RE: [emix] Groups - microgrid_summary.pdf uploaded

To your points, my comments:

1. architecture

(some propose decentralized peer-to-peer coordination, others expect centralized hierarchical control)

I don’t think this matters to EMIX (or IMO to microgrid). What you do inside your virtual end node (or whatever we are going to call it) is up to you. EMIX is about getting you the price signal. Or does the required signal somehow need to be different depending on your control paradigm? I don’t see that.

2. two-way or one-way power flow

(some proposed a single direction of power flow,others proposed the microgrid for ancillary services)

EMIX assumes 2-way is possible, whether you use it or not.

3. size

(some propose a microgrid should be less than 1MW, others have no restrictions on generation capacity)

This is semantics about the term “microgrid”, nothing to do with EMIX, unless we specifically use the term within the standard. I guess we should not in any formal way.

4. connection points

(some proposed only a single connection point, others assumed more of a decentralized integration/connectivity)

Do you mean electrical connection or communication connection?

David

-----Original Message-----
From: ahendry@pacbell.net [mailto:ahendry@pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 2:03 AM
To: emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [emix] Groups - microgrid_summary.pdf uploaded

The document named microgrid_summary.pdf has been submitted by Anne Hendry

to the OASIS Energy Market Information Exchange (eMIX) TC document

repository.

Document Description:

To try to wrap up the microgrid definition discussion I've captured in this

document the the most prevalent characteristics from previous posted

sources -- by no means an extensive set, but just enough to get a sampling

of the diversity of thinking in the area to help determine what is in scope

for EMIX -- and marked similarities and areas of

contradiction/divergence.

Characteristics that were common to most definitions are in green and what

I perceive as contradictory characteristics (they offer a view that is

contradictory to another view) are in red -- both open for discussion. If

none of the red characteristics are of a concern to EMIX, we can discard.

For the rest (green and black) we should decide if they are drivers for

EMIX (in scope) or not, and if so, make sure we've included support for

those features/capabilities in the spec.

The microgrid concept seems to span the breadth from literal physical

islands to virtual power plants and community choice aggregators, each with

their own scenarios for energy generation and distribution. The areas of

agreement are the more common concepts of you can expect (DER, better

efficiency, economics, source diversification, etc). Not much contention

there.

Areas of contradiction appear to revolve around these four topics:

1. architecture

(some propose decentralized peer-to-peer coordination,

others expect centralized hierarchical control)

2. two-way or one-way power flow

(some proposed a single direction of power flow,

others proposed the microgrid for ancillary services)

3. size

(some propose a microgrid should be less than 1MW,

others have no restrictions on generation capacity)

4. connection points

(some proposed only a single connection point,

others assumed more of a decentralized integration/connectivity)

-Anne

View Document Details:

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=37277

Download Document:

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/37277/microgrid_summary.pdf

PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your email application

may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to copy and paste

the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.

-OASIS Open Administration

emix message