[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: New Power Item Type proposals
I have been developing and coding with the proposed changes to the POWER.XSD and they allow some very strange outcomes. If I follow the schema, and use no knowledge I have already, Apparent Power can be expressed in a number of units, including Ohms, Radians, Degrees, Hertz, and Kilograms/Joule (and many others). This reduces the usability of the schema and makes many obviously invalid information exchanges (in terms of “you can’t buy that”) fully valid (in schema validation terms). This reduces the utility and value of the artifacts produced in inter-domain exchanges. They also break compatibility between the unification of measurement types urged by PAP10, in that they establishes special sub-classes of names of units and for that are used within Power that are used for no other areas of emix, for example, in quality measures, or in pollution warrants. By restricting in the schema all measurement types to a defined set only useful for power, they will require revisions to the standard to extend the classes to new metrics, say to new pollutant types, or to include carbon trading. If we reduce the base fungibility of measurements in this way, we decrease the ability of EMIX-based systems to respond to new market dynamics and new market regulations without returning to the standards cycle. This sort of hindrance to adaptability violates a core precept of EMIX which is to enable more rapid productization of technologies and energy approaches. EMIX as it has grown establishes some core models for exchanging information about products whose value changes with time of delivery. Power is but one of these. Certificates / Pollutants / carbon trading / et al. are significant others that are closely tied to power markets, and are likely to be more so in the future. These markets are much more changeable than the base power exchanges. Power quality metrics vary distinctly between US, European, and Asian market already. We want to make sure that our approach handles these different metrics, including ones we do not know, without returning to the standards process. EMIX already has a clear distinction between the base schema, and the particular instantiation of its extensions for power. Other groups are already looking at developing their own extensions for other energy-related products whose value changes with time. There are discussions underway about using domain extensions for the distribution of natural gas, low pressure steam, high pressure steam, chilled water, and other district-based distributions. When we move to an exceptionality for power, we reduce the power of the results. None of this is meant in any way to deprecate the importance of alignment with the IEC TC57 CIM, particularly as the IEC itself continues its growing alignment with ISO where there subject matters overlap. I mean instead to that we have not achieved the optimal alignment. Of course, we need to keep ever mindful that alignment is not the same as unity. tc “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]