Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/1218318
NETWORK / 27 / MARCH 2020 defining pathways to net zero for specific communities and regions, was emphasised, along with the associated quandaries this could raise for social equity across the UK. A sharp focus on some of the considerations that regional decarbonisation strategies raise for DNOs, was provided by Electricity North West's strate - gic decarbonisation manager, Helen Boyle, who described how the decision of the Greater Manchester combined city authority to adopt a 2038 net zero target is impacting the DNOs stakeholder engagement requirements and investment plans. Keen to support this ambition, ENW has committed to spending £63 million within the current price control on decarbonisation of its own activities. It has also acted in an advisory capacity to the multiple authorities incorporated in the Greater Manchester area to help them understand what their current "carbon balance sheet" looks like and what investment might be required to start changing this. But Boyle also warned of a "regionalisation dilemma" for networks, as similar city and lo - cal energy strategies take shape, pointing out that where some authorities are ambitious, others are further behind. Networks therefore need to be cautious of creating inequality or "post code lotteries" across their licence areas by accelerating low carbon investment in some areas at the expense of others. It's a quandary Boyle said Ofgem is "just starting to get its head around" in terms of the challenges it might raise for consumer protection and the scope that should be made in the next price control (RIIO2) for DNOs to build investment plans based on regional decarbonisa - tion ambitions, rather than the general GB one. Fellow speaker, Christianna Logan, director of customers and stakeholders at SSEN, agreed that tensions between national and regional decarbonisa- tion goals need to be carefully monitored and managed. From a Scottish perspective, she said it is an issue SSE has been acutely aware of, not only because Scot- land's decarbonisation target is set for 2045, but also because various cities and communities across the devolved nation have their own climate change mitiga- tion agendas and priorities. In the context of heightened political dialogue around the need for economic rebalanc- ing across the UK, both Logan and Boyle also highlighted the importance of understanding the economic interests which will o›en lie behind the develop - ment of regional decarbonisa- tion plans. This is key, they stated, because networks must not become barriers to regional economic development by fail - ing to anticipate how low carbon growth will impact demand and capacity on their networks. Such a failing would certainly be a blow to network legitimacy with the communities they serve and counteractive in an environ - ment of already fragile trust in utilities. The challenges and opportu- nities presented by a decentral- ised approach to the UK's low carbon transition also formed a core theme at Future of Heat, where speakers identified the fundamentally "bottom-up" na - ture of the challenge of altering heating solutions for homes and buildings. As we look forward to the remainder of 2020 a clear mes - sage from both conferences is that planning and decision making frameworks for the en- ergy networks industry need to adapt and connect with those of local and city authorities, while always maintaining visibility of whole system dynamics and optimisation. Further coverage of themes and insights from both Future Networks and Future of Heat, in- cluding opinion from key indus- try figures, will be available in the April/May issue of Network magazine, and at networks. online soon. Storms Ciara and Dennis are now recent memories, but they do serve as a reminder for our electricity networks that creating infrastructure resilience is not a do-once activity, especially for vegetation management (VM). When it comes to the work that tries to avoid trees impacting the line, the fundamental questions are simply: where to go, when to go there and what outcome do we want from the site works? Once we know the answers, our nation's skilled arborists can handle the rest. Unfortunately, these are often very complicated questions! The common objective of a network operator is to reduce costs and increase reliability and VM is generally one of the largest operational expenses. To make the where, when and what more effective and maybe even cheaper, we need to take a data- driven approach. To look at how each activity in the cyclical VM workflow creates data, makes decisions and feeds the next stage in the process. In practice, it's about optimising the data pipeline: how does field audit inform next year's trimming program? How is tree cut data being used to understand growth rates? How does the field activity get rolled up into compliance reporting? How are potential danger trees identified and then tracked over time? How can we gauge the success of a programme against network performance metrics? We need to look at the whole cycle of activity around VM, track where the data is and design how it is used. Then it really is possible to know that going here, going then and doing this is the best possible use of a scarce resource. nmgroup.com I N D U S T RY I N S I G H T The move to data-driven vegetation management