 3RD Party Data (F&S) should be designed in a manner
that enables flexibility when supporting the acceleration of the roll-our of smart meters2 and
fostering smart grid deployment. The model and therefore the solutions that it enables should
ensure interoperability not only of the smart meters but also for commercial
relationships and the market opportunities that will be developed relationships and the for market
opportunities that will be developed.
1 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/legislation/third_legislative_package_en.htm
2 80% by 2020 as required by the Third Package, subject to a CBA
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
4
Figure 1: Reference of the basic o of Model 3RD Party Data (F&S) 3
2. BEST PRACTISES
The following cases, Ontario and Italy, back up the rational behind the standardization for
interoperability, system flexibility as well as the value creation of having a new centralized
platform to foster smart grid.
Ontario and the 3rd Party smart grid Centralized Solutions:
Situation in Ontario: Shortfalls in generation and diversity.
Solution: Reduce Electricity Peak Demand.
How: 2004 released of a two-tiered IT central model that introduces smart meters and time-of-
use tariffs by 2010.
Responsibilities: DSO to ensure the functioning of their system and verify that data send to the
central hub is correct. That means installing and monitoring smart meters and ensuring hourly
reading.
3 Outcome of the 1st EG3 workshop, Brussels 2nd May 2012
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
5
In 2007 IESO, the Independent Electricity System Operator, was designated by the Government of
Ontario to manage the central platform for management and repository of meter data, while
supporting its TOU rate implementation through the Smart Metering Implementation.
In 2008 IESO launched the Ontario Smart Grid Forum, a broad-based industry dialogue aiming to
develop a smart grid vision for the Ontario province, and to offer the provincial government advice
and insights as it develops smart grid policy. The initial aim is to build on Ontario‟s Central Smart
Metering Initiative and complement the renewal already taking place in the transmission and
generation sectors by taking advantages of advances in the central information technology already
implemented while sharing the lessons learnt 4.
Value Creation: Scale of economies, highest services levels (such as experts and back up systems)
and finally data consistency that promote access among different stakeholders.
4 Modernizing Ontario’s Electricity System: Next Steps: http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/pubs/smart_grid/Smart_Grid_Forum-Report-May_2011.pdf
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
6
Figure 2: Responsibility Breakdown, www.smi-ieso.ca LDC (Local Distribution companies)
Italy and the centralized solution for market processes and meter data management
Situation: The Energy Authority for Electricity and Gas, AEEG, acknowledges that the electricity
system in Italy is Supplier centric5, with the relationship DSO-Supplier being critical in all the
business processes where they have to interact. DSO‟s responsibilities: Metering, meter reading
and meter values management; 95% of the electricity meters installed are smart meters.
5 CEER workshop on meter data management, April 19th 2012, Brussels
(http://www.energy-regulators.eu/portal/page/portal/EER_HOME/EER_WORKSHOP/CEER-
ERGEG%20EVENTS/CUSTOMERS/WS_meter_data_management/Scarcella-Stefano_MDM-workshop.pdf)
LDC ResponsibilityLDC
ResponsibilityIESO
Responsibility
Components of the Smart Metering System
7
Meter Data Management Repository (MDM/R)
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
7
Figure 3: Supplier Centric System and “Many to Many” model difficult to govern
What is regulated today: smart meters requirements, smart meters roll-out, meters reading
frequencies, and meter values availability to suppliers and TSOs. Moving toward standardization:
meter data for hourly measured points, meter data for non-hourly measured points and switching
meter values and past usage.
AEEG also recognizes that the there is need of standardization of procedures such as connection,
disconnection, activation, deactivation, switching and meter value management in terms of timing,
content and format.
Solution: A centralized architecture that serves as a central agent of communication and data
manager, avoiding difficult to govern the “many to many” data and info exchange current model,
lowering the complexity regarding current information exchanges timings and different part
processes standards. AEEG acknowledges that this today‟s complexity coming from diversity may
be turning into entry barrier for new entrants.
The centralized body is a gateway for communication and is responsible tracking all data exchange
as well as it holds the official data.
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
8
Figure 4: Central Body Responsibilities: Exchange and Hold Data
How: Implementing and Integrated Information System in different steps, from alignment of data
base between DSOs and Suppliers, registration of all DSO, Supplier and TSO, data migration,
monthly update of data from DSO to providing new services such as pre-check and centralized
settlements information. New procedures foster smart grid both procedures standardization and
dynamism will follow in 2013 and 2014.
This is where the implementation of the Integrated Information System is today.
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
9
Figure 5: Central System Today
Value Creation: Centralization of data exchange also with other market actors, easier enforcement
activity, possibility to optimize data management and processes and possibility of introduce new
services. Also during the implementation some procedures will see reduction of some technical
and organizational cost (avoiding provisional regulation and temporary procedures), to provide
immediate benefits (supporting processes that give immediate benefit to consumers), to provide
the opportunity to simplify (new procedures should shorten timing) and finally to also increase
reliability.
For more details on SII functionalities, please read the Annex II: AGENT OF COMMUNICATION AND
DATA MANAGER
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
10
3 MARKET MODEL: TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK
3.1 MODEL ASSUPMTIONS
REGARDING GROWTH AND FUTURE GENERATION MIX AND NETWORKS INFRASTRUCTURE (ANNEX IV)
Capacity is not all what be need to supply peaks, lets use smart technologies a business
models.
A redistribution of cost for the reinforcement of the distribution lines to cope with the new
business models should be clarified
Distribution reinforcement should happened parallel to the development of new commercial
capacity and system balancing opportunities
REGARDING FUNTIONALITY OF THE 3RD PARTY DATA
The following figure provides an idea of the number of transactions and interfaces that the 3RD
party should enable:
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
11
Figure 6: Interfaces, Cullen International
Some of the functionalities that the 3RD Party Data should carried out aiming to deliver
information flow that accelerate smart grid and retail market development are:
- Data Aggregation (for power outages, and demand response)
- Data Storage (historical/real time)
- Data Syncronization (for supplier switching and market settlement)
- Transactions Storages
Processes:
- Supplier switching
- Market settlement entity.
European Smart Grids
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
12
3RD Party Data and other stakeholders‟ responsibilities will determine the proper functioning of
not only the whole smart grid, but also of specific processes. Larsh Johnson, Chief Technical
Officer of eMeter, a Siemens Business, notes that sometimes DSO‟s could be empowered or
required to improve their metering and communications systems operations. He observes that DSO
metering and communications systems perform better when the DSO owns the responsibility for
data collection, data quality, timeliness and data delivery. In that case the central hub should be
responsible for the processes of supplier switching, meter data distribution to participants and
market settlement, avoiding unnecessary or redundant data movements between market entities.
The functionalities of the central hub as well as the DSO will be depend largely in the data process
they own. Alignment of both data process and responsibilities should be carefully examined
during the IT architecture design.
REGARDING DATA
Different types of information serves different purposes, so it may not be all the times necessary
or effective to use the 3RD Party Data (F&S) to facilitating smart grid functionalities. This model rule
is that by the 3RD Party Data (F&S) will handle all data that has a second purpose in the market.
Break down of data usage:
- Historical metering information for the purposes of market settlement, billing, switching
and quality of service. This should be responsibility by the DSO
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
13
- Additional (often real time) metering information for the purposes of offering demand
management services.
- Real time information for the purposes of dispatching and operation of the distribution grid
by the DSO
REGARDING WHO IS RESPONSIBLE TO MANAGE THE 3RD Party Data (F&S)
There are several options, but it should always secure flexibility, operation reliability and
independency. It should be an independent agency/ consortium or a regulated company, in terms
of responsibilities and deliverables (Figure 7). The operators of todays central data cases are:
- IESO: the TSO
- Italy: Acquirente Unico SPA (Institutionally vested for procuring continuous, secure, efficient and
reasonably-priced electricity supply for households and small businesses)
- Denmark: the TSO
- UK: under procurement process yet. Note: Elexon (that delivers balancing and settlement services
has been authorized by the regulator to deliver the DCC, UK Central Hub, services). One of the
main drivers of the procurement process is the financial security and liability.
- Texas: today the Central Hub responsibilities are handled by a consortium of DSO, but it is
expected to move to ERCOT, the TSO.
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
14
Figure 7: Danish Supplier Centric Model, Responsibilities & Deliverables
REGARDING REGULATIONS
How to regulate who has access to the data?. In the UK, a supplier centric model, also a central hub
is being design. In this case DECC mandates that stakeholders in contact with the central hub
(named „DataComCo” or DCC) has to sign the Smart Energy Code. In April 2012, DECC launched a
Data per point-of-delivery: - Grid abonnement - Grid services - System tarifs - Green tarifs - Taxes - Warnings and chance in tariffs
Payment
information/data
DSO
Retail Customer
- private or commerc.
- Supplier
- Aggregator
- Service Provider
Nord Pool / EEX
Wholesale
market
Maintainstarif-infomra onandgivewarnings
Sendsinvoicedataandcontrolreports
Paymentforflexibility
wholesaleclearing
Maintainstarif-informa onandgivewarnings
Sendsinvoicedataandcontrolreports
Supplyofbasic-orinvoicedata
Maintainsinfoontaxa onperpoint-of-delivery
Paymentforregularpowerconsump on
TSO
Reportonflexibilityserved
Invoiceonregularpowerconsump on
Tax authorities
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
15
consultation6 where it states that SEC “will govern the relationship between the DCC and the users
of its services, including energy suppliers, electricity and gas network operators and other parties.”
How, which market participants have access to the 3RD Party DATA (F&S) and to what data, will be
overview by an overarching previously designated entity. (ANNEX V: SEC CONSULTATION MAIN
GOALS, DECC)
6 http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/consultation/smart-metering-imp-prog/4896-smart-energy-code-con-doc.pdf
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
16
3.2 STAKEHOLDERS: ROLES, RESPONSABILITIES VERSUS TECHNICAL, INFORMATION AND BUSINESS
LAYERS.
Figure 8: Smart Grid Stakeholders: Roles and Value
Taking into account the new party‟s role, and looking at the EG2 Smart Grid Recommendations7 as
a reference, this model foundation is the definition of stakeholders‟ roles and responsibilities, as
well as an architecture that reflects data ownership, access to data and flows of information. The
figure 9 (see below) describes what the model takes into account: different stakeholders sending
information to a central hub and pulling out information from it too. The architecture will depend
mostly on which information should the 3RD Party Data (F&S) receive and manage, with which
7 Task Force Smart Grid, Expert Group 2: Regulatory Recommendations for data safety, data handling and data protection
(http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/smartgrids/doc/expert_group2.pdf)
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
17
purpose, and finally on which functionalities should provide to achieve fostering smart grid
development: looking a doing enabling interoperability and dynamic further than electricity related
services for the consumers and for the different stakeholders of the grid.
Figure 9 : Chassis of the models: Stakeholders, Responsibilities and Data Flows
In the following table includes specific 3RD Party Data (F&S) moles roles and responsibilities for the
smart grid stakeholders:
ROLES RESPONSIBILITIES LAYERS 3RDPARTY
TSO
Tech
Info
Business
DSO
Tech
Info
Business
EnergyGenerators
Tech
Info
Business
EnergyMarketSuppliers
Tech
Info
Business
MeteringOperators
Tech
Info
Business
Customers
Tech
Info
Business
EnergyMarketPlace
Tech
Info
Business
ProvidersofTechnology
Tech
Info
Business
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
18
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
19
3. 3 KEY PROCESSES
How the 3RD Party DATA (F&S) market model will run user cases such as:
- Consumer issues: Power Metering, Supply Switching, and Reconciliation Services.
- Trading and Flexibility: how to sell power from my DER to my neighbours, Virtual Power
Networks, Aggregated Buying, Ancillary Services, Storage and EV; and
- Consumer Flexibility and Energy Management: (Balancing the system) Demand Side
Management and Demand Response.
The last two bullet points use real time data as well as metering information for the purpose of
offering demand management services. Therefore the 3RD Party Data (F&S) are best positioned to
enables the flow of information, thus allowing companies operating in the free market to tailor
solutions to consumers‟ specific needs, designing products for demand management, offering
ancillary services or storage services to the DSO, or getting better prices in the market for specific
types of consumers. These third parties could be new stakeholders (aggregators and energy
services companies) or existing ones (suppliers)
Key processes will be better addressed if certainty comes from regulators regarding of consumers
issues (metering, supply switching), energy management by DSO (regarding consumers flexibility)
as well as question related to demand management services market. The final scenario should
enable full transparency and full access of new energy in the power market, avoiding
discrimination and facilitating operations like demand response as part of the capacity markets.
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
20
Description of how EV will be managed by the 3RD Party Data (F&S)
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
21
ANNEX I: ONTARIO, CENTRALIZED PLATFORM
Facing significant shortfalls in generation capacity in coming years, in 2004 the Province of Ontario
launched an ambitious program to reduce peak electricity demand through a variety of programs.
Central to that objective was the introduction of smart meters and associated time-of-use rates
across the entire province by the end of 2010. The deployment of smart meters in Ontario is
complicated by extremes in customer density with very congested urban areas contrasting with
rural and extremely remote communities throughout large expanses in the north of the province.
Ontario also has over 80 different electricity distributors, ranging in size from 1.2 million
customers to several dozen with fewer than 10,000 customers.
After an extensive consultation period, the provincial government announced a two-tiered IT
model with some functions remaining the responsibility of the local distribution companies, and
others being centralized into a new province‑wide service. This model achieves three key policy
objectives: Scale economies. The Province was faced with having up to 80 separate MDM
implementations, one for every local distribution company. As noted, some of these have fewer
than 10,000 customers. By having a centralized hub, the Province is able to capture the scale
economies associated with having a single system and single implementation.
Highest service levels. By concentrating the capability in a single operation, Ontario is able to
provide higher levels of service and functionality than individual utilities could afford especially the
smaller utilities. For example, for disaster recovery, Ontario has a full backup system up and
running at a separate geographic location, to take over operations in the event of an event
damaging or destroying the primary facility. Another example is expertise; the centralized operator
can afford to hire the best experts, because any additional cost minimize when allocated across
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
22
the many users of the system. Consistent and reliable data. Finally, by having all the utilities use a
single system, the Province ensures that all customers, regardless of the utility serving them,
receive the same, consistent accuracy and reliability of smart meter data.
These benefits of centralization occur as a matter of course in competitive industries.
Distribution companies are responsible for installing and maintaining smart meters, ensuring
hourly consumption data is collected daily, customer billing and collecting, answering customer
queries, and generally being the agent for conservation programs with the customer. The
Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), the province‟s electricity grid and market operator,
was designated by the Governments to be the Smart Metering Entity responsible providing the
provincial meter data repository central (MDM/R) service.
The central platform collects consumption data from each distribution company, validates it and
converts the hourly data into total consumption for each TOU billing period. These TOU billing
determinants are then returned to the distribution company for customer billing. Once
introduction of TOU rates is complete across the province, the MDM/R will collect and process
hourly interval data from approximately 4.5 million smart meters.
Ontario more recently introduced a robust feed-in-tariff that is driving significant investments in
renewable generation. One of the province‟s targets is that by 2030 nearly 13% of electricity
generated is from wind, solar and bioenergy.27 Much of this new renewable generation is
expected to come from small several hundreds or thousands of generation facilities at homes and
farms, each requiring bidirectional meters that measure and report both energy consumed and
generated.
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
23
ANNEX I: ITALY: AGENT OF COMMUNICATION AND DATA MANAGER
Information included in the Central Hub
POC (point of delivery identification standard code
DSO and supplier
Location of delivery point
All relevant market data (type of supply according to regulatory classification, default
market, etc)
Customer data
All relevant contract data (date of switch, tariff to be applied, etc
Meter values
All relevant profiling and settlement data
All relevant data for vulnerability protection tariff
Non payment data
Processes managed by SII:
New delivery point: new connection and POD assignation
Market processes: pre-check, activation and deativation, switching, activation of defatult
services, bad payment and credit recovery procedures
Meter value management: value management and interaction iwht TSO for settlement
procedures based on meter values
Adittional market services: bad payment info
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
24
ANNEX III: 3RD PARTY DATA (F&S) GROUP MEMBERS
MEMBER EMAIL ADDRESS AFFILATION
Alicia Carrasco [email protected] eMeter
Guillermo Amann [email protected] ORMAZABAL
Miguel Toledano [email protected] CULLEN INTL.
Peter Beumers [email protected] ALLIANDER
Paul de Wit [email protected] ALLIANDER
Yannick Phulpin [email protected] EDF
Regis Hourdouillie [email protected] ERICSSON
Marylin Arndt [email protected] ORANGE
Oliver Stahl [email protected] ENTELIOS
Manöel Rekinger [email protected] EPIA
Hamid Amir Alikani [email protected] PANASONIC
Alf Larsen [email protected] EON
Hans Taus [email protected] WIENENERGIE-STROMNETZ
Elsa Novo de Miguel [email protected] ENDESA
Markus Merkel [email protected] EWE
Oliver Franz [email protected] RWE
Michael G. Arentsen [email protected] Danish Energy Association
Pauline Lawson [email protected] EON
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
25
ANNEX IV: ENABLING NEW MARKET & CAPABILITIES: POTENTIAL & COST REDISTRIBUTION
In a future energy system there will be more renewables and other decentralized resources are
integrated into the system and market by means of smarter technology and processes. Then the
coordination and moderation of demand (Demand Side Management and Demand Response)
becomes a central tool inter alia. This tool is generally considered today to be part of the
competitive market as consumers who agree to become active should be able to maximize their
benefit i.e. supply companies and aggregators "compete" for flexibilities (and in the future also
smaller production units) with the aim to pool these flexibilities or productions in order to sell
them to the highest bidder. The demand for such "flexibility products" may actually be global
(TSOs, other suppliers, reserve markets), i.e. it makes no difference where load is reduced for
instance or it may be local (DSOs), i.e. a very particular problem (under or over current on a single
cable) is addressed.
It is important to notice that while DSOs are aiming to provide the market with a maximum of
network infrastructure today and will be tomorrow, capacity is the main cost driver for networks.
Therefore not all l capacity that might be necessary once in a while (e.g. just once a year or only
for a few hours per year) should be created in the future as smart technologies could and will be
used to maximize and enhance the existing capacity.
Therefore situation can and will exist in which there is a conflict between the ideas and interests of
global actors (i.e. aggregators) and local problems. That is to say that the capacity on a cable or
line might not be sufficient for certain actions. As an example imagine a situation where an
aggregator wants to create value by buying very cheap electricity from the market and supplying it
to numerous electrical cars.
If this aggregator "switches on" 100.000 cars at the very same time and some of those cars are
parked in the same streets this might actually force the DSO network to its capacity frontier. The
potential conflict increases in countries where networks have traditionally been built with less
capacity per customer. There might even be a situation when flexibilities are needed locally to
keep the situation under control and can therefore not be used globally. Another example is that
of an aggregator that tries to sell PV generated power into the market and who might be facing
shutdowns or production reductions in some of his contracted units if networks are not able to
locally take in all the PV generated power (e.g. in a street where virtually every house has morethan
3 kWp of PV installed).
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
26
Consequence: Even if aggregation, DSM and DR are originally left to the market they are not
independent from the underlying network infrastructure and mechanism need to be created that
are able to solve conflicts, that give all players "rules or rights of way". One idea could be
something like an early warning system where DSOs would provide all market players with
prognoses on those parts of their infrastructure that under certain (weather) conditions might
become "congested" so that market actors can develop a risk profile. This would enhance system
balancing and it should be done via the central data hub.
Final remark: Of course such environment also needs rules for DSOs on how long it is OK or legally
accepted to skip the reinforcement and when they should reinforce physically anyhow i.e. one can
imagine maxima for the amount, time and frequency of DSO interference with a certain installation
(first maybe for free, then at a cost, over the
legal limit only with a hefty fine), so that it is clear when reinforcements are necessary.
Smart Grids Task Force – EG3 – 3rd PARTY DATA Market Model
27
ANNEX V: SEC CONSULTATION MAIN GOALS, DECC
DECC consultation asked for feedback and input on:
How various participants will become parties to the SEC, the categories in which they will do
so, and the rights and obligations that will apply to them
The high level framework governing the services that are to be provided by the DCC,
eligibility of participants to receive those services, and the terms on which they will be
provided (including charging, billing, and payment arrangements)
The high level framework governing the services that are to be provided by the DCC,
eligibility of participants to receive those services, and the terms on which they will be
provided (including charging, billing, and payment arrangements)
How the SEC will be governed, administered and modified
How the SEC will seek to ensure that parties meet their obligations, and that there are
appropriate arrangements to deal with breaches, liabilities and disputes where these arise,
and
Other matters important for the robust operation of the SEC, including arrangements for
withdrawing from the SEC, and treatment of intellectual