RE: [energyinterop] Is silence consent?

["Holmberg, David" <david.holmberg@nist.gov>]

Some thoughts on Ed's 3/1/10 questions:

•        Ref Q2: we agreed to standardize DR signals, which to me takes the message set from OpenADR and adds a few more with the goal of a set of generalized messages that matches the large majority of existing DR programs. Communicating a price is one option.

•        Q7: I thought integrity signals were the DR messages. I'm not sure what grid safety signals are. Toby?

•        2^nd Q6--I think we need to pay attention to PAP 7 and probably other efforts marching forward on DER integration and think about what needs to happen in EnergyInterop.

 

Different subject--thoughts following last week's call. Some concepts/dimensions from the Collaborative Interactions vs. NOT-collaborative discussion (and why it’s complicated trying to pin this down):

•        Local vs. remote management (in the facility vs. utility control)

•        DLC and DR where the utility has contractually guaranteed response amount vs. no guaranteed response

•        DR bid vs. price response.

•        M&V versus not

•        Mandatory vs. voluntary contracts

•        AMI vs Internet channel

•        Utility remote DLC versus virtual DLC (utility owned in-home EMS, e.g., the PCT)

•        Energy Interop vs. SEP

•        Variety of DR program types

 

David

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Cazalet [mailto:ed@cazalet.com]
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 9:14 PM
To: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Is silence consent?

 

Sorry the reference to PAP 03 should be to PAP 09 which is the PAP energy

interop is addressing.

 

Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D.

101 First Street, Suite 552

Los Altos, CA 94022

650-949-5274

cell: 408-621-2772

ed@cazalet.com

www.cazalet.com

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Ed Cazalet [mailto:ed@cazalet.com]

Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 5:42 PM

To: Toby.Considine@gmail.com; energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org

Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Is silence consent?

 

All,

 

I think we need more focus in energy interop.

 

From the NIST Twiki the purpose of PAP 03 is to

 

Define a framework and common terminology for:

 

1.Price communication,

2.Grid safety or integrity signals,

3.DER support, and

4.Other signals and/or an extensibility mechanism.

 

I have several questions and some answers.  Happy to listen to other answers

and questions.

 

First question: Shall we focus our effort on the smart grid with interval

metering or the dumb grid with cumulative monthly metering?

My answer, assume interval metering or we are taking on too much complexity

in our document with little added value.

 

Second question:  Do we begin with price communication for the electricity

(or gas) commodity or do we ignore price communication for the commodity and

go to directly to specify signals to reduce load from an undefined base?

My answer, clearly we have to begin with price communication for the

commodity.  That is, we need to communicate the price from a regulated or

competitive retail supplier to the end customer. 

 

The price should be :

(1) real-time price for any amount of energy, or

(2) forward prices for forward commitments of energy for specified intervals

that can be added up to meet the desired forward purchases of the customer

with any residual purchase or sale at real-time prices, or

(3) any amount of energy at forward contracted prices that is independent of

real-time price or any further transactions (this is actually an option to

purchase energy). 

 

Third question:  Shall we facilitate bidding into wholesale markets by

retail customers for load reductions from the base in (2) above? 

My answer is yes since this is no different from the buying and selling in

forward transactions referenced above for the Second question. ( pricing

communication (2) )

 

Fourth question:  Shall we facilitate peak load pricing and rebates?

My answer is yes, as this is just another forward purchase or sale and is

included just like the answer to the third question.

 

Fifth question:  Shall we facilitate offers by customers to reduce or

increase forward purchases.

Yes, as this is included just like the answers to the third and fourth

questions.

 

Sixth question:  Shall we facilitate options for the retailer or ISO to buy

back at prescribed (high) prices (a call option by the retailer?  And shall

we facilitate options for the retailer or ISO to put back at prescribed

(low) prices (a put option by the retailer?  Similar options can be

described for the customers?

 

My answer is yes, but this is not high priority.

 

Seventh question: What are grid safety and integrity signals? 

 

My answer: These have nothing to do with price and should be restricted to

signals to the capable meters to

1. disconnect from the grid

2. prevent backflow to the grid

3. limit power consumed from the grid or provided to the grid under

emergency only conditions to protect the grid equipment.

A separate category could be notifications for voluntary actions by groups

of customers.

 

Sixth question: How should we provide for DER support?

My answer is that we use the structure described above.  No other changes

are needed.

 

Seventh question: What are other signals?

My answer is that I don't know and the above seems adequate.

 

 

 

Regards, Ed

 

 

 

Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D.

101 First Street, Suite 552

Los Altos, CA 94022

650-949-5274

cell: 408-621-2772

ed@cazalet.com

www.cazalet.com

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Toby Considine [mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Toby

Considine

Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 10:08 AM

To: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org

Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Is silence consent?

 

Again

 

It starts with the comments on Section 4 of WD06 that I requested for

response before I extended them into the document.

 

tc

 

 

"If something is not worth doing, it`s not worth doing well" - Peter Drucker

 

Toby Considine

TC9, Inc

OASIS Technical Advisory Board

TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar

TC Editor: EMIX, EnergyInterop

 

  

Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com

Phone: (919)619-2104

http://www.tcnine.com/

blog: www.NewDaedalus.com

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Evan Wallace [mailto:ewallace@cme.nist.gov]

Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 12:36 PM

To: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT)

Cc: Toby.Considine@gmail.com; energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org

Subject: Re: [energyinterop] Is silence consent?

 

 

Toby,

 

I think that many of us could use more elaboration on what you have written

in your email.  Like Rish, I am unsure to what FIX and CAP refer.  Also

unclear if bidding/contracts are going to be the only mechanism for DR

signal exchange.  This seems ill suited to smaller consumers or to handling

grid emergencies.

 

-Evan

 

Evan K. Wallace

Manufacturing Systems Integration Division NIST

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

 

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

 

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php