Joint E oint Eur uropean opean Stak Stakeholder Gr eholder - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Joint E

• int Eur

uropean

• pean

Stak Stakeholder Gr eholder Group

• up

Tuesday 17 March 2015: Meeting 1

• 1. Introductions and Apologies

Barbara Vest JESG Independent Chair

• 2. Appr

pproval val of

• f JES

JESG T G Ter erms of ms of Ref efer erence ence

Barbara Vest JESG Independent Chair http://www2.nationalgrid.com/WorkArea/DownloadAsset .aspx?id=39985

• 3. Review

view of

• f Action

Action Log & Log & Issue Issue Log Log

Sara-Lee Kenney JESG Technical Secretary

JESG Actions Log and Issue Log

• The Action and Issue logs for ECCAF, DECC/Ofgem

Stakeholder Meeting and the Joint European Standing Group have been reviewed, updated and consolidated.

• There is now one Action Log and one Issue Log each

showing the existing items but also any items closed as a part of this review and the reason for closure.

• The initial Action Log and Issue Log have been

published on the New JESG Website and will be captured in the headline report in future.

JESG Standing Actions

ID Topic Lead Party Source

S1 Continue to review the membership of the JESG and engage additional industry parties where appropriate. JESG Chair JESG S3 S2 Prepare a commentary / comparison document between the Network Code and the existing GB arrangements at appropriate stages in the Code development for each Network Code. NGET/Ofgem/DECC JESG S1 S3 Share any intelligence about how other member states are approaching demonstrating compliance through information gained from other government departments, regulators or parent companies DECC / Ofgem / Industry parties with European parent companies ECCAF 3/2 S4 Stakeholders are requested to provide specific examples of inconsistent or problematic definitions in the Network Codes to Ofgem (natasha.z.smith@ofgem.gov.uk) and DECC (elena.mylona@decc.gsi.gov.uk). All Stakeholders JESG S6

JESG Open Actions

ID Topic Lead Party Update Source

1

Consult GB Code Panels on the development of the Joint European Stakeholder Forum DECC, Ofgem Closed: Ofgem has liaised with Code Panels who were also invited to provide comments on the proposed new structure. Responses broadly supported the proposal for a single cross- industry forum on electricity European issues. All interested parties are invited to review and approve the ToR for the new group at the March 2015 JESG’ JESG 188

2

NGET to liaise with the GB Regional Group

• n how voting will

work and what information will be published with regards to voting. NGET (Paul Wakeley) Voting allocation under CACM is the responsibility of the member state, so DECC to consider. There has not been a further regional group meeting since the last JESG. Closed, and open new action on DECC to update JESG on GB TSO voting under CACM. JESG 193

3

JESG Subgroup to be arranged for April on Emergency and Restoration Network Code JESG Technical Secretary Tuesday 14 April (Elexon, London) lead by Ofgem and DECC Views on duration – Stakeholders requested half day 10-12:30 Registration will open in this weeks JESG Update Email. JESG 194

• 4. Sum

Summar mary y Sta Status of tus of Eur European

• pean

Netw Networ

• rk

k Codes Codes

Sara-Lee Kenney JESG Technical Secretary

• 5. CA

CACM CM Flo low w Based Based Ca Capacity pacity Calcula Calculation tion

Rob Selbie NGET

Place your chosen image here. The four corners must just cover the arrow tips. For covers, the three pictures should be the same size and in a straight line.

Flow Based Market Coupling

Robert Selbie

Robert.selbie@nationalgrid.com European Development

Contents

 Introduction

 Bidding zones  Capacity calculation

 How NTC works  How Flow Based Market Coupling works  Comparison of Flow Based v NTC  Flow Based application to GB  Limitations of the Flow Based algorithm  Questions

Bidding zones

 Bidding zones are the areas with a single electricity price and GB is a single market bidding zone as we have a single electricity price.  Before BETTA we had two bidding zones;

1. England & Wales 2. Scotland

 If a generator buys TEC they can sell their generation to anyone within GB regardless of location.

13

Capacity Calculation

 If a generator wants to sell energy to someone outside GB they must purchase* the capacity on an interconnector to do so.  TSOs calculate how much interconnector capacity is offered to the market.  Currently GB bidding borders;

GB-SEM border GB-FR GB-NL

14 *(implicitly or explicitly).

15

 CACM requires regional TSO coordination to calculate cross border capacity. This will be done in regional groups (Capacity Calculation Regions) using the Common Grid Model.  The impact of cross border flows on one another must be considered. ACER’s expectations and

15

Coordinated Capacity Calculation

 The aim is to optimise the capacity made available to the market, to maximise social welfare (economic surplus).

ACER’s expectations and

Capacity Calculation Methodology

 Each Capacity Calculation Region must have a Capacity Calculation Methodology.  Each Capacity Calculation Methodology must undertake either;

1. NTC or 2. Flow based

B

NTC

NTC: Capacity Calculation Method 1

 Interconnection capacity defined ex-ante as the right to submit balanced Net-exports schedules in each pair of Countries.  The capacities offered to the market are such that the TSO is confident that if all capacity is sold, system will remain within

• perational security

standards

A C

NTC AC NTC CA NTC BA NTC AB

“When a TSO provides NTC constraints to the MC system, he needs to make a choice on how to split the capacity among its borders (A to B and A to C).”

NTC BC NTC CB

Power flows

 In meshed networks a power transaction between two points creates flows over multiple paths  The split depends on the parameters of the network (impedances)  TSOs have very limited means to control these flows Facts about transmission flows:

Flow based: Capacity Calculation Method 2

B A C

Flow based  Interconnection capacity defined after all bids/offers have been received from the market. Power system is represented by simple approximation.  The simple power system approximation is such that all thermal security limits

• n the network are

respected. “The transmission rights for a given source-sink pair, are not fixed in advanced. Rather, they depend on the bid prices and hence are determined later during the allocation procedure.”

Flow-based: Power Distribution Transfer Factors (PTDF)

 PTDF matrix has all the information needed to calculate (approximately) flows resulting from net injections  The flows are a result of a product (in matrix sense) of the PTDF matrix and the net injections  Calculation is fast and easy for any number of lines and markets  The choice of reference node does not impact the results

Market A Market B Line AB 1/3

• 1/3

Line BC 1/3 2/3 Line AC 2/3 1/3

PTDF matrix

MW Market A 27 Market B

• 12

Net injections

MW Line AB 13 Line BC 1 Line AC 14

Flows

X =

Generation 27 MW

14 MW

A C B Consumption

12 MW

Consumption

15 MW

Calculation of power flows:

Example – equal impedances

MW Line AB ±200 Line BC ±200 Line AC ±200

Thermal Ratings

<

Flow-based: Power Distribution Transfer Factors (PTDF)

 PTDF matrix has all the information needed to calculate (approximately) flows resulting from net injections  The flows are a result of a product (in matrix sense) of the PTDF matrix and the net injections  Calculation is fast and easy for any number of lines and markets  The choice of reference node does not impact the results

X

Generation 27 MW

11.4 MW

A C B Consumption

15 MW

Calculation of power flows:

Example – Line AB half impedence

Consumption

12 MW

MW Market A 27 Market B

• 12

Net injections

MW Line AB 15.6 Line BC 3.6 Line AC 11.4

Flows

X =

MW Line AB ±400 Line BC ±200 Line AC ±200

Thermal Ratings

<

Market A Market B Line AB 0.4

• 0.4

Line BC 0.4 0.6 Line AC 0.6 0.4

PTDF matrix

Import to B

(from A & C)

Import to C

(from A & B)

Export to C

(from A & B)

Import to A

(from B & C)

Export from A

(to B & C)

Export from B

(to A & C)

 A full set of transactions for 3 markets can be shown in terms of net export (NEX) from two markets  Two net exports are always balanced against the net export from reference market: NEXA + NEXB + NEXC = 0

Representation

Flow Based: Transaction plane

A C B

Reference node

NEXB NEXA

Limit 200MW Limit 200MW Limit 200MW

Flow based: Security Domain

NEXB NEXA

 A set of conditions specifying that flows remain within limits

Security domain

• 200 ≤ Flow BC ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ 1/3 NEXA + 2/3 NEXB ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ Flow AC ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ 2/3 NEXA + 1/3 NEXB ≤ 200

= Flow based transaction space

• 200≤ Flow AB ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ 1/3 NEXA – 1/3 NEXB ≤ 200

Flow based: Security Domain

 A set of conditions specifying that flows remain within limits

Security domain

• 200 ≤ Flow BC ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ 0.4 NEXA + 0.6 NEXB ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ Flow AC ≤ 200
• 200 ≤ 0.6 NEXA + 0.4 NEXB ≤ 200

= Flow based transaction space

• 400≤ Flow AB ≤ 400
• 200 ≤ 0.4 NEXA – 0.4 NEXB ≤ 200
• 800
• 600
• 400
• 200

200 400 600 800

• 800
• 600
• 400
• 200

200 400 600 800 NEXB NEXA

Power flows: Critical branches

B A C

 A transmission line significantly impacted by cross-border power flows  Determined by each TSO for their own network  No necessarily a cross- border line

 Internal lines on a TSO network can be overloaded even when the cross-border line is within limits

Critical branches

Power flows: Arithmetic

Market A Market B Line AB … … Line BC … … Line AC … … Line AG … … Line BF … … Line GH … … Line GC … … Line CA … … Line AK … … PTDF matrix MW Market A … Market B … Net injections

MW Line AB … Line BC … Line AC … Line AG … Line BF … Line GH … Line GC … Line CA … Line AK …

Flows

X = <

MW Line AB … Line BC … Line AC … Line AG … Line BF … Line GH … Line GC … Line CA … Line AK …

Thermal Ratings

Market A Market B Line AB … … Line BC … … Line AC … … Line AG … … Line BF … … Line GH … … Line GC … … Line CA … … Line AK … …

Power flows: Arithmetic

PTDF matrix MW Market A … Market B … Net injections

MW Line AB … Line BC … Line AC … Line AG … Line BF … Line GH … Line GC … Line CA … Line AK …

Flows

X = <

MW Line AB … Line BC … Line AC … Line AG … Line BF … Line GH … Line GC … Line CA … Line AK …

Thermal Ratings TSO provide this Market calculates this to

• ptimise economic welfare.

• 800
• 600
• 400
• 200

200 400 600 800

• 800
• 600
• 400
• 200

200 400 600 800 NEXB NEXA

Flow based: Security Domain

Security domain

= Flow based transaction space

 TSO can add as many critical network elements as they like.  Therefore the thermal interaction of all interconnectors can be modelled.  The market can choose any point within the security domain.

NTC: Transaction space

 Can define transaction space of

• nly particular shape:

 Vertical  Horizontal  45% diagonal

NTC capacity model

NEXB NEXA

Max NEXB Min NEX B Min NEXA Max NEXA = ATC transaction space

B A C

 Must be as large as possible…  …while remaining within the security domain

NTC transaction space

Flow based vs. NTC

A C B

Reference node

Limit 200MW Limit 200MW Limit 200MW Max import to A Not achievable Max import to C Not achievable Max import to B Not achievable

NEXB NEXA

= Flow based transaction space = NTC transaction space

 The flow based solution converges to NTC solution!  For the majority of the time this is the case.

What happens if I can control the flows using HVDC, and the limiting element is the HVDC cable itself?

Application to GB

NEXB NEXGB

= Flow based transaction space = NTC transaction space

Limitations of the flow based algorithm

NTC Flow based

 Flow based only assesses thermal issues on the network

B A C

 NG undertake analysis to investigate;  Thermal,  Voltage,  Fault level,  Stability,  Inertia,  Response,

Limitations of the flow based algorithm

Flow based

 Flow based only assesses thermal issues on the network

B A C

1.40% 1.90% 96.70 %

NG trading activity since 2012

Thermal Voltage Inertia

CACM proposal timeline

Proposal dates from CACM guideline;  CACM entry into force ~ July 2015  Capacity Calculation Regions (CCR) consultation ~ August/September 2015  All TSO CCR proposal deadline ~ October 2015  Capacity Calculation Methodology consultation ~ Q3/Q4 2016  All TSOs in each CCR - Capacity Calculation Methodology proposal deadline~ February 2017

The decision to use flow based or NTC based capacity calculation is made in the Capacity Calculation Methodology

Questions

• 6. CA

CACM CM Upda Update te

Ofgem

• 7. DECC/

DECC/Ofgem Ofgem ENC ENC Implem Implementa entation Steering tion Steering Gr Group

• up

Upda Update te

Ofgem

• 8. Comitolog

Comitology y La Latest V test View iew

DECC

• 9. Infr

Infrastr astructur ucture e upda update: te: Pr Projects

• jects of
• f Common I

Common Inter nterest, est, Unit Unit Costs Costs, , Tarif ariffs fs

Ofgem

European Infrastructure Development

March JESG

Projects of Common Interest

41

• Benefits of PCI-status
• Access to funding
• Accelerated permitting
• Investor profile and support
• 2nd selection round underway
• Candidate list approved in January
• JRC’s methodology discussed in March
• First discussions on lists in Regional Groups – late March/April
• ACER Opinion in May/June
• Final decision in Autumn
• JRC methodology
• NRAs (through ACER) raised several issues with the methodology
• JRC took many of these on board, but Regional Groups will have to

sense-check outputs

Ten Year Network Development Plan 2016

42 TYNDP 2016 development is well under way Recent stakeholder workshop:

• Similar x5 visions as for the 2014
• Better accounting for wind growth
• Aggregate load drops in National Green vision
• ‘Have not yet taken into account ACER’s Opinion’
• Cion have said will reject TYNDP that does not give investment benefits
• Need to include more of the existing work
• Ten-year perspective is needed

Next steps:

• May 2015: Consultation on TYNDP 2016 scenarios
• May/June 2015: Third workshop on TYNDP 2016 scenarios
• Summer 2015: Regional project lists released
• Summer 2016: Consultation on CBA assessment of TYNDP projects
• End 2016: Final TYNDP 2016

European Unit Cost Indicators

43

.NRAs have an obligation to publish Unit Investment Cost

Indicators for certain assets under the TEN-E Regulation

.ACER and NRAs are collecting data from across Europe and

processing a single set of values for:

.Substations; .HVDC Converters; .Cables (underground, subsea); .Lines .The final values need to be published, although they will hold no

project identifiable information

.A parallel exercise is underway in Gas

Next steps NRAs aim to process and publish the data (through ACER) in Q2 this year

Tariff Harmonisation?

44

• The Commission have asked ACER to review the case for

harmonisation in electricity tariffs

• ACER have commissioned a study by CEPA to assess:
• 1. What real barriers to cross-border trade non-

harmonised tariffs cause

• 2. The significance of these barriers
• 3. The potential impact of options for harmonisation
• CEPA will consult on its findings in the summer
• ACER will then review and draft its Recommendation to the

Commission in the second half of the year

Contact: David.freed@ofgem.gov.uk

45

• 10. ENT

ENTSO SO-e e consulta consultation on tion on Har Harmonised Alloca monised Allocation tion Rules ( ules (HAR) HAR)

Lorcán Murray (NGIL)

Place your chosen image here. The four corners must just cover the arrow tips. For covers, the three pictures should be the same size and in a straight line.

Harmonised Allocation Rules (HARs) Project update

Lorcan Murray NGIL

49

PROJECT BACKGROUND

 Requirements for the project:

EUROPEAN NETWORK CODE ON FORWARD CAPACITY ALLOCATION (FCA) Articles 55 and 56 – provide for the establishment of Harmonised Allocation Rules for long term capacity only. ACER has requested ENTSO-e to develop the HARs ahead of FCA coming into force.

50

PROJECT HISTORY and CURRENT STATUS

 Some key milestones from the commencement of the HARs project:  Autumn 2013- ENTSOe establish team to consider principles of HARs content.  Summer 2014- Drafting team (ENTSOe and TSOs) prepared detailed HARs text.  18/11/2014- Stakeholder Advisory Groups 1st meeting  March 2015- HARs project reaches consultation stage.

51

PROVISIONS WITHIN THE REMIT OF HARs

Requirements and process for participation in Auctions and Transfer Collateral Long term Auctions Long term transmission rights (inc. return and transfer) Fallback procedures Curtailment Invoicing and Payment Border Specific Annexes

Local Access Rules are to be retained for Daily and Intraday capacity allocation and nominations procedures for all timescales.

52

CONSULTATIONS IN PROGRESS

ENTSOe have opened a public consultation on HARs (including Border Specific Annexes). In parallel with ENTSOe consultation, IFA and BritNed are consulting on their respective Access Rules and the Participation Agreements.

53

IFA and BritNed future CONTRACT STRUCTURES

IFA and BritNed will have an amended contract structure as follows:

ACCESS RULES Day Ahead and Intraday allocation, and use of capacity (all timescales). ANNEXES Containing Border Specific variations from HARs HARMONISED ACCESS RULES (Long Term Capacity Allocation for all participating borders) PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (NEW)

54

TARGET TIMESCALES

 18th March: ENTSOe is holding a stakeholder workshop  April – June: Review of market participants responses  End June: TSOs and ENTSOe submit the HARs to ACER and NRAs for approval  End September: NRA approvals.  ENTSOe target to adopt HARs 1st Jan. 2016 for participating borders  Individual borders’ participation dates will be dependent

• n local Access Rules approvals and systems

readiness

55

LINKS TO DOCUMENTATION

The ENTSOe consultation on the HARs is available from: https://consultations.entsoe.eu/markets/fca-harmonisation-

• f-allocation-rules/consult_view

The BritNed consultation on its Access Rules and the new Participation Agreement is available from: http://www.britned.com/Participants%20portal/Key%20links %20and%20documents/Regulation%20forms The IFA consultation on its Access Rules and the new Participation Agreement is available from: http://www.fui-portal.eu/auctionplatforms

Any questions?

Lorcan Murray

• 11. Website f

bsite for JESG and

• r JESG and

Ass Associa

• ciated Documents

ted Documents

Sara-Lee Kenney (NGET)

New JESG Website: Now Live

• The new Joint European Stakeholder Group information is located
• n a new page on the National Grid Website.
• ECCAF and Joint European Standing group information can be

found under the Archive Code Standing Groups section of the National Grid Website.

• The new JESG Website houses:

– JESG & JESG Subgroup Meeting Dates – Useful Documents: ENC Overview and Organograms – Terms of Reference – Latest published version of the ENCs – JESG Meeting Documentation – JESG Subgroup Documentation

• Feedback welcome: europeancodes.electricity@nationalgrid.com

New JESG Website: New Look Documents

ENC - Status Summary Diagram ENC - Development Gantt Chart ENC - Code Status Summary Tables

• 12. Review S

view Stak takeholder eholder Repr epresenta esentation tion

Barbara Vest JESG Independent Chair

• 13. Any Other Busine

Any Other Business ss

Barbara Vest JESG Independent Chair

• 13. AOB Item:

CMA CMA in investiga estigation and the tion and the Industr Industry y Cod Code Simplifica e Simplification tion

Energy UK

Lunc Lunch: 12.30 h: 12.30