Phil Davis | Senior Manager - Solutions | Schneider Electric Demand Response Resource Center | 3103 Medlock Bridge Road, Suite 100 | Norcross, GA 30071 | 404..567.6090 | phil.davis@us.schneider-electric.com | www.schneider-electric.com | Skype: pddcoo
I guess what I realized from Ed’s comment was that the consumer (just a consumer) is still an EI participant, whether he offers any resource or not. So, seems we need him in there. As for Balancing Authority—can’t you run a market without having balancing authority?
From: pddcoo@gmail.com [mailto:pddcoo@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Phil Davis
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 5:12 PM
To: Holmberg, David
Cc: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [energyinterop] Proposal for replacement for EI Fig. 1-1
With Dave;s comments, I like the three node model (no consumer) better for purposes of this discussion. Also, would the NERC idea of Balancing Authority work to replace the Market Operator term with all its components? It conveys a sense of responsibility regardless of the title of the entity.
Phil Davis | Senior Manager - Solutions | Schneider Electric Demand Response Resource Center | 3103 Medlock Bridge Road, Suite 100 | Norcross, GA 30071 | 404..567.6090 | phil.davis@us.schneider-electric.com | www.schneider-electric.com | Skype: pddcoo
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Holmberg, David <david.holmberg@nist.gov> wrote:
Good question. Is not Energy Interop serving the ideal of more efficient markets and use of resources? So, the “Resouce Provider” can be the customer, or the generator, or the storage—but then maybe they are also just a service provider to the utility? That is, OpenADR is not serving a customer, but rather the “customer” is providing DR service to the utility. Maybe EI is only about VEN and VTNs? And the market operator is a “market service provider”? If by customer we mean the end load buildings that consume most of the power and the industrial plants that eat the rest, then they are the only ones who are not a service provider, just a consumer (although they can act in other roles). So, maybe we need a cloud just for “consumer”? I was trying to show that the consumer can also be DER. Maybe this?
From: Ed Cazalet [mailto:ed@cazalet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 4:47 PM
To: Holmberg, David; energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Proposal for replacement for EI Fig. 1-1
Sorry, but where is the customer in the new diagram? Are they not who Energy Interop is to serve?
Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D.
101 First Street, Suite 552
Los Altos, CA 94022
650-949-5274
cell: 408-621-2772
From: Holmberg, David [mailto:david.holmberg@nist.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:42 PM
To: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [energyinterop] Proposal for replacement for EI Fig. 1-1
This addresses Jira issue 306.
The current Fig 1-1:
My proposed update for discussion:
I’m trying to get down to the fundamental view of who is using EI, and away from the NIST cloud diagram. Does this work? Or is it getting closer?
David Holmberg
NIST Engineering Laboratory
301-975-6450
“God cannot give us a happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing.”
C.S. Lewis
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for SPAM content and Viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for SPAM content and Viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
________________________________________________________________________
