Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/846256
NETWORK / 9 / JULY/AUGUST 2017 around commercial sensitivity, security and anonymity, "particularly if sharing of data between multiple parties is required… Data accessibility may be particularly challeng- ing in instances where non-regulated par- ties could bene t". Commercial arrangements The existing commercial arrangements have "unintended consequences that sometimes act counter to core policy objec- tives". The capacity market has awarded contracts to diesel generators to meet one objective – security of supply – but in do- ing so has compromised another – de- carbonisation. Contractual arrangements may be di cult to reverse, "resulting in a commercial inertia that acts as a barrier to-reforms". Market participants o‚ en struggle to achieve the market access needed to realise whole-system bene ts, particularly those that are highly regulated. The procure- ment of balancing services is mostly le‚ to National Grid in its system operator role, because licensing arrangements largely prohibit the involvement of DNOs. This could lead to sub-optimal outcomes through "con† icts and loss of synergies". Entirely new commercial models will need to be developed, and o‚ en this will only require regulatory obstacles to be removed. However, some will be "complex to design and implement", especially where they require co-ordination between di‰ er- ent-parties. Technical challenges "Future networks will be associated with increasing complexity, stakeholders and interaction with other vectors," the report-states. "However, there is currently a-lack of a whole-system modelling ap- proach in su cient granularity to support cost-e‰ ective co-ordination of planning and operation." There is a "capability gap" for real-time forecasting between the system operator and other parties such as DNOs. Some will struggle to close the gap because of limited access to historical data. Monitoring, control and communications systems lack the sturdiness and sophistica- tion required for many future functions, particularly at lower voltage levels on distribution networks. Control strategies are not robust enough for future complex power † ows and balancing actions, and there is limited integration of controllable distributed energy into network manage- ment so‚ ware. To ensure interoperability, standardisa- tion is needed at both the network and customer level for control, protection and automation solutions. Overcoming the barriers To overcome these barriers, another report produced for the programme calls for the creation of a ra‚ of "enabling frameworks" to deliver the 35 functions, either individu- ally or in groups. These enabling frameworks would be overseen and co-ordinated by an "ena- blement" organisation, but delivered by comprehensive networks of stakeholders. "Common enabling frameworks" would be set up to deal with broad issues that a‰ ect multiple enabling frameworks, such as legislation or regulation. Formation of an enablement framework would begin with the enablement organi- sation "brie† y assessing the function and undertaking pre-structuring activities". Fol- lowing on from this work, a corresponding stakeholder network would be established. "A comprehensive grouping of all the necessary stakeholders is important, along with the linkages and interactions between these stakeholders," says the document. With the help of the enablement organi- sation, the stakeholder network would then "activate" the enabling framework before specifying its requirements for any com- mon enabling frameworks and setting up links with other enabling frameworks and functions. The third stage of the FPSA programme will now seek to validate this model by developing prototype enabling frameworks for one or more of the 35 functions. N Tom Grimwood, senior reporter, Utility Week Assembly process for enabling framework example G3 – black start capability Source: Final Report - WP4: Enabling Framework Identifi cation Enablement assembly Need a plan based on evolving generation mix System functional limitation Integration points and processes defi ned and co-ordinated by EO Enablement organisation Enabling tools and mechanisms Processes, plans/blueprints Stakeholder network Common EF support Function G3 EF G3 v1 Outputs and activities Enabling framework assembly line Function G3 Needs Barriers 1 1 1 1 SO DNO/DSOs Suppliers Generator manufacturers Customers Communities Smart cities "We look at the industry through perspectives or lenses that refl ect what might put crudely as our context and our personal baggage. But there are many other people who look in a completely different way and when you start to compare those different perspectives you get very different answers." SIMON HARRISON, PROJECT DELIVERY BOARD CHAIR, FPSA