ICT4SMARTDG an Example on How EU Funds Can Contribute to Smart and Sustainable Growth

6 October 2011

TELECOM OPERATORS• TELEFONICA• DEUTSCHE TELECOM(T-SYSTEMS)

• EUTELSAT• BT

DISTRIBUTION OPERATORS• IBERDROLA• EDF

DG EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS• DISENCO• SAMARES

TELECOM EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS• ERICSSON• ALCATEL-LUCENT• NOKIA-SIEMENS

SOFTWARE SYSTEMS DEVELOPERS• SAP

ASSOCIATIONS• EUTC• EREC• COGEN

ICT4SMARTDG

THEMATICNETWORK

CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES• ACCIONA (also energy operator)

General Objectives:

•

Foster and promote large-scale integration of domestic and distributed micro generation and

•

Improve energy efficiency

•

Through the implementation of innovative ICT solutions into local smart power grids

Specific Objectives:

-

Build and expand an European forum for stakeholders for experience and information exchange and consensus building

-

Overview and provide insight of ICT technologies available for smart distributed generation at domestic level

-

Bridge knowledge gaps by interacting with key ICT, Power Generation, Distribution System Operators and the Telecoms Operators and Solutions Providers

-

Identify and promote benefits of ICT-based solutions available in the short to medium term (2009 –

2015)

-

Forecast steps forward to promote large-scale implementation of ICT based solutions

-

Identify inhibitors to large scale implementation and make targeted recommendations to overcome them.

-

Disseminating results to specific targeted audiences i.e., policy makers, ICT community and energy industry and increase awareness of general public.

Work Package 1 (WP1) Exchange of Information and Experience

Work Package Leader: Iberdrola

Exchange of Information and Experience

Exchange of Information and Experience

-

Task 1: Design of the Template Fiche-

Task 2: Fiche Collection and Distribution-

Task 3: Fiche Review and Classification-

Task 4: Organisation of Seminars-

Task 5: Final Results

27 October 2010

WP1 The Challenge for the Utility

The Network with Distributed Generation

27 October 2010

WP1 The Challenge for the Utility

The Network with Distributed Generation

•

Two way Power Flow in Medium & Low Voltage Networks:–

Multi-directional energy flows:•

Energy Storage Devices•

Customer Load•

Renewable Generation•

Distribution Network(s)–

Safety on Distribution Network is paramount•

Many protection devices•

Storage and generators must be isolated from network for fault and maintenance

•

Use as much as possible already existing infrastructure for economic viability

27 October 2010

WP1 Distributed Generation Requirements

•

Measure and Control the MV/LV Network:–

Voltage and frequency –

Power flow –

Load Shifting-shedding during islanding (Microgrids)–

Protection of the distribution assets–

Protection of utility staff & customers–

Overall operational stability–

Ability to interoperate with the distribution system when connected and to transition to and from island mode

–

Use as much as possible already existing infrastructure for economic viability

27 October 2010

WP1 The Challenge for ICT Technologies & Solutions (1/2)

•

Energy Networks will need to rely heavily on ICT to enable Distributed Generation because the smart infrastructure will need to be:

–

Self managing & self healing (best achieved through decentralized methods)

•

ICT solutions will need to support and provide:–

Real-time communications between power producers, suppliers, DSOs and

end users.

–

Real-time M2M interaction between “smart points”

within energy networks–

Real-time access to high-quality information on the status of the grid–

Software will need to have levels of autonomy, scalability, adaptability and be robust

–

Algorithms to superimpose and maintain a virtual mesh of the desired topology–

Cyber security protocols to protect local grids and wider energy networks

27 October 201012

Energy Network Assets –

A Typical DSO

SCADAPrimary Network

AUTOMATION

~100%

~30-60%

~5%

SMART METERS0%Mul

ti-di

rect

iona

l Pow

er fl

ow

CUSTOMERS !!

~100%

~50%

~100%

27 October 2010

Energy Industry Requirements

•

For Effective Distributed Generation–

Communications are needed to infrastructure assets. It is difficult to define exact requirements because the distribution businesses (DSOs) are not yet sure of how many of their MV/LV assets they will need to monitor and manage, however estimates range from 50% of the asset base to 100% of the asset base

–

DSOs also believe they will need some information from the customer premises, how many customers is not clear, estimates range from 10% to 100%

–

The first of these general requirements needs real time communications and will be supported by special applications designed to manage

the infrastructure.

–

The second can be provided by smartmetering functionality•

Therefore, large scale distributed generation will need smartmetering in place and will require a smart infrastructure to be operating.

13

27 October 2010

Energy Industry Requirements

•

We can look at the requirements in more detail by using examples developed by SEESGEN

–

The following tables show

•

Typical services in the smart infrastructure and a high level view of data volumes, latency requirement, the level of reliability and security

•

Applications and how they map onto the same service requirements•

The types of technologies that could service the applications and how they may support the data volumes, latency, reliability and security

•

Greater detail on the critical issue of latency•

The advantages and disadvantages associated with some the more common technologies.

14

27 October 2010

Overview of Requirements, Latency, Reliability, Security

•

Applications in the Grid and requirements imposed on the ICT

15

Source: Alcatel Lucent uk

27 October 2010

Requirements from SEESGEN data

•

After identifying the ICT requirements for the grid management, it is possible to illustrate the application (in terms of services provided by DG units) of the most common communication technologies.

16

ICT Requirements based on the function assigned to units DG (��High, �Medium, �Low) Source:SEESGEN ICT

27 October 2010

Requirements from SEESGEN data

17

Figure: Suitability of telecommunications technologies based on the function assigned to DG units (��suitable, �partially suitable, � improper) Source:SEESGEN ICT

27 October 2010

Requirements from SEESGEN data

18

Figure: Data delivery time required for some applications Source:SEESGEN ICT

27 October 2010

Technology Options for DG ICT Access –

using SEESGEN data for one application example

19

Table General communication options for voltage regulation in the medium voltage network

27 October 2010

Requirements from Smart Buildings

•

Smart Buildings will be producers and consumers of energy–

Smart BMS (Building Management Systems) will manage Quality, Environment, Health, Physical security

–

ECMS (Energy Control Management Systems) will be implemented, relying on ‘intelligent’

objects and communications with improved features such as optimization of Energy Efficiency, import and/or export of energy, energy costs, dynamic control of bulding support services and strategy-based reconfiguration of devices.

–

Such systems will communicate with energy distribution management solutions to support local energy aggregation or local load balancing

•

Will the DSO see the communications as OpTel services or external outsourced services, what level of interaction will be required?

20

27 October 2010

Requirements from Energy Suppliers and Aggregators

•

Requirements from Energy Retailer/Aggregator–

We received no direct feedback from the energy retail sector but

it is considered the primary focus at the present time, is smartmetering. There are many examples of smartmeter requirements, some examples are included on the ICT4SMARTDG web site.

–

Contact was established with one energy aggregator operating in the USA. There principle requirement for ICT services was of a telemetry SCADA function to establish local conditions at production facilities and to obtain real time data on load shedding or load delivery from energy storage plant.

•

These requirements were not seen as being more or less onerous than those demanded by the local distribution system operator

21

Work Package 2 (WP2) Achieve Consensus on Benefits of Available Solutions

Work Package Leader: Telefonica

27 October 2010

Communications Infrastructure -

Needs a Decision on Service Delivery Methodologies

•

Two Primary Options

•

Utility Self Provided Networks–

Capital Intensive, Impact of Energy Regulatory Environment–

Utility Retains control of service–

Designed to be Resilient and Reliable–

Large choice of technical solutions

•

Managed Service or Outsourced Solutions–

Revenue based service–

Technology agnostic–

Market lead pricing

23

Within ICT4SMARTDG Partners -

Strong Focus on ICT in the Managed Service & Outsource Environment

-

Members of ICT4SMARTDG not surprisingly have looked towards the commercial sector for network solutions

-

There is a fundamental belief in utility sector that commercial

services can not deliver on reliability, resilience to power outrages, latency requirements. In addition utilities lose control of service provision and service support functions.

27 October 2010

Utility Service Delivery Methods for Operational Telecommunications

•

In 2010 Engineering Consultancy Mott MacDonald completed an international utility telecoms benchmarking report –

the follwing slides are a sample of the findings, they illustrate that:–

Most utilities still favour self provided networks for operational services with limited use of Managed services or Outsourcing

–

TDM services are still prevalent for tele-protection and for SCADA solutions

–

The transition to IP solutions will be slow, legacy protocols present problems and for tele-protection, the final solution may be direct optical fibre

–

Industry not convinced such mission critical services can be left to public network operators.

27 October 2010

Op-Tel Network Ownership Ownership of Operational Telecommunications Network

Ownership Profile

The sample group indicates a high level of network ownership. It

is interesting to note that those utilities which are involved in transmission as part of their portfolio of services (Utilities E, F, H, I) in general have a marginally higher network ownership profile than distribution only businesses (Utilities A, B and G). This is generally due to two key reasons:

1.

Easier access to commoditised services from the PTO; the MV and LV plant is more likely to be located closer to telecoms services than HV plant which is often routed away from population centres

2.

The type of communications services required by the DSO are usually less onerous in performance standards (less stringent latency requirements) than those required for tele-protection by the TSO and hence can be provided more cost effectively from the local PTO than by building dedicated in-house network (often for low bandwidth applications)

%age of In-House Owned Network

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Util

ity A

Util

ity B

Util

ity E

Util

ity F

Util

ity G

Util

ity H

Util

ity I

Util

ity K

DSO onlyPortfolio includes TSO (e.g. Vert Int.)

27 October 2010

Op-Tel Sourcing

Sourcing of Operational Telecommunications Services

Sourcing Profile

As detailed in the previous slide, the pure DSOs are the most likely utilities to source services from 3rd

party service providers (Utilities A, B, and G). These services are selected as either leased line circuits, used to extend network reach where it is uneconomical for the utility to build out dedicated network, with services overlaid and managed by the utility itself, or a managed service where the service provide delivers some form of service over the circuit, or provides an enhanced service wrap.

Op-Tel Service Sourcing

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Util

ity A

Util

ity B

Util

ity E

Util

ity F

Util

ity G

Util

ity H

Util

ity I

Util

ity K

In-HouseLeased LinesManaged ServiceOutsourced Service

Outsourcing

Utilities I and K (both TSOs) outsource all of their Op-Tel services. However, it should be noted that this is not the same outsource arrangement as occurs within the Enterprise market. In both cases, the telecoms network and assets are owned by the Utility. Secondly, the outsourced service providers are either subsidiary

companies of the parent Utility (a U-Telco), or have

evolved from the parent utility into a fully formed Public Telecoms Operator. Again, in both cases, utility telecoms engineering staff have been transferred from the parent utility into the U-Telco organisation, so the utility remains confident that the appropriate skills exist within the outsource service provider to service the Utilities specialist requirements.

27 October 2010

Op-Tel Services

Technology Platform –

Transmission Protocol

Tele-Protection –

Transmission Protocol

For most of the utilities sampled, TDM services (PDH/SDH) are still the preferred transportation method for Tele-Protection services. However, IP MPLS is being adopted for the more modern networks (in emerging regions) which are not faced with having to support legacy protocols or adopt complex protection schemes with very demanding and deterministic

communications latency characteristics. Utility F is conducting

IP trails at present with an view to migrate towards more IP services over the next 5 years. Where utilities are having to upgrade multiplexer hardware without time to conduct IP performance trials, they are adopting Multi-Service Access Node (MSAN) technology which supports both TDM and IP based services. This provides a manageable migration path and also supports convergence of Op-Tel and Corporate Communications Services across the same network infrastructure. This is the case with Utility G and

Utility I.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Util

ity B

Util

ity E

Util

ity F

Util

ity G

Util

ity H

Util

ity I

Util

ity K

TDMIP MPLS

27 October 2010

Op-Tel Services

SCADA

SCADA –

Transmission Protocol

For SCADA, there has been a greater acceptance and adoption of IP based services, and whilst currently TDM services account for 84% of the underlying technology within the sample group, this will reduce to 60% over the next 3-5 years as utilities migrate their SCADA services to an IP platform. By 2015 it is anticipated that 37% of SCADA services within the sample group will be delivered over IP.

Within this period, other Utilities will have commenced trials on IP based SCADA services and decisions on implementation taken.

SCADA - Technology Type

0

20

40

60

80

100

Util

ity A

Util

ity B

Util

ity E

Util

ity F

Util

ity G

Util

ity H

Util

ity I

Util

ity K

PLCTDMIP MPLS

SCADA - Percentage Migration to IP

13%

60%

3%

24%IP MPLS

TDM

PLC

Migrating to IP

27 October 2010

Within ICT4SMARTDG Partners -

Strong Focus on ICT in the Managed Service & Outsource Environment

•

Members of ICT4SMARTDG not surprisingly have looked towards the commercial sector for network solutions

•

Following two slides reflect case for commercial sector solutions–

Commercial Broadband services have relatively high penetration which will continue to reach greater proportion of population

–

Using existing commercial solutions will improve the SG/SM business case

–

Use 3G( GPRS) , XDSL. Cable , as they are the most available communication technology for the majority of Customer premises

•

There is a fundamental belief in utility sector that commercial services can not deliver on reliability, resilience to power outages, latency requirements. In addition utilities lose control of service provision and service support functions.

30

27 October 2010

Communication Access Solutions available

31

Rank

Fixed broadband subscriptions, total, June 2010

31 Iceland 106.258

30 Luxembourg 169.757

29 Slovak Republic 651.268

28 Ireland 907.859

27 New Zealand 1.048.518

26 Finland 1.407.500

25 Czech Republic 1.446.900

24 Norway 1.653.837

23 Chile 1.729.575

22 Hungary 1.870.149

21 Austria 1.921.445

20 Portugal 2.013.528

19 Denmark 2.062.000

18 Greece 2.107.000

17 Switzerland 2.894.830

16 Sweden 2.966.384

15 Belgium 3.237.052

14 Poland 4.982.882

13 Australia 5.167.000

12 Netherlands 6.245.000

11 Turkey 6.780.479

10 Canada 10.138.741

9 Spain 10.261.933

8 Mexico 10.843.812

7 Italy 12.849.074

6 Korea 16.789.170

5 United Kingdom 18.827.700

4 France 20.257.000

3 Germany 25.599.360

2 Japan 33.537.796

1 United States 83.344.927

Source: OECD

Note: See the OECD broadband portal for information on data sources and notes

27 October 2010

Communication Access Solutions available

32

27 October 2010

ICT Solutions For SMARTDG

•

Research confirms virtually all applications providers, system integrators and solution vendors have a view of smartgrid.

•

Very few will provide details of what can actually be delivered–

This should not be a surprise, the energy sector does not know what is required and many will say nothing is needed for five years

•

The concern is that customers will make choices on EVs, heat pumps and domestic renewable energy and the energy sector must react to ensure the consequences of those choices are not catastrophic for the network and energy supplies

–

Work that is in progress on trials of smart infrastructure are based on traditional energy network applications and are focused in currently available technologies such as GPRS/3G, PLC and proprietary wireless solutions

–

Universities and academic institutions are also working on the complex problems of taking existing energy automation solutions and developing them to provide the functionality and flexibility required for the smart infrastructure

33

27 October 2010

ICT Solutions For SMARTDG

•

All players are trying to find their own space in the marketplace:–

Major ICT players are looking to deliver all SG ICT needs including support for the smart substation environment

–

Traditional distribution management vendors, trying to move to compete with those who in the past have concentrated on the corporate ICT market

–

Many mobile operators believe the Machine to Machine solutions can deliver on smartmetering and smart infrastructure. This market is growing rapidly, strong competition with Millions of connections

and presumably this will drive lower prices

–

It is not clear whether the proposed solutions meet any recognised standards, many may be considered proprietary causing vendor/supplier “lock-in”

34

27 October 2010

A Few Examples:

SW and Middle ware solutions (Nokia)

•

Fully managed ICT Communication Services by One-NDS Nokia Solution and NSN OPEN EMS

–

Open EMS Suite is a software platform pr

oduct for the Operations Support Systems (OSS)

market containing generic services, built-in applications and develop tools-

that makes it possible for application devel

opers to effectively create various kinds of network and element management product

s and solutions.

–

One-NDS is an open, customer-centric directory containing all subscriber and service data in one logical entity for existing and future domains and applications

–

Used with ServusNet, delivered operational manage

ment systems to a wind farm in Ireland

35

27 October 2010

A Few Examples:

DIFFERENT LAYER SOLUTION

•

PIAM (Ambient Intelligence Platform) Solution

36

–

This solution has a big number of applications. One of them is to monitor and control energy devices and could be an option for DER in a DG environment at Domestic Level.

–

The PIAM Ambient Intelligence Platform project proposes the creation of a new technological space with the capability to manage and access an increasing number of sensor and actuator

27 October 2010

A Few Examples: DIFFERENT LAYER SOLUTION

•

General M2M solution for monitor and control of the Electric Grid

–

In this application, M2M technologies are broadly extended and used specially for power metering.

–

They have some advantages in reducing the operational costs It is a very Telco oriented solution probably it is not optimal to control functions in smart grid.. It has been designed for monitoring purposes, even though the possibility of including actuators and control is contemplated. The control of actuators must cope with the very low latency requirements of some smart DG applications, such functionality is not contemplated in M2M.

37

27 October 2010

A Few Examples: DIFFERENT LAYER SOLUTION

•

SAMARES OSIRIDE is a smart operations centre intended to provide integrated management of many installations producing energy from renewable sources through the use of Mediation Devices (MD, e.g.: OSIRIDE QS, other dataLOG).

–

The center receives and combines information from one or more systems for the production of energy from renewable sources in order to control and show to the public the performances of a lot of distributed energy systems.

–

The system interfaces with data loggers and Mediation Devices of individual plants. It has a modular software architecture that handles a large number of communication protocols, both standard and proprietary including: NMR MODBUS,

–

DLSm, COSEM, TVP-IT, Ethernet, etc.

38

27 October 2010

A Few Examples:

Active Network Management control Solutions

•

Aura and ABB Statcom•

AuRA-NMS, an autonomous regional active network management system currently being developed in the UK through a partnership between several UK universities, two distribution network operators (DNO) and ABB.

–

The scope of control to be undertaken by AuRA-NMS includes: automatic restoration, voltage control, power flow management and implementation of network performance optimisation strategies.

•

The continuous increase of installed wind power seen during recent years has forced the transmission system operators (TSO) to tighten their grid connection rules –

also known as grid codes –

in order to limit the effects of wind power parks on network quality and stability.

39

27 October 2010

THE REFERENCE MODEL PROPOSED IN ICT4SMARTDG

•

No clear Architecture Reference model to follow -

many vendors are proposing similar, very complex models–

IEEE Communications reference model (P2030)–

EPRI Communications Architecture –

Connected Service Framework from Microsoft•

A lot of companies creating applications •

Most of them currently focus on smart metering and home networks

•

Use a range of communications, WAN, LAN, etc( PLC, XDSL, Ethernet, GPRS etc)

40

27 October 2010

THE REFERENCE MODEL PROPOSED IN ICT4SMARTDG?

•

Strong play being made by SW Industry ( SAP, IBM, ORACLE, Microsoft, etc) to use SOA models.

•

SOA models good for Web designed services, could support metering solutions, billing, energy consumption and analysis

•

Apparently not recommended for Real Time critical applications.

•

Most of these SW solutions are a mix of existing port folio solutions ( Lotus, WebSphere, Tivoli etc)

41

27 October 2010

THE REFERENCE MODEL PROPOSED IN ICT4SMARTDG?

•

Major Telecom operators favour NGN services to deliver all requirements for Smartgrid

•

Traditional Op Tel systems such as SCADA could be integrated in NGN by means of SIP/IP in the reference model

•

End to end solutions supported by integration in the Fixed Mobile Convergence Model

•

Telcos has experience in managing a lot information from millions of devices, and users ( for billing, charging, etc).

•

Use IPv6 without forgiving IPv4•

Network open to Internet, but telcos have extensive experience on Cyber security

27 October 2010

General approach to Reference Architecture

in ICT4smartDG?

43

•

There is an opinion that suggests the best reference model is a combination of the SOA orientated solution favoured by SW providers and the NGN solution favoured by Telco operators

Such discussions are beyond the

remit and capability of this group

27 October 2010

Regulatory Requirements -

Energy Sector

•

Many groups are examining the regulatory issues in the energy sector, we have included a summary from one such group, the SUSTELNET PROJECT

–

Non-discriminatory network access is a key precondition to a level playing field between centralized and distributed generation

–

Open access to wholesale electricity markets for distributed generation is already granted by the Electricity, RES and CHP Directives

–

The scope of market access should be broadened to include ancillary services–

The benefits and cost of distributed generation to the electricity system are directly related to the geographical point of connection

–

To facilitate the integration of DG in electricity networks DSOs

have to endorse ‘active network management’

–

This active network management entails investment in innovations

to improve network management, in particular in the field of ICT

–

The current regulatory frameworks often do not allow for DSOs to

recover the cost of investments in innovation.

44

27 October 2010

Regulatory Requirements –

Telecoms Sector

•

It is recognised Wireless solutions will play a major role in the ICT support for smart metering and smart infrastructure.

•

Utility companies in Europe use a range of wireless spectrum for

diiferent support services in their infrastrtructure networks

•

It is recognised by the utility sector that additional spectrum is required to deliver ICT services for Smartgrid–

There are sound arguements for harmonised spectrum across Europe

for utilities•

Vendor companies can better plan their products•

More vendors will enter the market, creating competition and price pressure•

A competitive market will stimulate innovation through market pressure•

A larger, unified market will encourage service companies into the smartgrid arena•

EUTC supported by the vendor community is in discussion with DGINFSO Spectrum Policy Unit on the opportunity for harmonised spectrum

45

27 October 2010

WP2 -

Conclusions

•

Current ICT utility service delivery methods favour self provided networks. This is not likely to change dramatically in the next 3-5 years

•

A range of telecom technologies are being used in smart infrastructure trials

•

The ICT community believe public networks should be used to support the new smart energy networks. Existing public service solutions and

applications can provide an improved business case.

•

Telco companies and Software companies believe NGN and SOA solutions respectively are capable of meeting all the future SG requirements although each has benefits and disadvantages

•

Utilities will need to be convinced, this is not a short term activity, discussions between Telco IMS, SOA Manufacturers and Power Utilities should be considered at the earliest opportunity

•

Stadardization is a major issue being discussed in may different

fora, it is important from a European perspective progress is made on this issue

46

ICT Solutions For SMARTDG

-

Research confirms virtually all applications providers, system integrators and solution vendors have a view of smartgrid-

Very few will provide details of what can actually be delivered-

All players are trying to find their own space in the marketplace

The Reference Model Proposed in ICT4SMARTDG

-

No clear Architecture Reference model to follow many vendors are proposing similar, very complex models-

A lot of companies creating applications ( See GTM report)-

Most of them currently focus on smart metering and home networks-

Use of raw communications, WAN, LAN, etc( PLC, XDSL, Ethernet, GPRS etc)

-

Strong play being made by SW Industry ( SAP, IBM, ORACLE, Microsoft, etc) to use SOA models-

SOA models good for Web designed services, could support metering solutions, billing, energy consumption and analysis -

Apparently not recommended for Real Time critical applications-

Most of these SW solutions are a mix of existing port folio solutions ( Lotus, WebSphere, Tivoli etc)

The Reference Model Proposed in ICT4SMARTDG

-

Major Telecom operators favour NGN services to deliver all requirements for Smartgrid-

Traditional Op Tel systems such as SCADA could be integrated in

NGN by means of SIP/IP in the reference model-

End to end solutions supported by integration in the Fixed Mobile Convergence Model-

Telcos has experience in managing a lot information from millions of devices, and users ( for billing, charging, etc). -

Use IPv6 without forgiving IPv4-

Network open to Internet, but telcos have extensive experience on Cyber security

Regulatory Requirements -

Energy Sector-

Non-discriminatory network access is a key precondition to a level playing field between centralized and distributed generation

-

Open access to wholesale electricity markets for distributed generation is already granted by the Electricity, RES and CHP Directives

-

The scope of market access should be broadened to include ancillary services

-

The benefits and cost of distributed generation to the electricity system are directly related to the geographical point of connection

-

To facilitate the integration of DG in electricity networks DSOs have to endorse ‘active network management’

-

This active network management entails investment in innovations to improve network management, in particular in the field of ICT

-

The current regulatory frameworks often do not allow for DSOs to recover the cost of investments in innovation

Regulatory Requirements -

Telecoms Sector

-

It is recognised Wireless solutions will play a major role in the ICT support for smart metering and smart infrastructure-

Utility companies in Europe use a range of wireless spectrum for different support services in their infrastrtructure networks-

It is recognised by the utility sector that additional spectrum

is required to deliver ICT services for Smartgrid-

EUTC supported by the vendor community is in discussion with DGINFSO Spectrum Policy Unit on the opportunity for harmonised spectrum

Conclusions

-

Current ICT utility service delivery methods favour self provided networks. This is not likely to change dramatically in the next 3-5 years-

A range of telecom technologies are being used in smart infrastructure trials-

The ICT community believe public networks should be used to support the new smart energy networks. Existing public service solutions and applications can provide an improved business case-

Telco companies and Software companies believe NGN and SOA solutions respectively are capable of meeting all the future SG requirements although each has benefits and disadvantages-

Utilities will need to be convinced, this is not a short term activity, discussions between Telco IMS, SOA Manufacturers and Power Utilities should be considered at the earliest opportunity-

Stadardization is a major issue being discussed in may different fora, it is important from a European perspective progress is made on this issue

Work Package 3 (WP3)

Identification of Non-Technical Barriers for Large Scale Deployment

Work Package Leader: Samares

WP3 Objectives

Task of this WP was to get the understanding of potential (non technical) blocking factors that could hamper large scale deployment of Smart Distribution Generation, given that suitable technology exist and to develop proposals about how to overcome those blocking factors.

T3.1: Identification and analysis of the potential adopters (end

users)

Public Sector: can act as an example for massive adoptionAgriculture: high potential for biomass, cogeneration and PV

Adopters are aware of RES benefit but the adoption is complex and “Green World”

is not the Cheaper WorldSmart Micro Grid may reduce costs and enable rural areas to local produce Energy for local use and consequently evolve in the value chain

Residential(PROSUMERS)

Hospitals

Finance Stadiums

Shopping Mall

Agriculture

Local Communities

Multifunctional buildings

Airports

T3.2: Identification and analysis of the potential suppliers/enablers (manufacturers)

In Current Scenario enablers are: Energy Companies, Electronic and electric equipment Suppliers, Metering suppliers, Storage Suppliers, ICT and Telecom Companies, DNO, TNO, System Integrators, Finance Institutions and ESCO

Two different business models-

One shot: single Energy improvement (i.e. LED lights, PV roof)-

Energy management: temporary energy outsource of Energy management to Utilities or to ESCOs with special Energy performance contracts

New figures may appear:-

ESCO: Energy Service Companies producing managing and reselling

Energy

-

Aggregators: manager of multiple DER to bring more added value to the Market

T 3.3 Major barriers and associated blocking factors for scenarios indentified in WP1

Barrier Factor Enterprises Micro-Grids Isolated Houses

Economical

Return of Investment � �� ���New business models �� �Shortage of proven business models �� ���

Employment �� ���Risk Insurance cost �� �� ��Uncertain risk of developing something new �� �� ���

Uncertain Feed in Tariffs ��� �� ���Training of the people �� �� ��

Cultural

Perception of RES ��� ��People Motivation � � ���Visual impact on properties � �� ���Utilities responsibility � �� ��Interconnection agreements ��� ��Grid operation procedures �� �� ��Why new? � � ��

Legal

Contractual issues � �� ���Regulatory framework �� �� ��Bureaucracy �� �� ��Barriers for new Player in the grid market �� �

Lack of standardization ��� ���

EnvironmentVisual impact � ��� ���Earth impact � �� �Unpredictability of the Sun and Wind �� ��� �

� = low barrier�� = medium barrier��� =

high

barrier

� = low barrier�� = medium barrier��� = high barrier

T 3.3 Major barriers and associated blocking factors for scenarios indentified in WP1SCENARIO 1: NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS / ENTERPRISES

Main barriers in this scenario, are principally the uncertain of feed in tariff.In fact the go decision is taken by a single investor who is the owner of the

building infrastructure and can be incentivized by special laws like asbestos removal.

SCENARIO 2: MICRO-GRIDSMain barriers are cultural and environmental (visual impact and the

unpredictability of the sun and wind) RES perception is a key barrier that has to be removed with specific environmental campaign or for earth sustainability and energy saving.

As a Microgrid scenario it is clear the importance of interconnection agreement and the problem of lack of standardization.

SCENARIO 3: ISOLATED HOUSESThis is the most critical scenario, where barriers are more higher in all areas.

Economical barriers are all related to the fact that people consider only the energy saving investment instead of the earth sustainability.

T 3.4 Analisys of Questionnaire Major Output

From Questionnaire The major concept of Distributed Generation (DG) is Solar

- Solar 92%- Micro wind 62%- CHP (combined heat and power) 7%- Biomass 12%- Cell fuel 3%- Thermal 1% - Micro hydro 1%

From Market Analysis -

EU has the largest installed base for small PV plants and is acting as a driver for SMART GRID Adoption

T 3.4 Analisys of Questionnaire Major OutputFrom Questionnaire the biggest non technical barrier for mass deployment of DG technologies

- Entry Price too high 10%- Uncertainty of economical payback period 15% - Complexity 30%- Costs implied (purchase, maintenance) 22%- Unclear perception of the potential benefits 12%- Lack of public support: financial help 1%- Lack of space within the building 1%- Don’t know 9%

From Questionnaire Adopters will install Smart distributed equipment solutions at home only if I get some economic gain:

- Short-medium term 62%- Long term 31%- Anyway 7%

T 3.4 Generate new proposal: Action Plan with ten major actions to reduce Barriers

To reduce Business Practice Barriers:1- Adopt standard and light commercial practices for interconnection2- Establish standard business terms for interconnection agreements3 Develop tools for Utilities to assess the value and impact of

distributed power at any point on the grid

T 3.4 Generate new proposal: Action Plan with ten major actions to reduce Barriers

To reduce Regulatory Barriers:4- Develop new regulatory principles compatible with distributed power

choices in both competitive and utility Market.5- Adopt stable regulatory tariffs and utility incentives to fit the new

distributed power model6- Establish expedited dispute resolution processes for distributed

generation project proposals7- Define the conditions necessary for a right to interconnect

T 3.4 Generate new proposal: Action Plan with ten major actions to reduce Barriers

To reduce Cultural Barriers:8- Create a “green benchmark” of energy efficiency to increase the

awareness of people en push for Smart Grid adoption.9- Promote Micro Grid as the solution to permit the adoption of

different technology in different networks.10- Promote specific information campaigns to push people to

consider energy saving investment linked with earth sustainability

Conclusions

Develop Micro Grids in isolated Countries can support Energetic Evolution of the Country itself, drastically reducing the distribution grid and satisfacting the own on site energy consumption.

Agriculture could feel the effects of PV-Wind plant diffusion

The land owner considers the use of the land for energy production as an alternative of agriculture use. In some countries as Italy only 5-10% of the overall agricultural soil could be used for PV installations; this will obviously represent a problem in solar and wind farms.

Work Package 4 (WP4)Definition of Steps Forward for the Promotion of Large Scale

ImplementationWork Package Leader

: Alcatel-Lucent, Bell Labs

Key Message -

1

ICT for distributed generation must be an integral part of ICT for the overall smart grid

-

Support distributed generation as well as other smart grid applications

-

ICT spans across all domains including the utility critical infrastructure and delay sensitive applications.

-

Support for legacy applications and protocols

Key Message -

2

With distributed generation sources expected to be spread widely

over the utility territory –

often inaccessible to wire-line networks, utility access to wireless networks is necessary

-

Exclusivity of access (or sharing with other mission critical services)-

SLA guarantees from Carriers-

Develop a wireless access blueprint -

New technologies including LTE and WiMAX

Key Message -

3

While current utility OpTel* service delivery methods favor self-

provided communication networks, incorporating carrier (service provider) networks may be considered for some of the applications over a period of time

-

Mix of self-provided and carrier networks-

Smart grid pilots are using carrier networks -

Support for the utility requirements on network access, performance, reliability, and security.

Key Message 4:

“

In addition to supporting integration of distributed generation in the utility grid, ICT will need to support many other applications that will be expanded or developed for energy and grid management.”

These applications include:

-

The “virtual power plant”-

Retail Energy Markets-

Role of aggregator-

Demand Response

Key Message 5:

“Communication network performance (including QoS), reliability, and security must be managed so as not to adversely affect electric grid operations when integrating distributed generation into the utility grid”

-

Eg, minimize communication network delays’

impact on power grid transients

Key Message 6:

“Utilities and suppliers of ICT (communication service providers and software companies) need a detailed dialog about the viability and actual availability of new ICT technologies for use by the smart grid”

-

NGN and SOA

-

IP as the networking protocol

-

Need for new data management architecture

-

Standardization

-

Persuade standards bodies like ETSI and CENELEC to include smart grid ICT requirements in their standardization efforts.

Near-term ICT Recommendations

Scenario 1: DG is a component of the smart grid

•

Solution 1: Integrated IP network supporting all smart grid applications including distributed generation

Scenario 2: ICT access to the large scale DG deployment

•

Solution 2: Effective, efficient, and practical wireless access networking technologies for the smart grid

Scenario 3: DG-specific ICT requirements

•

Solution 3: ICT for DG including at microgrids

and homes in support of DG applications

Scenario 4: Explosive growth in data sources

•

Solution 4: Secure network-based data management