Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/721278
NETWORK / 37 / SEPTEMBER 2016 I n my previous articles in this magazine the keyissues that surround whole energy systems analysis and operation in the 21st century have been discussed. We've considered how the challenges of com- municating between di• erent disciplines, tech- nology providers and societal groups is compounded by a lack of understanding about the art of the possible for system operation. Meanwhile, on the opposite end of the scale, we've recongised the comfort of familiarity and the temptation to remain wedded to the way in which things have been done before. However, to paraphrase Einstein: if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get the same result. So, in this con- cluding article on smart energy dynamics, consideration is given to the hard choices weneed to take in the next ‚ ve to ten years to rede‚ ne our energy system for generations to come. Let's consider the environment. We've got changes and challenges to generation types. Some would like government to de‚ ne a future mix of generation in the name of increased certainty, others argue that the market will deliver its own mix based on lowest cost options. Neither approach has so far won out. In a post- EU referendum world – with a review of the Hinkley Point C deal, massive deployment of solar in the West Country and the capacity market auctions delivering high levels of fossil fuel solutions – the way ahead is still very unclear. N E W W O R L D N E W A R C H I T E C T U R E This has implications for power network planning. At a transmission level, National Grid has chosen demand control (or demand-side response) solutions as a coping strategy. This is a departure from simply managing large generation, and as more coal-‚ red and nuclear generation comes o• the system and the num- ber of intermittent and undispatchable sources grow, the loss of system inertia means it's a strategy that will be strenuously tested. Distribution is arguably the area of the system that is changing fastest. Here we have seen innovation e• orts, supported with regulated funds, to explore the opportu- nities and challenges that a changing system o• ers for gas and electricity distribution network operators. But the ability of this work to provide certainty about the future of distribution operations is complicated by the rise of new stakeholders. These new players are small in size but not in number and they will have a dramatic impact on the power system going forward. Yet today they remain outside the energy system plan- ning, innovation and delivery system, from where they can bring solutions to market for consumers without engaging with cumbersome, slow-moving legislation and regulation and without the irritation of economic levers that are largely irrelevant to them. So, what are our options in this patchwork environ- ment of change? Do we need a centrally planned and controlled network for secure, a• ordable (whatever that means) and sustainable electricity delivery? Or are we heading for a world dominated by o• -grid communities that rely on the grid only as a national battery? These are the extremes – the actual outcome will likely be a hybrid of these and other new concepts. It'salso likely to be driven by integrated, multi-vector energysolutions. The evolution of the market for smart phones o• ers an analogy for our challenge. Before Steve Jobs, every- one assumed that you needed a camera, an MP3 player, a phone and a PDA. The thought that these could exist in one policy framework – and that those who played by its rules could o• er apps and make money from using all these devices integrated into one platform – was a pipe dream. In much the same way, we expect the only way we can receive the services we might desire is if our current market structure will deliver it. What if there were a new framework? One that allowed market players from all parts of the system – big or small, demand side or supply side (terms that will become redundant) – to o• er the services we desire. It is likely that the power system equivalent of the app explosion would happen. Some would win, some would lose. But the key aspect is that the frame- work would be robust enough to be safe, secure and agile enough to meet market requirements. Guaranteeing this framework's robustness would almost certainly require an architect role – an idea that was the genesis of the Future Power Systems Architec- ture project. We imagined not a central planner, but a group that looked a› er our new framework while letting market participants deliver and government act as a guiding light. DUNCAN BOTTING DIRECTOR GLOBAL SMART TRANSFORMATION "The evolution of the market for smart phones offers an analogy for our challenge." How are other nations handling challenges to power system operation and governance? See pull-out map in this issue.