Results: Searching for 'Electricity transmission '

A review funded by HubNet and UKERC, and written by the University of Strathclyde's Damien Frame, Keith Bell and Stephen McArthur, argues that RD&D activity by Britains electricity distribution network operators has significantly revived; this revival is linked to Ofgem's 500m Low Carbon Network Fund investment.

The principal aims of this paper are to examine the range of reported unit costs for major generating technologies, show the range of estimates, explain where possible the reasons for the range, and show to what extent there is any clustering around central values. In addition, the paper explains the components of unit cost calculations and discussed what is, and is not, included in these calculations.

• Light Vehicles in the UK
• Plug-in vehicle sales
• Vehicle life
• Vehicle usage
• Consumer attitudes to plug-in vehicles
• Where to support charging
• Meeting vehicle charging requirements
• Network reinforcement costs
• Consumers, Vehicles and Energy Integration (CVEI) project
  • Consumer adoption: understanding the mass-market
  • Outputs –Modelling capability
  • Interim findings
  • Roadmap for efficient ULEV uptake and use
  • Trials will deliver further robust evidence

This note provides an overview and guide to a process of assessment being undertaken by the UK Energy Research Centre Technology and Policy Assessment function (TPA), with support from the Carbon Trust.

The UKERC has consulted widely on the topics that the TPA needs to consider. It has chosen its preliminary topics carefully, in consultation with stakeholders and in accordance with defined criteria. Intermittency – used herein as shorthand for a range of issues that relate to the costs and electricity system impacts of the intermittent electrical output from wind, solar and some other forms of grid connected renewable generation – has emerged as one of two initial TPA assessment topics.

The TPA will undertake meta-analysis of existing work in order to seek gaps in knowledge, examine different modelling assumptions, and consider how well different pieces of work fit together. The assessment will seek to make clear where and why differences arise in terms of models, assumptions, scenarios and interpretation of findings. It will identify research gaps and provide a clear statement of the nature of the questions that remain.

A key goal is to achieve high standards of rigour and transparency. We have therefore set up a process that is inspired by the evidence based approach to policy assessment undertaken in healthcare, education and social policy, but that is not bound to any narrowly defined method or techniques. The approach entails tight specification of the means by which we will consult stakeholders and solicit expert input, highly specified searching of the relevant literature, and clear and transparent criteria against which relevant findings will be assessed. It is described in the Review Protocol, below.

An introduction to the subject matter and description of assessment activities are provided in this scoping note and protocol.

The note is aimed at informed commentators and therefore takes some knowledge for granted – for example of terminology, recent literature and the principal concepts. Its focus is on why and where opinions differ, and the objective is to highlight questions and disagreements, but not answer or resolve either. A more general introduction to the subject is provided in the project scoping note and protocol.

Feedback and comment is invited on all of what follows, and in particular on the set of summary questions at the end of this note.

The remainder of this note covers the following topics:

• Identification of key issues
• Capacity values
• System balancing
• Allocating costs
• Framing questions

• Energy balancing is critical and extends beyond the electricity system
• Numerous opportunities to achieve balancing include:
  • Energy storage
  • Demand side flexibility
  • Vector integration
• Key decisions that lead to new energy systems will affect how much and what type of flexibility is needed.
• There is a huge amount of potential that we do not currently understand about balancing within a whole energy system.
• It is possible to assess the requirements for future flexibility – tools and evidence are being developed to help with this.

• the collection of electrical energy offshore from multiple renewable energy farms,
• the transportation of electrical energy generated by these offshore farms to the UK shoreline,
• the connection and integration into the onshore power system.

• a clear understanding of the key issues concerning the connection of multiple renewable energy farms off the UK coast
• assessments of the likely technical limits concerning the integration of offshore renewable energy systems into the UK power system
• recommendations for new, optimised solutions for the grid connection of multiple offshore renewable energy farms, including the provision of design concepts for offshore HVDC electrical systems
• identification of technology development opportunities for the industry.

• Distributed Smaller Windfarms
• Large Windfarms
• Very Large Windfarms
• Small Marine Case
• Medium Wave Case
• Large Tidal Case
• Combined Tidal and Wind Case

1. Offshore renewable scenarios – to define the timeline of the expected volumes of offshore renewable generation capacities
2. State of the art of offshore network technologies – establishment of the current state of the art of offshore network technologies and their prospective future development path
3. Analysis at individual farm level – identification of the challenges and resultant technology opportunities from connection of individual large-scale offshore wind or marine energy farms to the UKgrid system, and recommendations for connection solutions for investigation.
4. Analysis at multiple farm level – evaluation of the optimal architecture(s) that could be developed to collect, manage and transmit back to shore the electrical energy produced by multiple, large-scale offshore renewable energy farms.

• Description of the approach taken towards the modelling activities, the models developed, the software tools utilised, an overview of the studies performed (including performance, high level impact on the onshore system), details of the raw inputs and outputs of the studies, and an interpretation of these outputs. ?
• Methodologies for the optimal design and selection of the electrical infrastructure for individual offshore renewable energy farms, both for connections within a farm and for connections to the onshore system. This includes comments for potential new grid connection specifications relating to these infrastructure approaches and proposals for new and/or revised Grid Code requirements.
• ?Control system implications of the selected individual offshore renewable energy farm configurations.
• ?Preliminary comparative economic assessments of the connection of individual offshore renewable energy farms into the onshore UK grid. Data used has predominately been derived from previous1SKM studies for the ETI. Where new assumptions are made these are included in this report. ?
• Specific architectures from the scenarios report and the state of the Art Technology reports were considered together with some additional ideas such as polyphase systems and storage solutions. ?
• Further recommendations of the technology development opportunities for ETI.

1. Offshore renewable scenarios – to define the timeline of the expected volumes of offshore renewable generation capacities
2. State of the art of offshore network technologies – establishment of the current state of the art of offshore network technologies and their prospective future development path
3. Analysis at individual farm level – identification of the challenges and resultant technology opportunities from connection of individual large-scale offshore wind or marine energy farms to the UKgrid system, and recommendations for connection solutions for investigation.
4. Analysis at multiple farm level – evaluation of the optimal architecture(s) that could be developed to collect, manage and transmit back to shore the electrical energy produced by multiple, large-scale offshore renewable energy farms.

1. Offshore renewable scenarios – to define the timeline of the expected volumes of offshore renewable generation capacities
2. State of the art of offshore network technologies – establishment of the current state of the art of offshore network technologies and their prospective future development path
3. Analysis at individual farm level – identification of the challenges and resultant technology opportunities from connection of individual large-scale offshore wind or marine energy farms to the UKgrid system, and recommendations for connection solutions for investigation.
4. Analysis at multiple farm level – evaluation of the optimal architecture(s) that could be developed to collect, manage and transmit back to shore the electrical energy produced by multiple, large-scale offshore renewable energy farms.

• Distributed Smaller Windfarms
• Large Windfarms
• Very Large Windfarms
• Small Marine (tidal and wave)
• Medium Wave
• Large Tidal
• Combined Tidal and Wind

1. Offshore renewable scenarios – to define the timeline of the expected volumes of offshore renewable generation capacities
2. State of the art of offshore network technologies – establishment of the current state of the art of offshore network technologies and their prospective future development path
3. Analysis at individual farm level – identification of the challenges and resultant technology opportunities from connection of individual large-scale offshore wind or marine energy farms to the UKgrid system, and recommendations for connection solutions for investigation.
4. Analysis at multiple farm level – evaluation of the optimal architecture(s) that could be developed to collect, manage and transmit back to shore the electrical energy produced by multiple, large-scale offshore renewable energy farms.

• There were two main primary areas of focus for offshore network technologies:.
  1. Submarine cable systems - critical to the development of networks because they contribute such a significant element in terms of project cost, risk and technology developments and also impact on the optimisation of system architectures.
  2. HVDC systems utilising technology which currently exists are able to be applied to support the development of offshore renewables for projects which are growing in size,complexity and connection distance
• Interoperability and control issues and barriers to integration of technologies from different suppliers were not seen as significant.
• Major bottlenecks in the supply chain over the next 30 years - excluding those linked to wind turbines, the major constraint identified was that of subsea cables, where there is no UK subsea cable manufacturing capability.
• Technology Opportunities where ETI could focus future research: -
  • HVDC voltage standardisation ?
  • HVDC circuit breakers ?
  • HVDC multi-terminal control standardisation ?
  • HVAC collector voltage optimisation studies ?
  • Offshore cable reliability and repair improvements ?
  • Pilot projects to connect small generation sized units using direct DC connections ?
  • Alternative technologies for production of higher voltage power electronic devices
  • ?Alternatives to replace HVAC export cables
  • ?Offshore platform design including standardisation on approach for fire protection.
  • ?Marinisation of offshore connection equipment

• the collection of electrical energy offshore from individual and multiple renewable energy farms,
• the transportation of bulk electrical energy generated by these offshore farms to the UK shoreline,
• the connection and integration of these offshore farms into the onshore power system.

To inform the UKERC Technology and Policy Assessment project that is examining consumer attitudes to changes in electricity supply voltage, the TPA team co-funded a working paper together with the Transformation of the Top and Tail of Energy Networks (TTaT), an Engineering and Physical Research Council (EPSRC) Grand Challenge research programme. The working paper draws upon a pilot study exploring consumer experiences and attitudes to appliance malfunction, which aimed to establish prior knowledge about voltage, and understanding of the Distribution Network Operators (DNO) role in supplying power.

• Vehicle electrification
• The project requires a broad range of expertise
• Modelling capability
• Scenarios have been developed to test further factors
• Interim findings
• Roadmap for efficient ULEV uptake and use
• Trials will deliver further robust evidence

• The Consumers, Vehicles and Energy Integration project is seeking to address the challenges involved in transitioning to a secure and sustainable low carbon vehicle fleet
• An integrated modelling toolset has been developed able to examine the implications for energy supply, infrastructure, vehicles, users, policy and commercial models – and with it, it is possible to test a wide range of scenarios
• Findings from several areas are already available and have been incorporated into a roadmap for delivering efficient vehicle decarbonisation
• Upcoming trials will deliver further robust evidence on how consumers respond to different charging propositions and attitudes to ULEV adoption

• CVEI project overview
• Project structure
• Analytical framework
• Accounting for trends and developments elsewhere
• Consumer adoption: understanding the mass-market
• Interim findings
• Dissemination of outputs

We welcome the opportunity to comment on the findings of the Cost of Energy Review, conducted by Professor Dieter Helm. In our response, we address most of the questions set out in the Call for Evidence from BEIS. Before turning to these specific questions, we have three general observations about the Review and the Call for Evidence.

First, whilst the review title focuses on the cost of energy, this is misleading. The terms of reference and the Review report make it clear that the main focus is electricity rather than energy in general.

This distinction is important since the data shows significant differences in the position of UK electricity and gas costs when compared to costs in other countries. There are also differences between relative costs for households and relative costs for business energy consumers. UK electricity prices are higher up the European league table than prices for gas. Electricity prices for energy intensive industries in the UK are particularly high.

Our second comment is that there are important distinctions between prices, costs and bills. Whilst much of the debate focuses on prices, the costs of energy for consumers also depends on their energy consumption. Therefore, it is also important to consider energy efficiency of buildings, appliances and industrial processes since these are a key determinant of costs.

Our third comment is that costs need to be considered for the electricity system as a whole. Whilst the separate questions in the Call for Evidence about generation, networks and retail supply are understandable, costs to consumers partly depend on interactions between these components of the electricity system. This compartmentalised approach to the evidence base could mean that some of these systemic interactions are missed.

This working Paper has been prompted by an inquiry into low carbon networks launched in September 2015 by the House of Commons Select Committee on Energy and Climate Change. A response on behalf of UKERC has been submitted to the Committee. This present paper expands on many of the themes included in that response and provides more detail and discussion

• variation in capacity growth requirements;
• available physical space; and
• land value

• smart grid solutions;
• fault current limiters;
• energy storage; and
• conventional reinforcement

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• PiEV recharging infrastructure requirements are presented for domestic, commercial and public applications.
• Power requirements, which are fundamental to determine PiEV connection capacities and ultimately system design solutions are determined for a range of recharging scenarios.
• Significant standards are discussed.
• A description of technology options is carried out for connectors, recharge points, DC recharging, inductive recharging and mitigation measures such as local load management and energy storage.
• The requirements capture, standards review and technology options are used to present system designs for a range of scenarios

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

1. wall box (e.g. for domestic or workplace locations);
2. public charge post (e.g. for use on street);
3. DC charger (for very high power transfer); and
4. inductive charger (to avoid physical connections).

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• The key finding is that moderate uptake of plug-in vehicles could cause significant challenges for distribution networks, if demand from recharging is uncontrolled.
• The constraints arise largely from voltage drop and unbalance, violation of transformer and cable thermal limits, increases in network losses, fault levels and issues such as harmonics and step voltage changes.
• Traditional network reinforcement, by way of substation upgrades and cable reinforcement, is likely to be increasingly inefficient in terms of accommodating the incremental and unpredictable loads expected from plug-in vehicles and heat-pumps.
• If uptake is expected to be significant, a ‘smart grid’ approach is recommended.

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

1. evaluate the different ways in which recharging infrastructure may be provided in the UK and recommend the requirements for the UK deployment;
2. evaluate the main cost drivers for plug-in vehicle recharging infrastructure, enabling a realistic forecast to be generated; and
3. determine the regulatory, legislative and commercial issues associated with recharging infrastructure and recommend how they should evolve for the UK deployment.

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Stage 1: Concept Design (definition of hypotheses, model development and experimental design)
• Stage 2: Detail Design (planning the implementation of an environment to test the models developed in Stage 1)
• Stage 3: Construction (implementation and pre-commissioning testing environment)
• Stage 4: Operation (data-gathering, analysis and hypothesis/model testing)
• Stage 5: Exploitation (evaluation, communication, standardisation, etc)

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• This work package identified six principal actors:
  • Government & Regulation
  • Electric Vehicle Charging Services
  • Vehicle and Infrastructure Providers
  • Other Service Providers
  • Electricity Supply Chain
  • Electric Vehicles and Owners / Users
• From the information flow and motivations between these actor, an an open architecture solution is proposed.
• Implementation could be
  
  • Strategic, ie planned for long term results on a large scale, or
  • Organic ie piecemeal, adapting to immediate local needs.
• Standards will be needed to allow interconnectivity of devices and data flow.
• Recommended next steps include
  • Publication and wide dissemination of the proposed system architecture.
  • Ongoing engagement of a broad range of stakeholders
  • Investment in a demonstration project
  • Engagement of key stakeholders in the Government and regulatory space

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Executive Summary (also available as a separate document)
• Section 1: Introduction
• Section 2: Infrastructure Requirements
• Section 3: Business Design
• Section 4: System Design
• Section 5: Realization
• Appendices (in separate documents)
  • A - supporting Section 2 (Infrastructure Requirements)
    
    • A1: Intelligent Infrastructure Requirements
    • A2: Intelligent Infrastructure Standards Requirement
  • B -supporting Section 3 (Business Design)
    
    • B: Conceptual Business Architecture
  • C - supporting Section 4 (System Design)
    • C1: Conceptual Application Architecture
    • C2: Conceptual Data Architecture
    • C3: Conceptual TechnicalArchitecture
  • D - supporting Section 5 (Realization)
    • D1: Plan for Architecture Realisation
    • D2: Standards Gap Assessment Report
    • D3: Delivery Phases, Options, Costs and Risks

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Introduction
• High Level System Context Views
• System Context Diagram – Inputs and Outputs
• Key Events and Data Entity Definitions
• Non Functional Requirements
• High Level Initial Use Case Model
• Appendix 1 : Acceptance Criteria
• Appendix 2 : Intelligence Levels

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Introduction
• Context for Vehicle Standards Requirements
• Candidate Areas for Standards
• Appendix 1 : Examples of current activity on standards
• Appendix 2 : Sources

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• ExecutiveOverview
• Introduction
• Development of the Model
• Evolutionary Models
• Possible Further Use of the CBM

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• ExecutiveOverview
• Introduction
• Overall Conceptual Component Relationship Diagram
• Conceptual Component Relationship Diagrams – Evolutionary Phases .
• Conceptual Component Relationship Diagrams – Static Relationship View
• Conceptual Application Architecture - Component Descriptions
• Conceptual Application Architecture – Component Interaction Matrix
• Overview of potential component context for domestic charging
• Conceptual Application Architecture – Logical Layers

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Executive Overview
• Context and Scope for Conceptual Data Architecture
• High Level Subject Area Data Model
• Conceptual Data Model .
• Relationship to other artefacts .

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Executive Overview
• Operational Modelling
• Conceptual Technical Architecture Content .
• Walkthrough Diagrams
• Relationship to other artefacts
• Appendix: Outline for non functional characteristics and levels

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Executive Overview
• Introduction
• Prerequisites
• Stage 2 the Scope of the Intelligent Infrastructure
• Stage 2 Plan on a Page
• Intelligent Infrastructure Components
• Appendix 1: Conceptual Functional Description
• Appendix 2: Capability View of the Component Business Model for the EV Market (relevant to the Intelligent Infrastructure)

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Executive Overview
• Introduction
• Key messages
• Standards Required
• Process and Governance for the Development of Standards
• List of Candidate Areasfor Standards
• Existing Standards Bodies Activity

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Executive Overview
• IntroductionRecap of the Intelligent Infrastructure Requirements (Smart Phase)
• Effect of Emerging Technologies on the Intelligent Infrastructure
• Systems Integration and Settlement within the Intelligent Infrastructure
• Intelligent Infrastructure Realization, Budgetary Estimates (Smart Phase)
• Appendix A: Conceptual Design Detail
• Appendix B: Budgetary Estimates for Simple Evolutionary Phase
• Appendix C: Budgetary Estimates for Semi-Intelligent Evolutionary Phase
• Appendix D: Requirements Recap - High Level Use Cases

1. Evaluate the potential role and economics of plug-in vehicles in the low carbon transport system: generate a quantified understanding of the market potential, cost models and carbon benefits case under defined scenarios of infrastructure investments, government intervention packages and finance model options across a number of key plug-in vehicle type/size/capability points; and
2. Develop the technology tool-kit for delivering an intelligent infrastructure: create a verified open interoperability architecture and generate information to aid infrastructure planning (e.g. to indicate how many recharging points are needed and where they should be located, what mix of power levels are required, how the impact of plug-in vehicle recharging on the electricity distribution network should be managed, how the overall system can be simplified for consumers, etc).

• Moderate uptake of plug-in vehicles could cause significant challenges for distribution networks if demand from recharging is uncontrolled
• Traditional network reinforcement, by way of substation upgrades and cable reinforcement, is likely to be increasingly inefficient
• Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) will need to move away from the conventional, passive reinforcement approach towards a ‘smart grid’ approach
• Success isalso reliant on effective consumer engagement, the costs of which are challenging to forecast.

The meeting considered both the general shape of the Electricity Market Reform (EMR) package and the four specific elements proposed in the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and HM Treasury (HMT) consultations. This summary covers first the generic aspects and then, more briefly, the four specific elements.

This report is an account of the discussion; comments are nonattributed. Opinions expressed in the report do not necessarily represent UKERC’s views. Arrangements for the meeting were facilitated by the UKERC Meeting Place.

• Energy governance and regulation frameworks – time for a change ? Keith MacLean, February 2016
• Enabling efficient future energy networks – what governance and regulation will be needed in 2030 ?. Robert Hull, February 2016
• Enabling efficient networks for low carbon futures. Jorge Vasconcelos, February 2016
• Markets, Policy and Regulation in a Low Carbon Future. John Rhys, January 2016

• Adapting and developing network designs to enable delivery of a cost effective and secure future low carbon energy system in the UK
• Developing new infrastructure approaches
• Demonstrating new infrastructure technologies
• What we have done to date

To recover the cost of energy policies which support the transition towards a low carbon energy system, levies are applied to household and business energy bills. This briefing note focuses on the levies applied to households.

Household energy policy costs

Energy policy costs are applied to household electricity and gas bills, equating to 132, or 13% of the average energy bill in 2016. This research highlights how low-income households are hit hardest by the current arrangements as the poorest households spend 10% of their income on heat and power in their homes, whereas the richest households only spend 3%, so any increase in prices hits the poor disproportionately.

Energy service demands in the UK

Household electricity and gas use represents only 12% of total final UK energy use. Total energy use includes all the energy used to provide househ

The objective of this workshop, organised at the request of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and held on 22 June 2011 at Imperial College, was to gain a better understanding of the smart meter research being undertaken and what else needs to be done.

1. Construction of a set of socio-technical scenarios of air conditioning uptake,
2. Dynamic building simulation to estimate half hourly power consumption of air conditioning in archetypal single buildings,
3. Addition of air conditioning demand to existing prediction of 2050 national grid demand (National Grid Two Degrees 2050 scenario).

• Representative hydrogen transmission model: transmission pipeline of different lengths required to transport hydrogen from production facilities to power generation sites and vehicle refuelling sites
  • Pipe lengths (NTS 32”) modelled for connection to production sites were 5km and 10km without the need for a compression station; pipe lengths (LTS 16”) for connection to refuelling sites were modelled at longer distances up to 200km, with a compression station required for anything over 100km
  • NPV/km for connecting to power stations was £5.4m for installation in 2025
  • NPV/km for connections to refuelling sites was in the range £3.0m to £3.5m depending on network length with the higher cost relating to the need to add in a compression station
  • The additionalcost of the power station scenario was due to the need to use larger diameter and hence more expensive pipe
• Representative hydrogen distribution model: distribution pipelines (LP/MP) required to connect production facilities to vehicle refuelling stations at different capacities and contexts
  • Context is a strong influencer of costs, with first costs per km increasing from rural through to urban and London. This is due to the higher costs of installing pipework in more congested areas.
  • Pipe costs dominate the overall network cost, particularly for the longer network lengths.
  • There is a small increase in cost per km for the higher capacity scenarios
• Hydrogen transmission and the impact of including storage:
  • Connecting a single large storage site into the network is considerably less expensive than connecting multiple storage sites of the same capacity
  • As the pipe lengths modelled were relatively short (5-10km) the storage costs dominated the overall project cost
  • Costs per mcm are considerably higher for the multi-storage option
  • The main benefit of the storage options is the storage itself and not the first cost savings associated with it.
• Hydrogen transmission network and the impact of pipeline material change: comparison of stainless steel 316L pipe with conventional steel using same pipe diameter (32” NTS)
  • First costs per km are higher for the stainless steel innovation
  • There is a slight reduction in cost/km for the longer stainless steel pipe lengths

The gas and electricity sectors feature many different actors that interact in different ways, through commercial arrangements and physical transfers of energy. The activities of the larger actors – generators, suppliers, gas shippers, and network owners and operators – are regulated through various licences.

There is then a raft of standards and codes that govern the interfaces between the actors and many of the characteristics of equipment that is connected to the networks. Most of these documents were established when the gas and electricity sectors were first liberalised in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Although a number have seen various revisions since then, many industry observers have argued that they are out of step with technological and market developments and difficult to change.

This document contains the UKERC response to the 2019 consulation by BEIS/Ofgem about how and why the codes might be revised.

The reason for producing this note is that two distinct strands of thought can be found in the literature on how to conceptualise the costs associated with any additional capacity required to maintain reliability when intermittent generators are added to an electricity network. The first does not explicitly define a system reliability cost rather it assesses the overall change in system costs that arises from additional capacity (Dale et al 2003). This approach can be used to derive system reliability cost if combined with an assessment of the impact on load factors of incumbent stations when new generators are added (see footnote 2). The second includes an explicit system reliability cost. This approach requires that we make an assumption about the nature of the plant that provides back up(Ilex and Strbac 2002). Both approaches should arrive at the same change in total system costs.

To address the aim, each chapter author presented a 10-minute summary of his chapter. This was followed by a five-minute critique by an invited discussant. Comments were invited from the floor for a further 15-minute period. Professor Gary May provided an overview of research in this area at the end of the workshop. The workshop was opened by an invited chair, Professor A.P. Sakis Meliopoulos of the Georgia Institute of Technology. Professor Meliopoulos offered final concluding remarks.

• The UK energy system
• Integrating networks to optimise across energy vectors
• Multi-Vector Integration project

• Description of the main phenomena
• Observations and geomagnetic indices
• Methodologies
• Related phenomena; solar energetic particles and groundlevel enhancement, ionospheric scintillation effects on satellite communication and GNSS signal, GIC and pipelines, hazard combinations
• Regulation
• Emerging trends

• Introduction
• Description of the main phenomena
• Observations, measurements techniques and modelling tools
• Methodologies
• Related phenomena; seismicity
• Regulation
• Emerging trends

• Technical Barriers
  • Line Commutated Converters (LCC)
  • Voltage Source Converters (VSC)
  • Converting AC Transmission Lines to DC Transmission
  • Underground DC Transmission
  • Multi-terminal VSC
  • HVDC Circuit Breakers
• Non-Technical Barriers
  • Costs Associated with Multi-terminal HVDC Links
  • Environmental Concerns
  • Supply Chain Issues

• Appendix A.Barriers to Development of FACTS Devices in UK Grid (Task 4; begins on page 11)
  • The FACTS (Flexible AC Transmission Systems) devices considered in this report, SVCs, STATCOMs and TCSCs, do not appear to have any major technological barriers to further utilisation and development. The major barriers for further utilisation are cost and footprint.
  • Historically in the UK, the advantages offered by the FACTS devices have not, generally, been deemed to merit the high costs and large footprints required. However, this may change as more generation is sited far away from load centres.The requirement to control greater power flows over a larger transmission network will necessitate more voltage and power flow control equipment.
  • It does not appear that cost of the systems will diminish greatly but some of the alternatives, such new lines, are increasingly more expensive and problematic. These drivers and the likely expansion of HVDC may put a strain on the small core of engineers competent to design FACTS and HVDC devices.
  • Each of the active network management technologies discussed have individual barriers to development but the largest general concern expressed by network operators is that of creating niche pockets of non-standard technology around the network and causing legacy problems. To overcome these issues it will be necessary to develop and demonstrate modular solutions that will allow staff to plan, design, maintain and operate ANM systems across the network in a standard manner, preferably not too dissimilar to current methods. The use of ANM has the potential to change the operation of the transmission and distribution networks in the UK but it will be necessary to develop and adopt flexible industry standards and frameworks to allow this to occur.
    
    
• Appendix B.Environmental and Social Impacts of FACTS Devices in UK Grid (Task 5; starts page 37)
  • This report is focussed on the potential environmental and social impacts associated with the application of FACTS (Flexible AC Transmission Systems) in the UK transmission and distribution network to provide enhanced network power flows and as a result release more capacity within the T&D systems.
  • The assessment was done in terms of ecology, designated sites, noise, overhead lines, substations, mitigation options, construction noise, landscape and visual impact, air quality, cultural heritage, hydrology, land contamination, land use, waste, access and traffic management, socio-economic factors (such as employment, benefits to local businesses during construction, loss of recreational areas) EMF exposure and impacts on carbon balance.
  • When considering each candidate technology the characteristic that appears to have the most influence on the potential for environmental impacts is the associated footprint. Another important consideration is that all but one of the options would be sited alongside an existing substation while the other requires the development of an entirely new site.
  • With these factors in mind the two preferred candidate options from an environmental perspective are:
    • Static synchronous compensators (STATCOMs); and
    • Thyristor Controlled Series Compensators (TCSCs) at either end of the selected line

• There are a number of important issues in the onshore grid system that is a function of the grid network, rather than the technologies themselves.
• New wide band-gap materials such as silicon carbide (SiC) andgallium nitride have the potential to deliver increased power electronic device voltage ratings, reduced switching losses, and raised operating temperatures. This has the potential for significant impact on the cost and performance of power electronic converters.
• The deployment of TCSCs on selected transmission corridors in the UK may improve the grid system’s ability to recover to stable operation following selected (unplanned) double circuit outages.
• In some circumstances, HVDC transmission can provide benefits by enabling long distance power transmission, eliminating reactive power flows from long HVAC cable circuits and enabling asynchronous system connections.
• The conversion of selected transmission corridors from AC to HVDC may improve the grid system’s ability to recover to stable operation following selected (unplanned) double circuit outages
• Multi-terminal HVDC (necessary for embedding DC interconnectors in a meshed system) is feasible with both LCC and VSC technologies.
• For a given transmission tower (‘pylon’) size significantly more power can be transmitted on a DC circuit than on an AC circuit (typically two to three times).
• There appears to be no benefit case for converting individual transmission lines in the UK Grid to HVDC to gain additional transmission capacity
• A total of 26 specific technology opportunity areas were identified by the project consortium as worth further examination by the ETI.

• Section 2: The conversion process and the resulting harmonics generated at HVdc terminals, and filtering requirements and the relevant standards.
• Section 3: Options, issues and experience with conversion of AC overhead linesto HVDC lines.
• Section 4: HVDC cable technology
• Section 5: Multi-terminal HVSC controls.

• Technologies Overview
• Power Electronic Devices
• Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS) Devices
• Active Network Management
• HVDC Transmission Technology and Multi-Terminal Schemes
• Performance of Technologies Integrated into UK Grid
• Social and Environmental Impacts
• Technical and Non-Technical Barriers
• Multi-Criteria Technology Assessment
• Opportunities

• Appendix A: TransGrid Solutions Report : Assessment of Performance of Onshore HVDC Systems Integrated into the UK AC Grid (WP2 Task 2; starts on page 12)
  This study looked at integrating HVdc technology into the UK grid by converting existing HVac lines into HVdc lines in order to improve the transmission capacity in selected transmission corridors. The outcome of this study is a qualitative assessment that evaluates the performance of the system following the conversion of selected AC lines to Voltage Source Converter (VSC) HVdc and Line-Commutated Converter (LCC) HVdc, and makes a comparison with the performance of the system without the line conversions. Each line conversion scenario therefore compared three schemes: VSC HVdc, LCC HVdc and AC. Schemes were compared exclusively in terms of their relative impact on transmission system performance, rather than on aspects such as cost or environmental impact.
• Appendix B: Impact of new onshore multi-terminal HVDC (WP 2 Task 3; starts on page 108)
  This report has focused on evaluating the impact of replacing an existing HVAC transmission circuit with an HVDC scheme. As can be seen in section 2.2.3, the required post-fault ratings, for a UK 400 kV double circuit transmission corridor, are in excess of 4 GW. In complying with SQSS specifications, there is negligible benefit of attempting to increase this transmission corridor capacity by replacing it with an onshore HVDC scheme primarily due to economic reasons. The benefits of using an onshore HVDC scheme could be maximised by installing a lowerrating (<4 GW) onshore HVDC cable link in parallel with an existing transmission corridor. However the impact of this application has not been studied as part of this report.

1. Feasibility of new technology application:Assessment ofthe feasibility of using new technologies now emerging in the marketplace, and those in development, to provide increased T&D capacity and improved management of network power flows, in order to facilitate increasedrenewable energy installation levels in the UK.
2. Feasibility of onshore multi-terminal HVDC:Assessment of the technical feasibility of an onshore multi-terminal HVDC systemdeployed in the UK, its performance when integrated with an existing AC gridnetwork, and the technology implications and benefits case for the conversion of existing AC lines to DC operation.

• Appendix A. Smarter Grid Solutions Report: Technology Options, Benefits and Barriers Workshop Review (Task 6; starts page 11)
  The main objectives of the workshop were to:
  • Ensure all participants are informed about project activities and expected outcomes
  • Consider the relative merits of the technologies under review
  • Identify all issues that translate into benefits or barriers for the technologies under review
  • Identify and prioritise assessment criteria
  • Assess the range of opinions on uncertain, controversial and subjective issues
  • •Identify and assess technology development opportunities
  The workshop satisfied all of these objectives
  
  
• Appendix B. Smarter Grid Solutions Report: Multi-Criteria Assessment of Technologies (Task 7; starts page 42)
  This workshop looked at the interaction between various factors in selecting the most appropriate area of further investigation. The assessment results indicated that the assessment criteria would be fulfilled most effectively by pursuing the following development options:
  
  • Investigate use of energy storage to help solve ANM constraints
  • Commission work on new HVDC systems/topologies
  • Prompt changes in regulatory framework to change business drivers
  • Develop effective DC breaker or blocking capability
  An alternative interpretation of the analysis is to focus on the one criterion that was ranked most highly, which was the potential to reduce CO₂ emissions. The development options that were considered to perform best for this single criterion were:
  • Prompt changes in regulatory framework to change business drivers
  • Support R&D in new devices for greater capability/performance
  • Commission work on new HVDC systems/topologies
  • Develop effective DC breaker or blocking capability
  • Investigate use of energy storage to help solve ANM constraints
  Energy storage was highlighted as being of particular interest and very relevant to the challenges faced in connecting more renewables to the existing system. It is an important outcome of this work that energy storage did not feature amongst the technologies identified for consideration but when industry stakeholders discussed the objectives and context for the assessment energy storage was highlighted as being of value.
  It is perceived that the technology could be effective in meeting the assessment criteria, including enhancing network capacity and allowing more renewables to connect, but some changes to the regulatory environment may be necessary for this solution to be used widely.

• The principel barriers to deployment of power electronic converterse and distribution level are cost and losses. These are expected to be overcome by advances in technology.
• SVC technology works effectively but is expensive.
• STATCOMS have a limited track record and higher costs and losses
• Barriers to using series compensation in the UK include the extensive modelling required, and the potential for introducing sub-synchronous resonance into the network
• There are no notable barriers to the deployment of phase shifting transformers, which are already in use in the UK
• The main barrier to using dynamocthermal rating is the disruption to existing assumptions and methods in planning and operation of the netowrk.
• Barriers to deployment of active voltage managment include the relatively tight range of acceptable voltages and hte potatneial large impact of generation, the complexity of the relationship between voltages at different parts of a network and the output of connected generation, and the rate of change of voltage and speed of response required.
• Demand side management requires a contractural agreement between the network operator and the user defining the amount of load that can be removed or assigned to the user, the modality of the control and tariffs and penalties applied.

This response provides recommendations on the reform of the energy supply market, based on research on “energy retail market governance” undertaken within UKERC.

• Overall, we recommend that reform of the retail energy market should not be considered in independence from the work on ‘systems flexibility’, energy transitions, ‘whole systems’, network charging reform and wholesale market policy.
• We recommend that the evaluation of energy retail market success should explicitly include an assessment of its compatibility with a low-carbon transition. Specifically, the retail market should allow for long-term investment recovery in low-carbon solutions .
• We also provide an overview of approaches to organising default energy commodity supply in some US energy retail competition states.
• We suggest that Ofgem (and Government) consider improving the potential for intermediaries and assess the likely implications of resale of commodity energy by a wider range of eligible players, subject to customer protection requirements.

The RIIO (Revenue=Incentives+Innovation+Outputs) model, introduced in 2013, is designed to ensure that payments to companies running the gas and electricity transmission and distribution networks are fair to network users and permit the recovery of reasonable costs in developing, maintaining and operating the networks.

The network licensees allowed revenue is linked to their performance and should therefore offer them incentives for securing investment, driving innovation and delivering the service that customers expect. However, some commentators have suggested that the licensees have been making unjustified profits. With network charges making up around a quarter of the average household energy bill, it is anticipated that the new price control framework will be tougher and provide lower expected returns for networklicensees.

The RIIO-2 frameworkconsultation is welcome. Ofgems final view on price control allowances will be published by the end of 2020 with the new network price controls ('RIIO-2') due to be implemented in 2021.

In our submission we respondedto the individual points raised in the call. We also note the following:

We support the proposal to reduce the price control period from 8 to 5 years. The energy system is undergoing unprecedented change, not only with continued transformation of the generation background but also major changes to the way electricity is used, such as for transport and heating. However, the rate and precise locations of these changes is uncertain. A shorter price control period will provide the opportunity for incentives and cost recovery to be adapted to the changing circumstances.

Maintenance of acceptable levels of reliability while facilitating the energy system transformation at least cost requires substantial innovation in technologies, business processes and commercial arrangements. The development of new innovations and associated benefits to consumers often takes years to be realised, sometimes beyond a price control period in which network company shareholders would expect a return. We therefore support the proposal to retain dedicated innovation funding but encourage greater clarity on the scope of activities that can make use of such funding and on best practice in the generation and dissemination of evidence on proposed innovations.

We welcome moves to increase the accountability of the network companies and would urge Ofgem to concentrate on those measures that have a genuine and positive impact on the network companies activities in the context of the whole energy system. We note that thisis not restricted to the business plans submitted under RIIO-2 but extends to a whole raft of codes and interactions. These include the evolving responsibilities of the Electricity System Operator (ESO), the relationships between the ESO, the transmission owners and the Distribution Network Operators, and the processes for ensuring that the full set of codes, standards and market arrangements are coherent and fit for purpose. This is a challenging task that requires constant attention to the big picture and sufficient resources, commitment and expertise on the part of the network owners, system operators and Ofgem.

In applying tighter controls that avoid excessive returns to the network licensees owners, the upside and downside risks should be clearly assessed and incentives for managing risk placed on those parties best placed to do so.

Pathways that are consistent with legislated net zero targets are likely to see highly significant changes to demand for electricity. When these changes will start to take place and how quickly is uncertain, which leads to challenges when setting price controls. Key elements to circumnavigate this will be flexibility and scenario planning.

The need for network reinforcement can be reduced by the appropriate use of flexibility, e.g. in the timing of EV charging. However, the means by which different sources of flexibility might be encouraged and then utilised are still immature and it is not yet clear which will actors prove to be the most significant and efficient in providing services.

Flexibility can only go so far in helping meet power supply needs; at some point, network capacity often proves the most cost-effective means, especially when considering its reliability and lifetime, and the opportunities provided by asset replacement. The triggering of investment in network assets presents an opportunity not just to meet the immediate need or that forecast for the next few years, but to provide for the maximum transfer that can be envisaged throughout the path to net zero. This is likely to be cheapest for consumers over the longer term as the incremental cost of additional electrical capacity is small relative to the total cost of aproject, it avoids the need for repeated interventions, andit saves on the long-term cost of network losses.

Ofgem has noted in the consultation document that some form of scenario planning of investment is likely to be needed. A number of scenarios should be developed that encompass key uncertainties but are consistent across Britain in respect of the whole, multi-vector system, and associated assumptions.

There should be engagement with Local Authorities and other stakeholders to develop regional plans of future energy needs, such as a Local Area Energy Plan. This engagement is important as local, regional, or devolved administration policies as well as different geographies and starting points can drive different actions.

Innovation is a long-term process and uncertainty is inherent to it there is always the potential for unforeseen things to arise. What this means for the energy system is that:

1. Withinaportfolio of innovations, some will realise the intended benefits, but some will not.
2. Where benefits are realised for energy users, they will, in general, take time to accumulate.

Where there is uncertainty about the effect or cost of new practices or technologies on an energy system and its users who ultimately pay but also benefit from innovations that are adopted it is reasonable for those users to share the risk by sharing the cost of resolution of the uncertainties. However, arguments might be made that costs should be shared not by energy system users, i.e. its customers, but by taxpayers, e.g. through funding by UKRI.
A less than perfect set of arrangements for the sharing of costs between different parties should be accepted if that is what is necessary to support R&D capacity, address risks, and drive innovation. Moreover, the amount of network customers money that is being proposed in RIIO-ED2 to support innovation is modest compared with the network companies total expenditure and the benefits that will accrue to customers and society as a whole in the energy system transition.

Good governance and good practice on the part of network licensees is essential to ensure that customers money is used effectively. In particular, we agree with Ofgem that data transparency associated with network innovation projectsneeds to be much improved.

In order that the scope of Network Innovation Allowance (NIA) funding is not set too narrowly, we think it important to have a clear understanding of what a successful energy system transition involves. We include in our response a first draft of a definition and include recommendations for the threshold that projects must meet to be funded.

Summary: The greatest challenges faced by Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) in forming investment plans relate to the gathering and use of information with suitable levels of spatial and temporal detail. Access to smart meter data should help, but innovation will be required to turn data into useful information.

A final observation is that it is important for the UKs economy as a whole that the UK has the capacity to undertake research and development, to innovate, and to generate evidence in order to drive the commercial viability of ideas

The UKERC response to the ofgem consultation 'Getting more out of our electricity networks by reforming access and forward-looking charging arrangements'

The following analysis revisits the relationships between the reserve requirements, the capacity margins needed to maintain the reliability of supplies, the costs of intermittency, the capacity credit for intermittent generation, and several other quantities. It is not put forward as a substitute for full-blown modelling studies, but does provide a reminder of principles and an independent means of checking results. It rests on a few key parameters, principally the means, standard deviations and ranges of the frequency distributions of the various quantities. Whilst this is a simplification, it helps to make the underlying relationships more transparent and enables the analyst to explore the effects of changes in assumptions. It begins with a basic case and then relaxes the assumptions.

There are three questions which recur throughout the paper:

1. What are the required additions to reserves to maintain the reliability of supplies when intermittent generation is substituted for thermal generation? It is unquestionable that the margin will need to rise when the variance of thesupplies increases if supply reliability is to be maintained—but by how much? An alternative way of putting the question is what is the ‘capacity credit’ (defined below) that can be given to intermittent generation?
2. What is the associated increase in system costs that would result from building more wind and less thermal generation?
3.  At the project level, how can we compare the costs of a large wind farm say with the thermal alternative? To answer this, we need to know the answer to (1) above—how much extra ‘reserve’ or ‘backup’ capacity is required for the intermittent resource, and of course what its costs will be.

The paper does not answer questions as to what the optimum reserve margin should be or how it should be determined. There is a long debate on the role of markets and regulation for determining reserve margins which this paper does not get into. Suffice it to say that whatever policy position is taken: (a) in actuality there is at all times a reserve margin, which is the difference between available capacity and demand; (b) this quantity is of interest and needs to be monitored since when it declines the probability of losing load increases; (c) when for policy purposes estimates of the costs of introducing intermittent resources onto the system are being made it is necessary to compare like-with-like such that the costs of introducing them, including the costs of maintaining the reliability of supplies, can be compared with the costs of the alternatives.

• GridON’s FCL uses a direct current coil to magneticallysaturate the iron core – providing a very low impedanceduring normal operation and a high impedance to limit faults.
• Unlike previous technologies, this design offers the advantages of a pre-saturated core type fault currentlimiter without the need for superconducting components.
• The design is based on combining industry standard, proven transformer technology with GridON’s unique and proprietary magnetic saturation technology
  
  

• Vehicle electrification
• Users and Vehicles
• Energy supply
• Project aims
• Project structure
• Modelling framework
• Narratives (scenarios)
• Stage 1 initial analysis
• Stage 1 research with consumers
• Stage 1 research with fleets
• Stage 2

• Substantial challenges associated with widespread roll-out of low carbon vehicles; shift from a “problem for the network” to an “opportunity through integration of vehicles as part of a wider system” can yield benefits for all actors in the system, including:
  • increased uptake of low-emission vehicles, managing charging and refuelling, and optimising the system design
• Analysis and solutions must be holistic (considering all parts of the system together, including users)
• Robust trials in Stage 2 will generate data to test solutions and inform analysis, and will add unique value:
• Trial with mass-market users (i.e. people from the majority of the vehicle user and fleet operator markets)
• Addressing widely-applicable plug-in vehicles (BEVsand PHEVs) suitable for wide range of users
• Holistic system design

The following submission is preceded by a tabled summary of the current state of energy research and development and deployment in the UK, technology by technology. This is used as the basis for commentary on the technology potential of:

• Wind
• Photovoltaics
• Hydrogen and fuel cells
• Marine renewables
• Bioenergy
• Groundsource heat pumps
• Microgeneration
• Intelligent grid management
• Energy storage Finally,

UKERC offers its views on the research funding landscape. Recommendations are highlighted in bold.

This Consultation Response to the Energy and Climate Change Committee's Inquiry on Electricity Demand Side Measures explores whether the Governments and Ofgems current proposals for incentivising the development of demand reduction measures are enough to ensure the potential energy savings outlined in the 2012 Energy Efficiency Strategy are achieved.

This Consultation Response to the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee Inquiry into the resilience of electricity infrastructure.In this response we discuss whether theUKs electricity system is resilient to peaks in consumer demand and sudden shocks, andhow the costs and benefits of investing in electricity resilience are assessed and decisions made.

The UK Energy Research Centre welcomes this opportunity to provide input to the HMT Carbon Floor Price Consultation. We have focused only on the questions where we believe we may have something to offer. The observations have benefited from discussions at an “Independent Experts Workshop on Electricity Market Reform” convened jointly by UKERC and the Imperial Collage Centre for Energy Policy and Technology on 31 January 2011.

UKERCs 2017 Review of Energy Policy, appraises energy policy change over the last 12 months, and makes a series of recommendations to help meet the objectives of the governments Clean Growth Plan.

Our main recommendations are:

1. ‘Develop a strategy to avoid ‘cliff edges’ for the energy sector due to Brexit, including effects on interconnectors, the single electricity market for the island of Ireland, and nuclear power.
2. A White Paper that includes stronger incentives for energy efficiency across the economy, and an enhanced programme of low carbon heat demonstration and evaluation.
3. Learn from the success of offshore wind by extending competitive auctions in the power sector.
4. Minimise the costs of electricity system change and renewables integration by increasing incentives for flexibility.
5. Complement the additional funding for CCS innovation with a new strategy for deployment in the industrial and power sectors.
6. Ensure that vehicle taxation and other incentives are compatible with the target for phasing out new conventionally fuelled cars and vans by 2040. This should be complemented by a wider strategy for mobility that takes into account anticipated new services and business models.
7. A more comprehensive programme of action to involve citizens and communities in the clean energy transition, building on ‘Green Great Britain Week’.
8. Identify opportunities for energy policy learning across the UK – particularly in the areas of heat, engagement and energy efficiency.

1. The transition to net-zero will affect the whole economy. Investment and policy decisions by all government departmentmes need to be compatible with this transition.
2. Policies to support renewable electricity generation should be more ambitious, building on deployment and cost reduction successes. Action is also needed to ensure electricity market rules are fit for a fully decarbonised power sector.
3. Decisions by the energy regulator, Ofgem, should also be compatible with net-zero. This includes enabling investment in local electricity networks to facilitate heat and transport decarbonisation, and ensuring more active use of existing networks.
4. Local energy systems could play a significant role in achieving net-zero, particularly in the integration of electricity, heat and transport. More resources and greater powers for Local Authorities will help to ensure the potential for local action is realised.
5. A clear plan is required for upgrading the UK housing stock. A heat and energy efficiency White Paper must include policies for widespread deployment of low carbon heat (including demonstrating hydrogen at scale) and for prioritising low income households.
6. Whilst the decarbonisation of industry is receiving more attention, policy initiatives are not joined up. Funding for specific projects and industrial clusters should be complemented by market creation policies, including for carbon capture and storage.
7. Our analysis shows that achieving net-zero requires the phase out of fossil-fuelled vehicles to be brought forward to 2030. Immediate action is also required to counter the rapid increase in sales of larger cars (including SUVs).
8. Plans to meet net-zero should maximise environmental co-benefits. Potential negative impacts on ecosystems should be assessed and mitigated.
9. Continuing uncertainty about the UK’s changing relationship with the European Union has already affected decarbonisation plans. Whatever the outcome, close co-operation with the EU is likely to make it easier to achieve net-zero.
10. The transition to net-zero should not compromise energy security. In light of the events on August 9th, responsibilities for ensuring system resilience need to be clarified and applied in a more rigorous way.

In this issue of UKERCs annual Review of Energy Policy, we discuss some of the effects of COVID-19 on the energy system and how the unprecedented events of 2020 might impact energy use and climate policy in the future.

Focusing on electricity demand, transport, green jobs and skills, Brexit, heat, and societal engagement, the Review reflects on the past year and looks forward, highlighting key priorities for the Government.

Key recommendations

Electricity

The scale of investment in the power system required over the coming decade is huge. A big challenge is market design. We need a market that can incentivise investment in low carbon power and networks at least cost whilst also providing incentives for flexibility. Output from wind and solar farms will sometimes exceed demand and other timesfallto low levels. The right mix of flexible resources must be established to deal with variable output from renewables, with the right market signals and interventions in place to do this at least cost.

Mobility

The end of the sale of fossil fuel cars and vans by 2030 must be greeted with enthusiasm. Yet if this is to play its part in a Paris-compliant pathway to zero emissions, it must be one of many policy changes to decarbonise UK transport. Earlier action is paramount, and we recommend a market transformation approach targeting the highest emitting vehicles now, not just from 2030. Phasing-in of the phase-out will save millions of tons of CO2 thus reducing the need for radical action later on. The forthcoming Transport Decarbonisation Plan has a lot to deliver.

Green jobs and skills

COVID-19 recoverypackages offer the potential to combine job creation with emissions reduction. A national housing retrofit programme would be a triple win, creating jobs, reducing carbon emissions and make our homes more comfortable and affordable to heat. However, UKERC research finds that there are significant skills gaps associated with energy efficient buildings and low carbon heat. UKERC calls for a national programme of retraining and reskilling that takes advantage of the COVID downturn to re-equip building service professions with the skills needed for net zero.

Brexit

As the UK leaves the EU on the 1st January it will lose many of the advantages of integration. With new regimes for carbon pricing, trading, and interconnection yet to be agreed, there will be a high degree of uncertainty in the near to medium term. Given upward pressure on energy costs,delays to policy, and this uncertainty surrounding new rules, the overall effects of Brexit are not positive for UK energy decarbonisation.

Heat

UKERC research calls for action on heat to deliver the net zero technologies that we know work - insulating buildings and rolling out proven options. We need to end delay or speculation about less-proven options. Analysis is consistent with recent advice from the CCC that heat policy should focus on electrification whilst exploring options for hydrogen. We need to break the pattern of ad hoc and disjointed policy measures for heat and buildings, and develop a coherent, long-term strategy. This would be best achieved as an integral part of local and regional energy plans, involving local governments as coordinating agents. The aspirations for heat cant be realised unless we also take actionon the skills gap.

Societal engagement with energy

Achieving net zero in 2050 will entail significant changes to the way we live, what we eat and how we heat our homes. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown that when faced with a threat, society can change rapidly. Engaging society with the net zero transition also needs to change, it needs to be to be more ambitious, diverse, joined-up and system-wide, and recognise the many different ways that citizens engage with these issues on an ongoing basis.

As we reach the end of 2018, the scorecard for UK energy policy is mixed. Optimists can point to rapid emissions reductions, cost falls in renewables and the centrality of clean energy within the Industrial Strategy. Ten years after the Climate Change Act was passed, UK greenhouse gas emissions have fallen by 43% from the level in 1990. The UK is on the way to meeting the first three carbon budgets, and a transformation of the power sector is well underway.

However, if we turn our attention from the rear view mirror, the outlook is more pessimistic. As the Committee on Climate Change pointed out in June, there are an increasing number of policy gaps and uncertainties. If not addressed promptly, meeting future carbon budgets will be much more challenging. For some of these gaps, there is a particularly clear and immediate economic case for action.

Key recommendations:

The government needs to take urgent action to ensure that the UK continues to meet statutory emissions reduction targets, and goes further to achieve net zero emissions. This not only requires new policies to fill looming gaps in the portfolio, it also requires much greater emphasis on sharing the benefits and costs of the low carbon transition more equitably. Our main recommendations are:

1. We repeat our call for a heat and energy efficiency White Paper, and recommend that the Industrial Strategy mission to reduce building energy use is extended to existing buildings.
2. A better, more targeted approach to the energy needs of low-income households is required. Energy efficiency investment for these households should be funded via general taxation.
3. Urgent large-scale trials of heat decarbonisation using hydrogen are required to understand whether it could be technically, economically and socially viable.
4. A dashboard of indicators is needed to monitor gas security during the energy transition. The current one dimensional approach is not sufficient.
5. Future electricity policy should build on the Electricity Market Reform policies that have worked well, and adapt them in the light of changes in technologies and costs.
6. Changes in incentives for ‘black start’ and other ancillary services are necessary to ensure that the electricity system remains resilient as it changes.
7. The target for phasing out conventionally fuelled vehicles is inadequate and does not fit with our emissions targets. The 2040 date should be brought forward and linked to accelerated investment in networks and charging.
8. The Industrial Strategy needs to be strongly linked to market creation policies for low carbon technologies. Carbon capture and storage is in particular need of such policies to progress beyond its current holding pattern.
9. To ensure widespread support for the energy transition, there needs to be more focus on equity and justice. The UK government should consider setting up a process similar to Scotland’s Just Transitions Commission to achieve this.
10. Continued vigilance is required to mitigate any negative impacts of Brexit, particularly those that could affect integration with European energy markets.

This review takes stock of UK energy policy ahead of the Autumn Statement, Industrial Strategy and new Emissions Reduction Plan. Its main recommendations are:

1. An integrated, evidence based approach to the new Industrial Strategy and Emissions Reductions Plan. The Industrial Strategy should set out clear priorities and the mechanisms for realising benefits for the UK
2. A new White Paper on Heat and Energy Efficiency
3. A Gas by Design approach to the future of gas that is compatible with carbon budgets and targets
4. A new approach to CCS commercialisation and deployment, in response to the Oxburgh report
5. An extension of the Levy Control Framework beyond 2020, and plans for auctions that include most large-scale electricity technologies and demand reduction in a single auction
6. Reform of the Capacity Mechanism so it gives equal

Energy System Demonstrators are physical demonstrations testing new technologies for low-carbon energy infrastructure.

A review of energy systems demonstrator projects in the UK was undertaken for UKERC by the Energy Systems Research Unit (ESRU) at the University of Strathclyde. The review encompassed 119 demonstrators and consisted of two phases: 1) the identification of demonstrator projects and 2) an analysis of projects and their outcomes.

Energy demonstrators

The review defined an energy system demonstrator as “the deployment and testing of more than one technology type that could underpin the operation of a low-carbon energy infrastructure in the future”. Only demonstrators that post-date the 2008 Climate Change Act were included and that included a physical demonstration at one or more UK sites. 119 projects were identified that met the search criteria.

There were two phases of review activity. Phase 1 involved identification and documentation of demonstration projects, involving a systematic search to identify and record the details of projects. Phase 2 was a review of project outcomes and outputs, particularly end-of-project evaluations, covering technical, economic and social outcomes where available.

The review outputs (available here) are a final report summarising the findings, 119 demonstrator project summaries (the Phase 1 reports), 119 demonstrator output analyses (the Phase 2 reports) and a GIS (Geographic Information System) map and database showing the locations and project details of the demonstrators.

The final report, attendant project summaries and GIS data are intended to provide policy makers and funding bodies with an overview of the existing demonstrator “landscape”, enabling decisions on future demonstrator calls and the focus of those calls to be made with a clearer knowledge of what has already been done.

Project files

• Access the demonstrators GIS map here.
• Access the Phase 1 summaries here.
• Access the Phase 2 summaries here. 

What mix of generation will provide the cheapest total system cost for the GB electricity system after the 30 minute balancing requirement is met, while still meeting carbon reduction targets? Keith Bell, Scottish Power Professor of Smart Grids, University of Strathclyde, and Graeme Hawker, Research Associate, University of Strathclyde, argue there is no simple answer given that calculating costs is next to impossible due to uncertainties around such factors as storage and demand-side management.

• Negotiations over the terms of ‘Brexit’ are likely to be lengthy, complex and difficult. Energy is one policy area in which it may be easier for the UK and future EU27 to find common ground

• Energy cooperation over the past decades has helped European countries to enhance their geopolitical security, respond to growing climate threats, and create a competitive pan-European energy market. Maintaining close cooperation in this field, and the UK’s integration in the European internal energy market (IEM), will be important for the UK and the EU27 post-Brexit.

• Strong UK–EU27 energy cooperation could help ensure that existing and future interconnectors – physical pipes and cables that transfer energy across borders – between the UK, Ireland and the continent are used as efficiently as possible. As European economies, including the UK, look to decarbonize further, interconnectors will help minimize the costs of operating low-carbon electricity systems, and help lower electricity prices for UK consumers.

• The UK and the EU27 have identified the special relations between the UK and the Republic of Ireland as a priority for negotiations. Any future agreement needs to maintain the Single Electricity Market (SEM) across the island of Ireland, as failure to do so could result in an expensive duplication of infrastructure and governance.

• EU funds and European Investment Bank (EIB) loans account for around £2.5 billion of the UK’s energy-related infrastructure, climate change mitigation, and research and development (R&D) funding per year. Replacing these sources of finance will be necessary to ensure that the UK’s energy sector remains competitive and innovative.

• The UK intends to leave Euratom, the treaty which established the European Atomic Energy Community and which governs the EU’s nuclear industry. This process – dubbed ‘Brexatom’ – will have a significant impact on the functioning of the UK’s nuclear industry, particularly in respect to nuclear material safeguards, safety, supply, movement across borders and R&D. Achieving this within the two-year Brexit time frame will be extremely difficult. The UK will need to establish a framework that it can fall back on to ensure nuclear safety and security.

• Remaining fully integrated with the IEM would require the UK’s compliance with current and future EU energy market rules, as well with some EU environmental legislation. The UK government, British companies and other relevant stakeholders will need to maintain an active presence in Brussels and European energy forums, so that constructive and informed engagement can be sustained.

• Without a willingness to abide by the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and in the absence of a new joint UK–EU compliance mechanism, the UK may be required to leave the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) – an instrument in the UK’s and EU’s fight against climate change. Leaving the ETS would be complicated, even more so if the UK leaves before the end of the ETS’s current phase (2013–20). To maintain carbon pricing in some form outside of the ETS, the UK would need to either establish its own emissions trading scheme, which would be complicated and time-consuming; or build on the carbon floor price and introduce a carbon tax. Either of these potential solutions would need political longevity to be effective.

• It is in both the UK’s and the EU27’s interests for the UK to continue to collaborate on energy policy with EU and non-EU member states. The best way to achieve this would be to establish a robust new pan-European energy partnership: an enlarged European Energy Union. In particular, such a partnership could offer a useful platform for aligning EU policies with those of third countries, including the UK, Norway and Switzerland, while allowing them to fully access the IEM and push forward common initiatives. Experience suggests that the EU27 would be more receptive to working within an existing framework or multilateral approach (as with the European Energy Community) than to adopting a bilateral approach (as the EU currently does in its energy relations with Switzerland).

This report aims to understand and quantify these impacts, and therefore addresses the question ‘What is the evidence on the impacts and costs of intermittent generation on the British electricity network, and how are these costs assigned?’ It is based on a review of over 200 international studies.

Energy security is a central goal of energy policy in most countries and with rapid changes occurring throughout the UK energy sector, it remains high on the policy agenda. Recent concerns about UK gas supplies - highlighted by National Grid's gas deficit warning demonstrated just how fundamentally important it is to have a reliable energy system.

Using a number of indicators, ‘The Security of UK Energy Futures’ assesses aspects of security such as energy availability, reliability, sustainability and affordability to examine how energy security risks will change over time

The report draws three main conclusions:

1. There is an important role for energy efficiency and energy demand reduction in energy security strategies; by reducing our energy demand we reduce exposure to risks such as price shocks and energy shortages.
2. The relationship between decarbonisation and energy security is not straightforward. Energy imports are often cited as being insecure, however this can be controversial. Imports can help enhance security by providing additional sources of energy, by lowering costs, or by increasing diversity. What matters most is where the imports are from and whether they are dominated by risky sources or supply routes.
3. Many of the risks can be mitigated; security of the electricity and gas system can be improved significantly by investing in system flexibility. Increasing demand side response has a particularly positive impact on system reliability.

A 500MW interconnector between Ireland and the UK is at the proposal stage. In the latest UKERC working paper, Joseph Dutton, UKERC Researcher and Associate Research Fellow, University of Exeter, examines the institutional and regulatory tensions that could yet derail the project.

• Energy networks as a part of the energy system
• Energy system scenarios
• Network transition challenges
• Evidence base

This Working Paper has been motivated by the growth of distributed energy resources (DER) on the electricity system in Britain, i.e. generation, storage and flexible demand that is connected at distribution network voltages, and the consultation published by Ofgem and BEIS in November 2016 on the subject of electricity system flexibility. It aims to give a very basic and rapid introduction to some of the issues and their origins.

• Energy networks as a part of the energy system
• Energy system scenarios
• Network transition challenges
• Transitioning electricity networks
• Transitioning gas networks
• Transitioning heat networks
• Transitioning hydrogen networks
• Integrating networks to optimise across energy vectors
• Balancing supply and demand
• Policy and economic factors

The UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) has provided research and analysis across the whole energy system since 2004, with funding provided by the Research Councils through a succession of five year phases. Research related to low carbon heat became a significant focus during Phase 3 (2014 2019) and the current Phase 4 includes a research theme devoted to decarbonisation of heating and cooling, with several of our other themes providing relevant insights. Our whole systems research programme addresses the challenges and opportunities presented by the transition to a net zero energy system and economy.

In this submission we address specific consultation questions where UKERC evidence and analysis provides us with relevant insights. In addition there are a number of high level observations that we provide in these introductory remarks.

Overall, we are concerned that the measures outlined in the consultation need to be set within a coherent and ambitious package of policies that work together to drive the UKs transformation to sustainable heating at a rate commensurate with the goal of net-zero by 2050. While we appreciate there are some uncertainties over the future role of the gas grid and the potential for hydrogen for heating, immediate progress in heat system decarbonisation is clearly required as part of this multi-decadal transformation. As the consultation notes, heat pumps offer a low regrets option in some applications and it is widely acknowledged that the UK has a small supplier base and very low level of heat pump deployment compared to many countries. Increasing consumer and installer familiarity, and growing the skills base and supply chain all feature strongly in the process of learning by doing that reduces heat pump costs. Ifheat pump deployment were to proceed linearly to 2050 in line with some scenarios for deployment, annual installations would need to increase by an order of magnitude. Whilst welcome, the current proposals are not sufficient to deliver a large scale market for heat pumps. Ambition and clarity of purpose are essential if heat system decarbonisation is to succeed. We also stress the importance of providing support to support the development of large low carbon heating systems, including systems attached to heat networks. We appreciate that the provisions laid out in the consultation pertain only to specific schemes and note the observations made in the consultation about support for heat networks.

Alongside the required policy changes necessary to support specific heating technologies, wider governance changes will be needed to drive the UK transformation to low carbon heating.Whilst regulation and other forms of financial support for building efficiency improvement are noted in the consultation, we note that it is likely to be important to use sticks as well as carrots if the highest carbon heating systems are to be removed and building efficiency increased. However, it will also be important to consider ownership and regulation of heat networks, the role of local authorities and opportunities for innovation that may be unlocked through regulatory change such as encouraging electricity suppliers to offer smart heating tariffs or enabling community ownership of heat distribution schemes.

While we appreciate these issues are beyond the scope of the current consultation, it is important that these considerations inform policy choices made now.

This UKERC Research Landscape provides an overview of the competencies and publicly funded activities in electricity transmission and distribution research, development and demonstration (RD&D) in the UK. It covers the main funding streams, research providers, infrastructure, networks and UK participation in international activities.

UKERC ENERGY RESEARCH LANDSCAPE: ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION

• Section 1: An overview which includes a broad characterisation of research activity in the sector and the key research challenges
• Section 2: An assessment of UK capabilities in relation to wider international activities, in the context of market potential
• Section 3: Major funding streams and providers of basic research along with a brief commentary
• Section 4: Major funding streams and providers of applied research alongwith a brief commentary
• Section 5: Major funding streams for demonstration activity along with major projects and a brief commentary
• Section 6: Research infrastructure and other major research assets (e.g. databases, models)
• Section 7: Research networks, mainly in the UK, but also European networks not covered by the EU Framework Research and Technology Development (RTD) Programmes
• Section 8: UK participation in energy-related EU Framework Research and Technology Development (RTD) Programmes
• Section 9: UK participation in wider international initiatives, including those supported by the International Energy Agency

The UK power system experienced a period of significant and rapid expansion during the late 1980s and in the 1990s. Many power generation assets are now approaching the end of their useful life and need to be replaced as we decarbonise the overall energy system. Developments in distributed generation and other technologies open important questions as to whether the traditional approaches to development and operation of power systems are still adequate and whether the anticipated major re-investment in transmission and distribution networks could be avoided by adopting new technologies such as smart grids, smart meters and a greater emphasis on demand side participation.

High level research issues identified within the UKERC Energy Supply theme cover a number of areas, including:

• Aging infrastructure replacement strategies before failure - models and tools for condition monitoring - risk management of existing T&D infrastructure
• Energy security & system security
• Environmental sustainability reducing the impact of electricity production, transportation and use on the environment (strive to reduce greenhouse gases responsible for climate change) - need to incorporate climate change driven constraints into system planning and operation (EU renewables targets; 80% 2050 CO2 targets; Meeting UK carbon budgets will require large scale decarbonisation of the electricity sector by 2030)
• Integration of distributed generation including intermittent energy technologies & micro generation - what type of network architecture - reliability and power quality - communication and control aspects of networks - incorporation of demand response and demand side participation (impact of smart meters) - role of energy storage
• Incorporation of smart meters and smart grids (impact on demand and networks)
• Transmission (on- and offshore) and distribution network planning under uncertainty of intermittent renewable resources such as wind and the uncertainty of markets and regulatory policy
• Interaction between electricity and gas networks - Integrated network (multi energy vector) research and optimisation
• Encouraging network innovation and low carbon generation through regulation and market design
• Assessing the potential of heat networks
• Impact of greater European market/network integration (gas and electricity)

These projects are reviewed in this report and from these high level research issues, some of the key research challenges identified are summarised as follows:

• Identifying and quantifying the costsand benefits of community heating and energy systems
• Quantifying Costs and Benefits of Integrating UK and EU Energy Infrastructures
• Smart meters and demand side participation
• The role of gas in the UK energy system
• Resilience of gas systems
• Compatibility of energy market and climate objectives and risks in a post EMR world

Scope of the Call for Evidence and objectives in respect of flexibility

We welcome the attention being paid by Ofgem and BEIS to the need for flexibility in Britain’s electricity system. In our view the main reason to support electricity system flexibility is that it can help minimise the costs of meeting the UK’s statutory climate targets whilst ensuring that system security is not compromised. The electricity system’s ability to adapt to changing demand in timescales of years down to minutes and varying availability of power from different resources will be extremely important to meeting these policy goals. Furthermore, action is needed so that those consumers that are best able to adapt their patterns of use of electricity have sufficient incentives and rewards for doing so. One manifestation of the main goal in accommodating future generation and demand is an objective to maximise the utilisation (across each year of operation) of electricity system assets, i.e. generators, network components and storage facilities.

Whilst the title of the call for evidence focuses on ‘a smart, flexible energy system’, most of the raised relate to the electricity system. We have therefore focused most of our responses on electricity rather than the energy system as a whole. Our responses are selective. We have only answered those questions where we can offer relevant evidence, based on our research and expertise.

• Energy Storage
• Flexible Demand
• Pricing and tariffs
• Procurement of System Services
• Interactions between transmission and distribution
• Industry Leadership
• Roles in planning and operating the future power system
• Evidence and access to data

Scope of the Call for Evidence and objectives in respect of flexibility

We welcome the attention being paid by Ofgem and BEIS to the need for flexibility in Britain’s electricity system. In our view the main reason to support electricity system flexibility is that it can help minimise the costs of meeting the UK’s statutory climate targets whilst ensuring that system security is not compromised. The electricity system’s ability to adapt to changing demand in timescales of years down to minutes and varying availability of power from different resources will be extremely important to meeting these policy goals. Furthermore, action is needed so that those consumers that are best able to adapt their patterns of use of electricity have sufficient incentives and rewards for doing so. One manifestation of the main goal in accommodating future generation and demandis an objective to maximise the utilisation (across each year of operation) of electricity system assets, i.e. generators, network components and storage facilities.

Whilst the title of the call for evidence focuses on ‘a smart, flexible energy system’, most of the raised relate to the electricity system. We have therefore focused most of our responses on electricity rather than the energy system as a whole. Our responses are selective. We have only answered those questions where we can offer relevant evidence, based on our research and expertise.

This document only answers questions 28 -32 inclusive. Another document is available http://ukerc.rl.ac.uk/UCAT/PUBLICATIONS/Response_to_Ofgem-BEIS_call_for_evidence-smart_flexible_energy_system.pdf which gives answers to other questions in the consultation.

UKERC endorses the principles underlying the proposed package of reforms and supports the broad direction and aspirations of the EMR. However we believe that the package is unnecessarily complex and that some important issues, such as governance arrangements and price transparency in wholesale markets have received insufficient attention, or are absent.

A system of feed-in tariffs differentiated by and tailored to specific technologies, coupled with a capacity mechanism, would be sufficient to deliver the twin goals of promoting investment in low carbon generation and ensuring security of supply.

The feed-in tariff (FiT) is the key element of the EMR package. However, a one size fits all approach to FiT design is not appropriate. Low carbon technologies are diverse in terms of technological maturity, cost structure and risk profiles and different technologies may merit different approaches.

We regret that fixed FiTs have been excluded as they are the lowest risk option and they have a proven track record globally in encouraging investment in renewables. Contracts for differences (CfDs) may be appropriate for nuclear, while biomass generation and CCS could be supported by premium FiTs. The Emission Performance Standard (EPS) appears to be the most dispensable part of the EMR packages since other measures, such as carbon price support, will effectively inhibit investment in new unabated coal in the UK.

A capacity mechanism will be needed to give assurance that sufficient capacity will be installed to guarantee security of supply though it may be some time before the mechanism is needed.

We would recommend approaching auctions for FiTs with caution as, for many technologies, the pre-conditions for a successfulauction are not in place. These include the need for established technologies, a vibrant, diversified and competitive market, and a well developed supply chain. Administered prices or beauty contest type tenders could be used initially with a move to auctioning at a later date.

The key risk associated with the proposed package is that its complexity and uncertainty surrounding its implementation could lead to an investment hiatus threatening the attainment of both low carbon generation and security of supply goals.

• There are extremely ambitious technology deployment rates (for example for CCGT, heat pumps and electric vehicles) within some scenarios that could be challenging in reality and should therefore be subjected to stress testing.
• In addition to the need for appropriate investment signals, analysis should address the incorporation of a very active demand side and if the current arrangements can handle large amounts of intermittent generation supplying an elastic demand side.
• UKERC recommends that Ofgem consider a stress test that examines the loss of Norwegian gas supplies.

• Without the adoption of a more holistic approach that addresses BETTA structural reform and network regulation, it is difficult to see how a satisfactory resolution of the transmission access issue can be achieved.
• It is proposed that more strategic and unified development of the onshore and offshore network together with the provision of interconnection would be encouraged through common or at least zonal ownership of offshore transmission assets, while cost-effectiveness and the efficient delivery of assets could be achieved through tendering and outsourcing construction.
• Modern distribution networks are not typically designed to accommodate generation; a number of technical and operational challenges will need to be addressed in order for the connection of significant amounts of distributed generation on these networks.
• The consequences of intermittency or variability of input will need to be managed by a combination of retaining conventional plant and developing demand response. Additionally, interconnection with adjacent transmission systems and improved forecasting of wind resource and maintaining geographic diversity of wind generation could also reduce the impacts of intermittency.
• The role of smart grids will be to enhance the capacity and utilisation of the electricity grid (both transmission and distribution) by means other than investing in traditional transmission assets and, via the deployment of smart metering, massively increase the contribution of the demand side to system security and the decarbonisation of the heat and transport sectors.
• UKERC is concerned that a major opportunity will be missed unless there is a timely change to a regulatory regime that encourages objective and costefficient choices between investment and smart grid solutions.

The prices paid for electricity by domestic customers in the UK has been a regular discussion point in both policy debate and the media. A particular concern is the contribution that policies to incentivise low-carbon generation and energy saving make to the bills paid by householders. In response to these concerns, the UK Energy Research Centre’s Technology and Policy Assessment team examined in detail the data available on prices in the UK and other countries to address the question: How do the impacts of government policies funded through consumer electricity bills differ between countries?

This report reviews evidence on electricity prices paid by household (i.e. domestic) consumers with a focus on the UK and selected case study countries (Germany, France, Sweden and Australia), supplemented by consolidated EU-wide data to provide a broader context. Gas prices were not examined in detail because to date, policy has generally had a much greater impact on electricity prices, and UK gas prices are in the lower quartile of the EU range for all domestic consumers and almost all commercial and industrial consumers.

Key findings

• UK domestic electricity prices are higher than many EU countries - but not amongst the highest. They are around the median of those in Western Europe.
• Countries make different choices over which categories of consumer bear which costs, for example how costs are shared between industry and households. Countries also differ in terms of resources, the mix of power stations, and network costs. As a result caution should be exercised when comparing electricity prices between countries. There are significant differences in price breakdown between countries, even for those with broadly similar total prices.
• Wholesale energy and supplier costs together make the biggest component of UK domestic electricity price.
• UK policy costs are the lowest amongst the study countries, and total UK low-carbon policy support costs per MWh are below the EU average, despite an above-average share of electricity that receives support. Policy has contributed to increases in domestic electricity prices in the UK and other countries over the past five years but UK domestic electricity bills have not increased at the same rate as prices, due to the effects of energy efficiency policies designed to reduce overall consumption.
• There are a plethora of policies (both current and past) and taxes. This, together with a conflation of social policies and low-carbon policies, and of policy impacts with concerns over market structures, charging regimes and supplier profit margins, creates a very complex overall picture.
• The evidence for policy impacts is largely well understood but complexity creates the opportunity for differing interpretations or selection of the facts. This may help to explain some of the continuing controversy in the area since it allows different stakeholders to interpret and represent the facts differently, or select different subsets of those facts, to suit vested interests or political positions.

Electricity price formation is complex and affected by policies in the UK and all of the case studies considered in this review. Different policy approaches, geographical factors and mixes of power generation mean that comparison requires considerable caution, avoiding over-simplification. Nevertheless there is no evidence to support the contention that policy costs are either the principal source of high domestic power prices in the UK or are high compared to the country case studies or indeed the majority of Western European nations.