Last month, AEMO hosted their second workshop for the Consumer Energy Resources (CER) Data Exchange. We have digested all the information, and these are our notes.
Reminder – why is this so important?
- Consumer Energy Resources (think solar, batteries, EVs) are growing fast and are forecast to make up 45% of dispatchable capacity in the market.
- A market that has been built around a smaller number of generation assets will become millions of different, small, distributed assets in future.
- This will constrain the market, the network and frustrate consumers who have spent money expecting to gain a positive return (either less energy costs or rebate against their investment).
The Politics have started, not everyone is on board… yet.
The message was clear – AEMO wants to work with the industry as part of a co-design process to start thinking about the high-level design of a potential data exchange.The emphasis was on the design preferences for a solution to the CER challenge – not the actual design of a central exchange.
AEMO explained what the CER Data Exchange is NOT:
X Not all data – only for certain use cases where efficient solutions do not exist
X Not for control – communication only with control systems separate
X Not to device – org to org
X Not a replacement – of existing efficient processes
X Not preclusive – of other data sharing mechanisms (incl point to point)
Testing alternate futures – Organic, current state, enhancing existing capabilities or creating a new data exchange?
We worked in groups and our group discussed three use cases. There were differences of opinion on the real need behind some of these use cases (both at our table and from all the attendees).
USE CASE ONE: Sharing of Network Limits = central capability
- Currently, DNSPs set limits on each connection point to provide capacity guardrails for network stability. This is operational, focusing on the next 15 min. Currently, there is no further forecast of this. This relationship is directly between the DNSP and the connection point.
- For this to be a relevant use case, the industry would need to operationalise forecasts to give longer-term visibility.
- Customers, aggregators and retailers would want access to these forecasts, and historical limits to inform contracts, pricing and optimisation.
- Operationally focussed DNSP systems may not be the correct place to do this, so a central capability makes sense.
- Confidentiality concerns with the treatment of data need to be addressed.
USE CASE TWO: Streamlining CER Portfolio Data Access = not recommended.
- It is not clear that there is a need to make CER asset data available to those outside the owner of the portfolio such as an aggregator.
USE CASE THREE: Supporting EV Uptake = future state
- Similar to the previous use case this one was a bit vague for groups to understand.
- Could a data exchange help increase uptake of EVs through sharing contract, preferences and other information?
- This is a future state leaning into the concept of the virtual NMI.
- Each EV could plug in anywhere and access its retail contract and preferences – removing the need for current owners to have multiple different charging provider apps and accounts.
Exploring preferences and design trade-offs if a new data exchange was agreed.
The goal of this exercise was to gather design preferences focusing on understanding:
- Extent of functionality – how far should a data exchange go?
- Ownership & Operations – Who should own and operate the exchange; a public/government body or a private consortium?
- Oversight – How much regulation and oversight should be applied – being governed by an existing regulator/authority, a new authority or being self-regulated?
We discussed these preferences in light of three mock scenarios to understand if any of them would be a preferred approach:
- An industry lead Message Bus – this option didn’t get a lot of acceptance, offering limited functionality and lack of trust in ownership
- Extending AEMO IDX (Industry Data Exchange initiative currently in flight) – potentially simplifies costs for participants who must integrate to access market data, however, creates some concerns as to whether it would be fit-for-purpose or be in the best interests of consumers.
- A full new Agency and Exchange – deemed the most expensive and time-consuming to get up and running but provides the greatest flexibility in being fully CER focussed.
Next steps?
The project intends to have a full public consultation paper out before the end of the year, aiming to put together a final roadmap and costings by the end of CQ1 next year.