european task force for the implementation of smart grids...

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


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


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


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


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


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)

http://www.smi-ieso.ca/


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.


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.


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


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:


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


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


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.


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


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


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)


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


18


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.


20

Description of how EV will be managed by the 3RD Party Data (F&S)


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


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.


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


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


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).


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.


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

european task force for the implementation of smart grids...

Documents