energy networks association open networks project advisory … · 2018-12-04 · energy networks...

Energy

Networks

Association

Open Networks Project Advisory Group4th December 2018

Welcome & IntroductionsNigel Turvey – ENA Open Networks Project Chair

3

Amenities

Both male and female toilets can be found in the corridor.

Emergency Exit

Fire escape door is located in the corridor. Signage can be found above entrance.

No alarm tests scheduled for today.

Should there be an emergency, the alarm will sound and instructions will be give via the PA system.

Wifi

Login: ENA Wireless

Password: R0ut3rEn3rgy!

Tea & Coffee

Tea, coffee and biscuits can be found next to reception or the members area.

Attendance

Please remember to sign into Slido to mark your attendance.

Correspondence

If you would like to receive information about the Open Networks Project or have any feedback you

would like to submit, please get in touch with us at [email protected].

General Housekeeping

mailto:[email protected]

4

Slido

Slido

Slido is an interactive platform we are using for our Q&A segments and

general feedback. You are able to ask questions via Slido at any point

throughout the presentation and we will address as many of them as possible

at the end of each session. If you wish to ask a question verbally, please wait

until the allotted Q&A segment.

• Link– Website: www.slido.com

– App/Google Play store – search and download: ‘Sli.do’

• Event code – #ONAG (non-case sensitive)

• Login – Full name

• Password – ENA (case sensitive)

http://www.slido.com/

5

The Advisory Group is essential to our project to:

Ensure stakeholders are aware and taking the Project into account;

Request input from stakeholders to improve the quality of our products;

Increase awareness about project risks & issues, ask for views on risks & issues and

collaboratively resolve where appropriate.

It will provide input to:

Steering Group on project scope, progress, risks & issues;

Workstreams with deliverable comments/feedback.

We will seek to send information in advance of meetings to ensure that views can be sought

by trade associations in advance. Our objective is to encourage open feedback from you all

across all of our work.

Thank you for the continued input.

Advisory Group ToR Reminder

6

The intention of the bulk of this meeting is to split the Advisory Group into 3 break-out groups to discuss the materials.

Each break-out group will discuss the material from workstreams for just under an hour, then the facilitators will move

on to discuss their material with another break-out group. We will have 3 of these sessions, so each break-out group

will discuss all of the material in turn.

Introduction to Advisory Group meeting (Nigel Turvey – WPD)

Welcome & introductions, housekeeping, objectives, running order of the day etc.

Publications and progress to date

Scope for 2019

Update | Workstream 1: T-D (Matt White – UKPN)

Product 1: Investment Planning

Breakout group | Workstream 2: Customer Experience (Steve Halsey – UKPN)

Product 4: Information on Flexibility Services

Breakout Group | Workstream 2: Customer Experience (Sofia Cobo de Guzman – SPEN)

Product 7: Provision of Constraint Information

Baringa Workshop | Impact Assessment (Mark Askew, Duncan Sinclair & Ben Hall – Baringa) Unintended Consequences

Today’s Agenda & Approach

7

Publications & Progress to Date

If you would like more information about upcoming consultations, please visit our

website and/or subscribe to mailing list at [email protected].


8

Workstream 4:

Whole Energy Systems

Workstream 1A: Flexibility Services

Workstream 1B: Planning & forecasting

Workstream 2: Information Provision & Connections

Workstream 3:

DSO Transition

Workstream 5:

Comms & Stakeholder Engagement

Workstream 1 – T –D Process

Workstream 3:

DSO Transition

Workstream 2: Customer Experience

Workstream 4:

Charging

Workstream 5:


2018 Workstreams

2019 Overview

2019 Workstreams

New workstream

Scale of work for 2019 is

expected to be in line with

2018 with a number of

products continuing further

development.

We will be consulting in Q1

2019 on the scope of work

and areas of priority.

We will continue to seek

input on our work through

the Advisory Group on a bi-

monthly basis.

Advisory Group Meetings

in 2019

7th Mar, 2nd May, 4th Jul, 5th

Sep & 7th Nov

No explicit workstream as

part of SCR Development –

Key Dependency

2019 Overview

9

Governance

ENA Board

ENFG

Open Networks Project Steering Group

Workstream 4:

Whole Energy Systems

Workstream1A: Flexibility

Services

Workstream1B: Planning &

forecasting

Workstream 2: Information Provision & Connections

Open Networks Project Advisory Group

Electricity Regulations Group

inform

inform

advise DER Connections Steering Group

Workstream 3:

DSO Transition

Ofgem

BEIS

inform advise

advise

Workstream 6:

Comms

Workstream 5:


Dependencies

COG

Governance

Workstream 1 | T-D ProcessProduct 1: Investment Planning

Nigel Turvey (WPD)

11

The Journey

2017

• Map T & D Investment Processes

• Gap Analysis

• Develop approach to whole system planning in the short term

2018

• Develop case studies that consider DNO network options in a Regional NOA process

• Deliver detail processes and interface for the Regional NOA process

• Create a methodology for a CBA that considers transmission and distribution options

2019

• Continue to evolve the methodology to include opportunities for market based options

• Agree funding mechanisms and propose future options

• Develop new case studies and methodologies to test different system needs

• Embed the new methodology into NOA 19/20

RIIO-2

• Propose different options to further enhance whole system planning

• Consider 'whole energy system' in development of longer term models

12

2018 – the detailed scope

• Assess regional requirements and identify need for case studies

• Identify and agree case studies

• Develop framework for approach to case studies

• Develop tools and processes required to perform a Regional NOA

• Establish data requirements and exchange mechanisms

• Create common network models and exchange mechanisms

• Identify distribution options to tackle transmission issues identified via

case studies and submit for assessment

• Perform CBA to assess distribution options against other options, to

derive ‘least worst regrets’ recommendation

• Identify business change requirements and conduct impact

assessment

• Identify regulatory/commercial impacts. Propose code modifications

13

The 2018 Model

For clarity, the model assumes the DNO transitions to a DSO and the activities

relating to the SO functions are clearly demarcated

Does not consider the use of 3rd

party/market based solutions

14

Investment Planning Update – High Volts Case Study High Voltage Case Study Aims:

• Apply relevant learnings from the UKPN and

WPD Regional Development Programmes

• Develop Regional NOA processes to address

additional system needs

• Explore the use of distribution network

solutions to meet transmission network needs

• Identify any regulatory blockers and potential

requirements for changes in RIIO-T2/ ED2

regulatory incentives

• Improve planning processes across

Transmission and Distribution

• Identify business change requirements

Deriving the Case Studies

15

• Study undertaken for the year 2020 for England & Wales • Following the completion of the pre-fault analysis initial regional areas (ENWL &

NPg) were identified where there are forecast to be pre-fault SQSS compliance issues.

Case Studies – the network

16

Case Studies - the approach

17

Investment Planning Update - Outcomes

Observations & Recommendations

• Processes for data sharing and information exchange need to be augmented to support

whole system planning

• Communication of needs to be at a level that doesn’t limit the options submitted

• Consistency in costing of options is needed to facilitate a meaningful CBA. A clear set of

rules will need to be defined ahead of any procurement/optioneering exercise – further work

is also required on how options can be funded within the current regulatory framework

• Further consideration to elements of the CBA process is needed in expanding the process

to distribution and market solutions, inc. agreeing suitable time horizons, the impact of any

solution on other system parameters and other incentives

• For the purposes of the case studies and within current time constraints the project only

assessed DNO and TO solutions however in the future third party and market solutions need

to be considered as part of potential solution providers

• It is anticipated that code/licence modifications will be required as the process continues to

be expanded – ESO licence; Grid Code

18


• The tools and processes required to perform and implement a Regional NOA assessment (voltage rules)

• A set of key recommendations and next steps to improve and evolve the process

• A range of distribution options to resolve a transmission constraint

Key deliverables

• Broadens the range of available options when looking to resolve constraints on the transmission network. Lower cost to consumers

• First step to a more inclusive network assessment process that will include new opportunities for market participants

Key Improvements

Outputs for 2018

19

• Explore and agree the funding routes for a range of distribution and transmission based solutions

• Agree and develop a consistent approach to costing transmission and distribution solutions

• Continue to evolve the CBA process to adequately cater for distribution based solutions; build, non-build and market based

• Market test the outputs from the High Volts case studies (RFI to all market participants)

• Develop new case studies for different system needs to further evolve the Regional NOA

• Identify / submit code change proposals to support the roll out of the Regional NOA

• Incorporate regional voltage methodology into NOA 19/20 methodology and continue to evolve processes for Regional NOA for other system needs

The Plan for 2019

20


The 2019 Model

For clarity, the model assumes the DNO transitions to a DSO and the activities

relating to the SO functions are clearly demarcated

21

Aim is to test a) where a distribution solution can be used to address a transmission constraint b) where a transmission solution can be used to address a distribution constraint.

The Potential Case Studies

High Volts – market test 2018 work

Stability

Fault Level

Thermal

Boundary constraint

22

2020 onwards

• Represents some initial thinking

• Dependencies on Future Worlds

and Whole Energy System

• Need to understand at what point

there is limited value in

expanding further

23

Questions

We are keen to get your feedback on the work to date, the proposals for 2019

and the future thinking. Below are a set of questions to support the feedback

process

1) Does the work to date deliver tangible progress?

2) Have we identified the key activities and appropriate next steps in 2019s

plan?

3) Are there additional areas that we need to consider, or areas we need to

make clearer?

4) Accepting the dependencies and limitations imposed by other work

currently underway within the industry, not least the Open Networks Future

Worlds work does our thinking for RIIO-2 and beyond seem plausible? If

not, what is missing?

Breakout Session 1

Workstream 2 | Customer ExperienceProduct 4: Information on Flexibility Services

Steve Halsey (UKPN)

26

Context - PID

Information on Flexibility Services – Review how information should be provided to customers on potential DNO requirements for flexibility services. Agree good practice.

27

It’s fit in the bigger picture

28

Touches on the what also

o the drivers for the service/the network requirement

o service requirements, including:

o procurement method

o payment approach and structure, including:

o possible contract lengths

o dispatch information:

o position on service conflicts

29

The how - Good practice

Multiple engagement channels, mailing lists, up

to date web pages, webinars, events

A centrally hosted flexibility services webpage

Heat-maps/geographical representations

30

Questions

1.What examples of good practice have been encountered?

2.What does good practice look like to you?

3.How does your view compare with what’s presented here?

4.Are there any areas where convergence of

ideas or establishing similarities would be particularly beneficial?

5.Recognising the relative infancy of this area is the document a good starting point?

Breakout Session 2

Workstream 2 | Customer ExperienceProduct 7: Provision of Constraint Information

Sofia Cobo de Guzman (SPEN)

33

Published Information:

Flexible Connections Process

All network companies publish online information on their flexible

connections processes:

• ENWL “offer constrained or flexible connection offers as

standard”. Their website provides details of their ‘Curtailment

Index’ approach.

• NPG publish information on flexible connections in the FAQs

section (Q&A style) of their website. Contact details are

published for further information.

• SPEN publish a detailed policy statement outlining all aspects of

service provision and policy applicable in area

• SSEN publish a flexible connections guide and general

information regarding service provision

• UKPN provide details of their Flexible Distributed Generation

(FDG) connection offerings.

• WPD provide information on available alternative connection

types. A guidance document is also provided for Connect &

Manage in their SouthWest network area.

34

Curtailment Estimates:

Information Currently Provided

Approach No.1 (the DIY Assessment)

Customer provided with relevant network data to enable it to carry out its own

curtailment assessment

You might like …

• Freedom to choose basis of curtailment assessment and who conducts it

• Customer in control of costs and timescales

You might have concerns about …

• For some customers it might be difficult to determine who has the competency,

or is best placed, to carry out the curtailment assessment

• Potential restrictions on release of some network data due to commercial

confidentiality (e.g. data for existing connected customers)

35



Approach No.2 (the DNO Curtailment Assessment)

Curtailment assessment report prepared and provided by the network company

You might like …

• Site specific curtailment assessment

• Studies can be based on a ‘complete’ non-redacted half-hourly data set

• Customer benefits directly from network company’s knowledge, skills and

experience


• Customer has less opportunity to input into scope/detail of report

• Different approaches adopted by different network companies

36



Approach No.3 (The Curtailment Index)

• Provided for flexible connection offers (>200kW)

• Curtailment forecast indicates forecast of curtailment for each voltage type

(stated in connection quotation)

• Curtailment Index – a cap on curtailment beyond which the network

company will seek to take action (stated in Connection Agreement).

• Annual provision of ‘actual’ curtailment for the previous 12 months, plus

cumulative 6-year average (post connection).

You might like …

• Annual provision of ‘actual’ curtailment

• Commitment of intervention where actual (6-year average) curtailment

exceeds the Curtailment Index


• Generic nature of curtailment forecast (not site-specific).

• Action to resolve breaches of Curtailment Index subject to funding approval.

37



Discussion points:

1. Do you have a “preferred approach”?

2. Do you agree with the plus/negative points highlighted?

3. Is there an alternative approach you would like us to consider?

38


Timescales for Information Provision

Prior to application:

• UKPN provides a curtailment assessment under a Feasibility Study.

At time of Offer issue:

• SSEN provides the network data, enabling customers to carry out their own

curtailment assessment.

• NPG and WPD provide a curtailment assessment.

• ENWL provides a forecast of curtailment (for the voltage type of the connection)

Following acceptance of the Connection Offer:

• SPEN provides a curtailment assessment

39


Timescales for Information Provision

Discussion points:

In what timescales would you like to be receiving curtailment information?

a. Prior to application?

b. Upon receipt of Connection Offer?

c. Following acceptance of Connection Offer?

What level of detail of information do you believe is necessary at each stage?

Is there benefit in DNOs providing phased levels of assessment, i.e. higher level

information when customers are first exploring grid connection opportunities; more

detailed assessment when customers are closer to taking their projects forward?

Consider: Implications for customers of timing of associated charges.

40

Information Sharing - Post Connection

(Upcoming Planned Works)

The Quality of Supply Guaranteed Standards require network companies to

provide at least 2 days notice of planned power cuts/outages. In addition, several

network companies provide an enhanced service to larger customers. This

includes:

• Annual notification of outages with updates closer to the time.

• Operational fora to share post connection outage information

41


(Reporting of Actual Events)

Most network companies will provide customers with information on network

outages which have impacted on their connections. Additional information may

also be provided to ANM/flexible customers to help them better understand their

curtailment history. Two main approaches:

Information Provided on Request

• Details of curtailment history (e.g. date, duration and event).

Information Provided on an Annual Basis

• Annual statement of total actual curtailment.

In addition two network companies are currently developing web-based portals

where customers can log in to obtain more detailed information on historical

constraints.

42


Discussion points:

1. Reporting of actual historic events (for ANM/flexible connections):

• What level of information would you find helpful:

− A detailed log

− A statement of actual curtailment

− Other?

• What are the pros/cons of each?

2. Is the web portal product (for ANM curtailment information) something you

would value/make use of?

3. What is your view of ‘best practice’ in respect of notification of planned power

cuts/outages?

Breakout Session 3

Baringa | Impact AssessmentUnintended Consequences Workshop

Mark Askew - Baringa

Wrap UpNigel Turvey – ENA Open Networks Project Chair

46

• There are some challenges ahead if we want to meet our carbon targets while providing a safe and secure energy grid at an affordable price.

• However, by enabling flexible networks we can address these; open up new markets for customers for low carbon and innovative technologies; and deliver efficient network costs for consumers.

• We are working together and dedicated to making this work with input from stakeholders in an open and transparent way.

• Please remember to complete the feedback poll on Slido.

We welcome feedback from all our stakeholders. If you have any comments that you would like to share, please feel free to submit them to [email protected].

Wrap Up


energy networks association open networks project advisory … · 2018-12-04 · energy networks...

Documents