Disable your ad blocker to enjoy the full interactive features of this document.
Insight
Unlocking data for connections transformation
What’s stopping us grasping ‘no regrets’ actions?
Connections reform is a huge challenge with a queue of zombie projects that needs slimming down and reorganising. But how should that be done? Our recent roundtable with Autodesk examined the role of data.
Introduction
Among the most urgent challenges in GB’s energy transition is connections reform. Accelerating the process of connecting to the grid for low-carbon technologies and weeding the queue of zombie projects are priority issues, attracting the attention of leading minds in the sector.
Debate is live over the impact that National Grid ESO’s proposed TMO4+ reforms will have on the ballooning connections queues – projected to bulge to 800GW by the end of this year. While broadly welcomed, the proposals have been labelled insufficient by some. In a recent interview with Utility Week, National Grid’s president for Strategic Investment Carl Trowell said the Electricity System Operator must go beyond ambitions to shrink the connections queue through its “first ready first connected” principle and aspire to also reorder it. His words echo those of speakers at Utility Week’s Reforming Grid Connections Conference earlier this year.
There, experts from organisations including consultancy Baringa and power transmission company Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks suggested ESO’s reforms are simply a preliminary step in a “fundamental paradigm shift” for energy system architecting and management – a shift which will require parallel and coordinated transformations of planning processes, regulation and market principles. This process may challenge deeply ingrained commitments to technology agnosticism in decision-making, they said.
Completing this complicated jigsaw of reform entails tackling many “difficult and exciting questions”. But some parts of the puzzle should be more straightforward. At a recent roundtable debate hosted by Utility Week in association with global tech firm Autodesk, a mix of senior industry leaders including network operators and developers said that putting in place critical data and digital foundations for faster and more strategic connections involves “no regrets” actions which have broad support from system stakeholders. However, they also said that work to improve the visibility, shareability and integrity of data is moving at a frustratingly sluggish pace.
Read on to find out more about what the group had to say on challenges to the use of data to support transformation of grid connections.
Vision set, but mission mentality missing
Is data being used to its maximum potential to support transformation of grid connections?
Our roundtable participants said the opportunity is recognised, but seizing it is being hampered on a number of fronts. Read on to hear what they had to say about the need to lock into a “mission-based mentality”, align conflicting regulatory drivers, and overcome outdated attitudes and processes to information exchanges.
Data will be the lifeforce of our future energy system, fuelling flexible energy markets and dynamic management of supply and demand. This was recognised even before government cemented our 2050 net-zero target into law, with the Energy Data Taskforce setting out clear recommendations for the creation of a “modern, digitalised energy system”, marginally ahead of the pivotal policy announcement in 2019.
The taskforce triggered a flurry of initiatives to overturn old cultural attitudes towards data and establish “presumed open” principles, common asset registration processes and a unified digital system map to “increase visibility of system infrastructure and assets, enabling optimisation of investment and informing the creation of new markets”.
While some significant progress has been achieved against all these objectives, one participant at our roundtable said that in many ways they remain “aspirational goals” because “no one has come up with an elegant way of ensuring I can get the right data at the right time with the right security protocols”.
“We are keeping ourselves at a very low threshold because we are not exploiting what we have.”
Others agreed, pondering whether “we have made as much progress as the Energy Data Taskforce would have expected”. Many shared examples of continued resistance to data-sharing or open data initiatives being hampered by a lack of quality/confidence in the data earmarked for publication.
Security concerns remain a key sticking point with “ever more massive cybersecurity concerns” making it harder for data to clear the triage processes established by energy network operators to check for risks associated with opening up particular data sets.
While the security of critical national infrastructure must of course be protected, several of our roundtable participants felt nervousness because getting the balance between sharing and locking down data wrong is leading to “missed opportunities” for optimisation of system planning and associated processes like grid connections. “We are keeping ourselves at a very low threshold because we are not exploiting what we have,” commented one system operation expert.
Changing this situation is primarily a cultural challenge, our participants agreed. One data management leader from a transmission operator observed that although Ofgem’s Data Best Practice Guidance has encouraged adoption of presumed open data principles, in practice there is often resistance from senior colleagues to certain data sets being shared or made visible to external stakeholders.
“I can tell you, when our directors are responsible for keeping the lights on and you say that all our data is now presumed open unless we have good reason not to make it open – it wasn’t a good conversation!” they recalled.
Shifting ingrained cultural attitudes will not be easy, our participants agreed. While there was optimism that the attitudes and experiences of millennial and Gen Z employees will make it easier in future to turn open data aspirations into business-as-usual practices, the urgent need for data to be freed up to support rapid energy system transformation demands more immediate and assertive action on culture, they said.
As explored below, this could be supported through better alignment and consistency in regulatory incentives/penalties around data-sharing and security. It was felt that regulation is currently sending “mixed messages”.
However, changes to the regulatory regime are only part of the answer. More broadly, our experts felt there is a need to step up the prominence of digitalisation language in the narrative around our net-zero transition so that improvements to data-sharing, visibility and quality become synonymous with the wider mission.
Some around the table speculated about the opportunities for this development of the narrative around data for an accelerated net-zero transition that will arise following the Labour government’s launch of Mission Control – headed up by former Climate Change Committee boss Chris Stark – and GB Energy.
One network leader with responsibility for connections strategy also noted that the new National Energy System Operator (NESO) will be in a position to lead by example and influence wider industry culture on data sharing. They noted that the NESO will “have the power to ask for data” from other system participants and users. The way in which NESO wields this new ability may have a material impact on attitudes and practices in the sector, they suggested.
Conflicting messages
As referred to above, our roundtable participants suggested that misalignment of regulatory incentives/penalties over data-sharing are hampering efforts to free up data which could support more effective system planning and remove friction from the connections process.
On the one hand, data management experts at the table acknowledged the progress that has been made since the introduction of Ofgem’s Data Best Practice Guidelines, which include adoption of presumed open data principles as well as standardisation of data assets and metadata and demonstrating a commitment to making data easily discoverable to interested parties and supporting interpretation of data.
Ofgem’s guidelines have prompted energy networks to publish reams of data on system constraints and infrastructure resilience planning which was not previously available or easily discoverable. Developers around that table welcomed this, saying it is starting to improve their ability to understand where their best opportunities are for connection to the grid and to support arguments for sensible co-location of complementary technologies such as solar and battery storage.
However, participants suggested that more data – or more granular data – which could be of value is currently being held back due to fears that other regulatory mechanisms would punish networks for making it available to third parties.
“It seems there’s only disincentive for you to share because you feel you can get caught out.”
A key case in point is Section 105 of the Utilities Act. One debate participant – a senior leader at a distribution system operator (DSO) – explained: “This basically says we can’t display anything that relates to an individual or business and their affairs, unless we need to do so as a condition of our licence.”
This rule is causing many networks to steer clear of publishing information which might be highly relevant and helpful in better management of the connections queue, it was suggested. “The spirit of the act has been lost and networks are retreating to a position of following the letter of it,” continued the DSO leader.
A data management expert at another distribution company agreed, saying that “what you can’t say or share” received a heavy emphasis in company induction training. They also observed that responding to expectations that more data should be made ready to share requires a significant investment in resource – to ensure sharing risks are appropriately and reliably assessed – which can be hard to find or fund.
Several developers at the table said they found these perspectives enlightening. “It’s good to appreciate the conflicts you’re subject to,” one commented. “It seems there’s only disincentive for you to share because you feel you can get caught out… I guess that’s why we can’t get basic transformer availability data. Not because it’s critical to the networks, but because there’s a feeling it could get you in trouble.”
Another participant observed “the incentives just don’t line up with the plan of where we need to be… We need to build in a clearer logic that links central planning to what is actually happening”.
Communication and trust breakdowns
Many developers at the table were sympathetic to the competing pressures energy networks are subject to over data-sharing. Nevertheless, several also expressed a degree of frustration that increased visibility of more granular networks data is not being made available more quickly. There was also a common feeling that there could be far better coordination between the ESO and DSOs to help developers get a clear view of their ability to connect.
One developer said: “It’s that interface between transmission and distribution. We’re finding comms just aren’t going through and we’re having transmission connections delayed… We have schemes that are shovel-ready that we can’t connect because there is an outstanding risk the DNO will say it affects their network and you have to pay whatever million. We can’t invest on that, so it ends up delayed.”
Better data integration and communication between transmission and distribution is needed to stop experiences like this deterring investment in projects with real intent to connect, the developer said.
Network leaders around the table acknowledged that information exchanges between transmission and distribution could be smoother – and more equal. One participant was keen to lodge their feeling that there is “almost a one-way street” when it comes to information flows between distribution companies and the ESO, with the former offering up a lot more than they get back.
“We’ve got a complete disconnection between the ability of technology and the way planners make decisions.”
Feelings of imbalance aside, a key reason for the relatively turgid flow of data between network operators – and other system stakeholders – is the immaturity in the modes of exchange. A process of moving away from email-based information exchanges characterised by attachments in inconsistent formats – from PDF, to Excel or Word documents – is underway. But the industry is still a long way from establishing common data exchange standards which can prevent key information being lost and reduce the human effort required in collating it effectively.
Another barrier to better exploitation of data for connections transformation is the lack of a trusted assurance or accreditation regime for validating data integrity, currency and provenance, our participants suggested. The leads to “wasted time and money in re-surveying”.
This lack of trust in data has far reaching implications for the connections challenge, causing continued assumption-based decision-making in a variety of scenarios, from demand and dispatch calculations to planning. In the latter case, it was broadly agreed that planning procedures seem “almost wilfully archaic”.
“We have the technology to do upfront optimisation of proposals…which can show, this is going to be the best solution for this community. But planners still say no. They want two-dimensional maps. We’ve got a complete disconnection between the ability of technology and the way planners make decisions.”
Concluding remarks
"Build trust in the technology and overcome cultural barriers to take advantage of this golden opportunity"
By Lisa Jones, lead account executive, critical infrastructure, EMEA, Autodesk
Availability, reliability and transparency of data are all critical in the development of solutions that will reduce wait times for connections to the grid and support better investment-planning and a smarter approach for future energy networks.
But access to capital, resources and planning issues continue to hamper energy networks’ efforts to adopt common data environments more readily. From conversations we’re having with energy experts and our own critical infrastructure clients, we know that digital technology providers need to work in closer collaboration with the wider industry to close current information gaps and support energy firms to use data to achieve better long-term system outcomes. Here are three core areas I believe should be focused on first to do just that.
- Transparency, accuracy, granularity needed to build trust in technology
In terms of data quality, reasonably structured data should be sufficient for energy firms’ needs, but a bigger concern remains around data accessibility. This is where the benefits of 3D modelling and the integration of data to assets and components are clear, as well as BIM, or ‘digital information modelling’ (DIM) – as some of our customers suggest it should more accurately be referred to – to control who has access to what at a particular time, and give the right access to the right people.
- Overcome cultural barriers to share data more readily
The energy sector has a relatively conservative and risk-averse culture, similar to other highly regulated industries. As such, energy networks have a cultural barrier to overcome in terms of being more comfortable with sharing data with other parties. The benefits and incentives to sharing data must be communicated better if networks are going to start embracing more transparency and openness between key players in the industry.
- Data sharing is the golden opportunity for energy networks
If energy firms can overcome this cultural barrier, they have a huge opportunity to innovate. They are sat on goldmines of data – which have increased exponentially in the last three years – but without technology providers’ support, they don’t always know how to open the shafts. The UK is advancing at a faster pace than other countries, with a National Infrastructure Commission in place, and major planning reform already announced as part of the new Labour government’s energy and climate priorities. The more technology providers can do to connect the dots with industry, the more they can do to unlock so many more opportunities for energy networks.
Learn more at: autodesk.com/uk-critical-infrastructure
Lisa leads a team of technical, subject-matter, and customer success experts dedicated to helping customers best leverage Autodesk technologies and enable positive business outcomes.
