energyinterop — archive

[David Holmberg]

Ed, Thanks--this is a very useful organization of signals. I think when we agreed to address DR for the utilities as our first priority we agreed to address category #2. But some additional observations and questions before I'm sure on that point. The difference between the PGE CPP program (where we have 3 tiers of price, like 3 levels, but a category #1 collaborative energy message) versus a "go to shed level 2" category #2 command is the contractual response of category #2. An agreed upon response requires M&V. Neither categories #1 or #3 have M&V issues, only cat#2, because the utility has to verify the response per contract. And the M&V is inherently lame since it is reduction from a virtual baseline. And we all recognize, I think, that this is not the future for load response. Even the utilities get that to varying degrees. The other point is the utilities are using SEP for category #3, but they also see SEP serving category #2 for residential--and have C&I in view also (see the recent OpenADE presentation on the PAP10 list http://osgug.ucaiug.org/sgsystems/Shared%20Documents/PAP%2010/PAP%2010%20UCAIug%20OpenSG%20-%20Customer%20Domain%20Involvement.ppt which shows plans for OpenADE and OpenHAN in the C&I space. And I'd note that SEP already addresses category #2). My point is that it seems that there is scope overlap between Energy Interop and SEP. Does that need to be resolved up front? I don't know. Does OpenSG see SEP being used to communicate to a C&I customer via the ESI? Or do they plan to use it via the meter to large customers? If we think of a multi-tier grid (microgrids and other lower levels), I think Ed's categories represent ownership and control boundaries. Category #2 is the fuzzy one which for C&I is generally within the facility boundary, and might use something like the BACnet Load Control object to send shed level signals. But as the owner, I might choose to use EIX down another level. Or oBIX. Or BACnet WS. Anyway, for residential there typically is no category #2 inside the home since there is no multi-level BAS, and the function of the EMS might exist at the utility in order to serve grid reliability concerns. I'd like to hear from the utility members. Does it matter for EI TC to address category #2 if we are not serving the residential space and SEP is handling category #2 with visions of extending this to C&I where it applies? Or is it, for all EI members, that we want to allow EIX to extend down into lower layers of the grid control hierarchy and serve the use case of contractual load shedding (think microgrids), and/or if and when utilities want to send signals via the ESI? David