Re: [emix] Groups - microgrid_summary.pdf uploaded

[Anne Hendry <ahendry@pacbell.net>]

Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) wrote, On 4/13/2010 7:28 AM:

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

A Microgrid is merely an entity that actively manages its own energy use, generation, storage, and market operations. A microgrid may choose, for its own reasons to exclude any of those services from its active portfolio. Similarly, it can add one of those services, say generation or storage, without it being a concern to any other entities. We are, of course, concerned with the market operations of the microgrid.

And where those market operations are exposed/traverse to external/other grid(s), such as when a microgrid provides ancillary services to external/other grid(s).

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

A microgrid that participates in market operations must have a meter for those operations. It is probable that a microgrid that participates in both buying and selling should have a meter for each operation. Logically, we should treat this as if it is true. Whether it is actually true is beyond the scope of this TC. Whether the two meters are virtual or not is beyond the scope of this TC.

 

A microgrid can contain other microgrids, so a microgrid can support internal market operations. For architecture purposes, the smart little toaster that understands EMIX and EnergyInterop is a microgrid.

'Contain' still speaks to a hierarchical model.  Would it be necessary for the toaster to be part of a larger centralized kitchen grid?  Or can the devices participate in (micro)grid interactions in a peer-to-peer scenario w/o having to go through a 'kitchen' controller?

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

Now, back to the questions:

(fyi, not exactly questions, but a summary of contradictory views from various sources on microgrids, in order to clarify the EMIX viewpoint ...)

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

1. architecture

   (some propose decentralized peer-to-peer coordination,

    others expect centralized hierarchical control)

 

A Microgrid actively manages its own energy and uses market operations to augment those resources. A microgrid can choose to outsource control of any of its functions. It can choose to outsource them to its primary energy supplier. Whether it chooses to do so is a separate business process from its market operations.

Not sure how/why outsourcing comes into play (separate discussion), but agree with your last statement.

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

2. two-way or one-way power flow

   (some proposed a single direction of power flow,

    others proposed the microgrid for ancillary services)

 

A Microgrid that actively participates in both buying and selling is effectively participating in two markets, or at least two market roles. The market rules for each market role can be quite different. In some markets, the rules for a role may happen to be too onerous to be worthwhile. Market rules are outside the scope of the TC.

Great clarification.  Thanks.

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

3. size

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

    others have no restrictions on generation capacity)

 

Any market rules about size and market participation are outside the scope of the TC.

Yes.

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

4. connection points

   (some proposed only a single connection point,

    others assumed more of a decentralized integration/connectivity)

 

It is a good practice to manage any critical supply chain for any critical resource with an eye to redundancy. Having at least two suppliers is a common requirement for many critical resources. Two (or more) connection points is merely two (or more) supply chains. Even if the counter-party for each supply chain is identical, the markets may be different. For example, the two markets may be subject to different capacity constraints, and so subject to different congestion pricing. Some market rules for sellers may require locally produced energy (which is effectively a limit on reselling electricity between substations), but that is not unique to electricity. The local farmer’s market has rules requiring participants to be original producers as well. Such market rules are outside the scope of this TC.

Not sure.  Doesn't this speak directly to our current EMIX Element 'Market Context' then?

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

 

In summary, I think the questions are a distraction,

Where out-of-scope we can discard.  There are related agreed-upon (green) characteristics of microgrids of which a few must be relevant enough to use as a definition of why/how microgrids warrant special consideration (or if not, no need to have special mention in EMIX?).

Thanks -- appreciate your viewpoint and clarifications.

-Anne

49388A5276025649AC24AF97ADB9DA6256B0D25DCB@facmailmb3.facilities.unc.edu" type="cite">

 

tc

 

---

"If flies are allowed to vote, how meaningful would a poll on what to have for dinner be, and what would be on the menu?" -  Unknown

---

Toby Considine Chair, OASIS oBIX Technical Committee Co-Chair, OASIS Technical Advisory Board Facilities Technology Office University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC

Email: Toby.Considine@ unc.edu Phone: (919)962-9073 http://www.oasis-open.org blog: www.NewDaedalus.com

 

 

From: Holmberg, David [mailto:david.holmberg@nist.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 9:52 AM
To: ahendry@pacbell.net; emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: 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