Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters

Public
Settlement of
Dynamically
Switched Meters
PSRG31/01
30 April 2014
Jon Spence
Health & Safety
2
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Objective
■ To review draft consultation on Dynamically Switched Meters
■ Ensure all drivers for change have been captured
■ Ensure all options for change have been identified
■ Ensure consultation questions are fit for purpose
3
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
scope
• Mechanism for switching load with smart Meters
SEC /SMETS
DCUSA
• Operating framework between Suppliers and
LDSOs (e.g. DCP204 ‘Smart Metering Related
Amendments to Schedule 8 Name is required’).
• Notification of switch times to SVAA
BSC
4
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Drivers for Change
Radio Teleswitch Service
■ clock-switched or teleswitched
■ Regimes can be –
– Static (clock or RTS)
– Semi-static (clock or RTS)
– Dynamic (RTS only)
■ RTS commands can be – Programmed (typically day-ahead)
– Immediate (e.g. DSR load-shedding,
little used)
6
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Welcome to Droitwich
Dynamic RTS categories
■ Weather (or wholesale price) based –
e.g. Heatwise
Westerglen
■ Load Management (e.g. managing
constraints in the highlands and
islands of Scotland)
■ Load shedding / boosting (rarely used,
a few minutes at a time, not profiled
well)
Burghead
7
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Load control features of SMETS meters
■ Auxiliary Load Control Switch (ALCS) or HAN-connected ALCS (HCALCS)
■ ALCS [n] Calendar
– where n = 1 to 5, supporting up to 5 types of switched load e.g. water heating,
heat pump, electric vehicle charging)
– Up to 200 time and date based switching rules
■ Ad-Hoc Requests
■ Boost Buttons – controlled by consumer via user interface
■ ALCS [n] Calendar only determines load switching times
■ Register switching times are defined in the Tariff Switching Table
8
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Load control via DCC
■ Dynamic switching can be effected by changing the calendar or issuing ad-hoc
requests
■ Supplier needs to synchronise ALCS [n] Calendar and Tariff Switching Table
■ DCC has no concept of SSCs or grouping Metering Systems
■ Suppliers will send multiple ‘unicast’ messages to smart meters
■ Only Suppliers can update the ALCS [n] Calendar and issue ad-hoc commands to the
ALCS/HCALCS
■ LDSOs won’t have control of switching in initial design
9
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Volumetrics
NHH MPANS = 29,867,136
Switched Load = 5,209,773
Radio Teleswitch = 1,868,249
Dynamic RTS = 616,163
10
East Midlands
South Scotland
371,066
83,602
London
North Scotland
82,732
78,719
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Implications of change for Settlement
■ NHH Settlement needs a mechanism for accurately allocating profiled energy to the
correct Settlement Periods
■ Switch times are monitored centrally by the Teleswitch Agent and notified to the
SVAA by the Teleswitch Agent on a daily basis
■ For Smart Meters, switch times will need to be notified to the SVAA by Suppliers
(directly or indirectly) if dynamically switched meters continue to be settled in NHH
arrangements.
11
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Implications for Supplier / Customers
■ Existing RTS arrangements don’t readily support tariff innovation (no new RTS
regimes created since 2004)
■ Existing RTS arrangements don’t readily support Supplier-led DSR. Mechanism for
allocating an SSC to an Additional BMU has never been used
■ Dynamic tariffs present an imbalance risk to Suppliers (other than Group Code
Sponsor) as switch times not notified in advance
■ Smart arrangements could bring improvements in these areas
■ Many Suppliers have few customers on dynamically switched SSCs, offer ‘mirror
tariffs’ and might struggle with the introduction of an obligation to notify switch
times
■ Suppliers currently have dynamic load switching carried out for them, so the
switching mechanism is ‘all-new’ functionality (to support low customer numbers in
many cases)
12
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Implications for LDSOs
■ Some LDSOs can avoid network reinforcement costs by dynamic switching
■ In Scotland the Group Code Sponsors supply 90% plus of dynamically switched
customers
■ This may be a viable load for network management, even if other Suppliers decide
to move customers to (semi-)static regimes or set up their own SSCs
■ Volume of switchable load may fall, if smart meters lead to new Supplier (perhaps
national) products and easier switching
■ Co-ordinating dynamic responses across other Suppliers likely to be challenging –
– Day-ahead co-ordination possible (immediate commands not)
– Some dynamic switching is automated (rule-based)
■ Although LDSOs can’t control load via smart meters under the initial design, the
Smart Grid Forum (SGF) Workstream Six is not ruling this out as a future option
13
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Consultation Question 1
■ Do you agree with the documented opportunities and risks
of moving from the RTS arrangements to the smart
arrangements?
14
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Future Changes
Demand
Side
Response
Dynamic
Time of Use
(e.g. Critical
Peak
Pricing)
Other load
types (e.g.
EV
charging)
Universal
HH
Settlement
Smart
appliances
LDSO access
to smart
load control
functions
15
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Remote load
control by
internet /
mobile
telephony
Consultation Question 2
■ Please provide any views on the potential future changes to
remote load management and dynamic Time of Use. To
what extent and how should the solution for notifying
switching times for current RTS Metering Systems on
transition to smart metering, take into account future
changes? Are there any additional changes that need to be
taken into account in the shorter term?
16
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Options for Change
Static / semi-static regimes
CURRENT
SMART
CLOCK-SWITCHED
FIXED
ALCS [n] CALENDAR
RTS
static
static
static
semi-static
dynamic
semi-static
VARIABLE ALC [n]
CALENDAR and/or ADHOC COMMANDS
dynamic
18
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Static /semi-static regimes
■ No BSC changes required
■ On smart installation, ALCS [n] Calendar and Tariff Switching Table can be aligned
to:
– existing RTS SSC (terminologically inexact and lose differential between RTS and
smart)
– an existing clock-switched SSC
– a new clock-switched SSC (via MDD change)
■ Constrains flexibility
■ Benefits of dynamic switching are lost
19
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Consultation Question 3
■ Do you believe that any changes are needed to the BSC or
BSCPs to accommodate static/semi-static switching using
DCC-serviced smart Meters?
20
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Randomisation
■ Some LDSOs have noted a greater concern with (semi-)static switching than
dynamic
■ Clock-drift, though unintentional, avoids load peaks from static clock-switched
meters
■ Smart meters will keep good time and can be synched to the DCC clock
■ Smart meters have a ‘Randomised Offset’ – a random number of seconds up to a
‘Randomised Offset Limit’
■ Randomised Offset Limit is configurable up to 1799 seconds (up to but excluding 30
minutes)
■ Need to strike a balance, in setting Randomised Offset Limit, between meeting
network management needs and accurate Settlement
21
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Consultation Questions 4 and 5
■ Does the randomisation functionality of SMETS Meters
alleviate the risk that accurate time-keeping presents to
network management (e.g. load spikes)? Please describe
any other measures that you believe may be required and
the Settlement implications of such measures.
■ Should the ‘Randomised Offset Limit’ be constrained by
industry governance to a value lower than the maximum of
1799 seconds (<30 minutes)? If so, should this be a BSC
constraint? What would be an appropriate threshold for the
BSC to apply?
22
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
High level options for dynamic switching (1 and 2)
■ OPTION 1 - DO NOTHING
– a mix of:
– static/semi-static
– Elective Half Hourly
– SSCs reflect ‘operating windows’ (accept errors)
■ OPTION 2 - MANDATE HALF-HOURLY
– Avoids NHH profiling issues
– No industry processes for DCC-service Half hourly
– Ofgem’s Settlement Reform workstream looking at ‘universal’ (or wider) HH
– Timing issues in terms of roll-out of first ALCS/HCALCS
23
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Option 3 – co-ordinated dynamic switching
Group Code
Sponsor/RTS
Access
Provider
Internet
portal (or
other method)
DCC
ENA
Supplier
smart meter
BBC
SVAA
RTS meter
24
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Option 3 – co-ordinated dynamic switching
■ No change to BSC / SVAA system
■ Will only work while the RTS infrastructure / Teleswitch Agent remain in place . . .
■ . . . but buys time to introduce ‘universal’ Half Hourly
■ Doesn’t work for immediate commands (although used rarely)
■ Doesn’t readily support new dynamic SSCs
■ some dynamic switching may be automatically triggered – i.e. driven by bespoke
calculation tools feeding into the RTS scheduling
■ RTS SSCs will include non-RTS smart meters
■ No differentiation between RTS and smart meters
25
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Option 4 – amend the process for notifying switch times
Group Code
Sponsor/RTS
Access
Provider
DCC
ENA
Supplier
smart meter
BBC
SVAA
RTS meter
26
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Option 4 –Amend the process for notifying switch times
■ Dynamic SSCs become Supplier specific
■ SVAA receives existing D0277 flow and new flow from each Supplier each day during
roll-out
■ When no RTS meters are left, only the new Supplier flows will be received
■ Suppliers notify times from Tariff Switching Table (registers) rather than ALCS [n]
Calendar (load)
■
SVAA will need to carry out completeness checks (based on MDD) and chase
missing Supplier notifications
■ SVAA will need to apply defaulting rules at Supplier-SSC level
■ Would require a Modification Proposal
■ Supplier specific SSCs could result in high numbers of SSC changes (in the shorter
term)
27
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Standard Settlement Configurations
Description
count
MDD
Allowed by format
In use
10,000
738
Available
9,262
RTS SSCs
All RTS SSCs
Dynamically Switched
98
With associated MPANs
77
Supplier – SSC combinations
Supplier – SSC combinations with greater than 100 MPANs
28
391
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
1,323
249
Consultation Questions 6 and 7
■ Please provide comments on the relative merits/drawbacks
of the four short-to-medium term options described in
Options for Change Section 3. What is your preferred option
and why?
■ Are there any other options that we should consider?
29
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Option 4 variants
■ Responsibility for notifying switch times:
– Suppliers
– Group Code Sponsors
– Central agent
■ Daily Notification v Notification on Change:
– Daily notification closer to existing RTS arrangement, but contains redundancy
– Notifying calendar changes or ad-hoc commands, less data, but increased
complexity for SVAA
■ Collating Switch Times:
– Suppliers notify ‘intended’ switch times
– Monitoring and interpretation of DCC requests
30
Insert: Document title
Consultation Questions 8 and 9
■ Who should be responsible for notifying switch times and
why?
■ How should switch times be notified? Is the Data Transfer
Service appropriate for multiple notifications in short
timescales? If not, what other communication methods
should be considered?
31
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Consultation Question 10
■ Should the Supplier (or notification agent) provide daily
switch times or only notify switch times by exception?
32
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Consultation Question 11
■ Do you agree that notifying intended switch times by
Suppliers would be more practical and cost-effective than
interpreting individual commands to/responses from smart
Meters? Please describe any alternative methods of collating
switch times.
33
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters
Next Steps
Next Steps
■ ELEXON to apply comments from today’s meeting
■ ELEXON to issue to PSRG for review (how long?)
■ ELEXON to update with review comments
■ 4 week [?] consultation
■ Reconvene PSRG to review responses
■ Report to the SVG
35
Settlement of Dynamically Switched Meters