[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [energyinterop] RE: problem of sending signals to participants form multiple sources
|
As a commercial building, I certainly plan to authenticate any
transaction from any DRAS on the Internet. And probably check their
Authorization to send the command they want executed. Just like the
Personnel Manager at the City of Chicago, I don’t want nobody that nobody
(i.e., a Precinct Captain) sent. And if I happen to have two megawatts of load to drop
tomorrow afternoon instead of the usual one megawatt, because the air
conditioning is broken and the plant will be shut down tomorrow, I want to sell
the first megawatt back to my usual Aggregator, and then sell the other
megawatt to another aggregator who has coupons this week. The landscape will be littered with contract provisions, but I
would expect the two aggregators, the distribution company, and the energy
suppliers would prefer a more real-time, ironclad non-repudiable mechanism for
preventing me from selling the same load reduction to two different
people. I can’t predict the future, but the distribution company, touching
the electrons last, having control of the customer meter data, providing the
Measurement and Verification for all energy providers, and being a natural monopoly
which would logically be regulated, would be the honest broker that the
participants could rely upon. I could also see, though not as clearly,
that a market clearing entity could apportion the risk. See http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/energyinterop/email/archives/201002/msg00025.html
in
the 4th paragraph beginning with “I
agree, the exchanges…” for a bit more explanation about multiple
aggregators, and mine and Sila’s discussion about energy usage
information and its custodian for more discussion about M&V for multiple
sources of signals. Best, B.O. July 7, 2010 Robert Old Siemens Industry, Inc. Building Technologies 1000 Deerfield Pkwy. Buffalo Grove, IL 60089-4513 Tel.: +1 (847) 941-5623 Skype: bobold2 bob.old@siemens.com www.siemens.com From: Edward Koch [mailto:ed@akuacom.com] Gale, I’m going to kill two birds
with one stone and also cc my response to the EI list. Bear in mind that my response
below is within the context of what we discussed during the 1.0 drafting of the
spec, although I suspect the EI will come to similar conclusions. Just like as shown in figure 6, we
did in fact identify scenarios where someone may receive signals from multiple
sources. The conclusion we came to at the time was that how any conflicts
between signals get resolved was beyond the scope of our specification.
What this means is that if this is a potential conflict exists then it will
need to be resolved either by the receiver of the signals or the senders.
The implications to the specification we wrote were that the most we were
willing to do to help resolve conflicts was to add an attribute identifying the
source of the signals. Anything beyond that would require some sort
of coordination between the different entities sending the signals and we
didn’t want to go down that road. Of course the receiver can also
resolve any conflict himself, and while they might feed back some information
concerning how they resolved the conflict it probably does not affect the
downstream DR signal itself. Note that I think that much of
what is done today to help resolve these issues is on a contractual
basis. Customers often sign contracts with either Aggregators or
Utilities which preclude this situation from occurring. Some aspect of
this might be reflected in the transactional energy model. Perhaps Ed C could
elaborate more on this. Thanks, -ed koch From: Horst, Gale [mailto:ghorst@epri.com] Ed and Rish: Your action items from the energyinteropTC
call today: What are the architectural implications?
For exampe will each end node be linked to receive from one entity above
it in the hierarchy? Or is it acceptable to be able to receive from
multiple senders (REC or entity above) concurrently. We may want to reference the diagram in the
proposed solution to this item. For example Figure 6 in “energyinterop-1.0-spec-wd-12.pdf” line 672
would seem to have an implication. I can see where signals ORIGINATE from
several sources. But will the “Entity A” (REC) be responsible
to sort / prioritize and send the appropriate signal on? Perhaps other
developments or OpenADR has hashed their way through this issue and can bring
some clarity. We may want to check that we have described the background
text in the document to be sure it relays the proper understanding. THANKS, Gale Gale R. Horst Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) Mobile: 865-368-2603 |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]