Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

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

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Place your chosen image here. The four corners must just cover the arrow tips. For covers, the three pictures should be the same size and in a straight."— Presentation transcript:

1 Place your chosen image here. The four corners must just cover the arrow tips. For covers, the three pictures should be the same size and in a straight line. Distributed (Embedded) Generation Benefit DCMF Iain Pielage – 4 th April 2013

2 2 Overview  Background  Previous proposal work (GBECM-23)  Way Forward

3 3 Background  Exemptible distributed (embedded) generators avoid generation related transmission changes and receive equivalent demand charges from the relevant supplier (subject to their own commercial contracts)  Due to the effect of the residual element within TNUoS, this leads to an ‘embedded benefit’ of ~ £25/kW (and increasing)  Also receive BSUoS & Transmission Losses benefits  Different definition of Transmission across GB.  At BETTA, a directly connected gen. at 132kV in Scotland located in close proximity to one which is embedded would arbitrarily pay ~£18/kW more  Ofgem introduced the time limited small gen. discount in Scotland for 132kV directly connected gen. to address this (SLC C13)  Ofgem has indicated that it does not considered the current arrangements as sufficiently cost reflective nor a level playing field for competition and that an enduring solution is required.

4 4 How Does TNUoS Benefit arise?  TNUoS consists of two elements  Locational signal + Residual (revenue recovery) TNUoS Locational Elements only D @ Apaid £10/kW G @ Apays £10/kW EG @ Apays £10/kW Charging Zones Tariffs All equal Inclusion of the Residual Element D @ Apaid £5/kW G @ Apays £15/kW EG @ Apays £5/kW Residual Charging Zones £10 embedded benefit  Relative ‘embedded benefit’ is 2 x the residual in this illustrative example - £10/kW (i.e. Generation Residual Component + Demand Residual Component)

5 5 BSUoS & Losses  Similar to TNUoS, distributed generation  does not pay BSUoS  no adjustment for transmission losses  Receives both BSUoS and losses benefit.  Reduces the net demand for associated Supplier  Reduces Suppliers share of BSUoS and Losses  Associated costs recovered from other parties.

6 6 Where did we get to? - Recap  Issue highlighted as a consequence of BETTA  Charging pre-consultation GB-ECM23 raised to review embedded generator benefit (linked to Standard Licence Condition SLC C13)  Work progressed over January – June 2010  Project TransmiT launched : September 2010  Consequential impact on GB-ECM23  At that time, the outcome of SCR was unknown  CMP213 subsequently raised  Standard Licence Condition C13 expires 2016  Allows for enduring charging solution replacement for SLC C13 based on new transmission charging baseline progressed under CMP213.  Expectation “that industry will begin work during this time to produce an enduring solution” Link to Ofgem decision letter: http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Networks/Trans/ElecTransPolicy/Charging/Documents1/SLC%20 C13%20decision.pdf http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Networks/Trans/ElecTransPolicy/Charging/Documents1/SLC%20 C13%20decision.pdf

7 7 Previously Considered Options for Change Net Gross SupplierDNO TODAY

8 8 Previously Considered Options for Change Net Gross SupplierDNO TODAY Existing arrangements / minimal disruption Ofgem has indicated that there is an issue Analysis indicates not cost- reflective. ~ Could indirectly address cost-reflectivity issue ~ Introduces massive implementation complexity (revenue transfer, nodal market) Directly addresses cost- reflectivity issue Removes the need for more complicated contractual arrangements ~ Requires de-minimus threshold and robust/transparent discount level Directly address cost- reflectivity issue Removes need for more complicated contractual arrangements  Introduces significant implementation complexity for same result as gross supplier

9 9 Previously Considered Options for Change Net Gross SupplierDNO TODAY Existing arrangements / minimal disruption Ofgem has indicated that there is an issue Analysis indicates not cost- reflective ~ Could indirectly address cost-reflectivity issue ~ Introduces massive implementation complexity (revenue transfer, nodal market) Directly addresses cost- reflectivity issue Removes the need for more complicated contractual arrangements ~ Requires de-minimus threshold and robust/transparent discount level Directly address cost- reflectivity issue Removes need for more complicated contractual arrangements  Introduces significant implementation complexity for same result as gross supplier Same result from less complicated model Not cost reflective

10 10 Net DNO Model  Charges still levied on net flow on / off transmission network  Change from implicit to explicit access rights (injection / off-take)  DNO manages access rights  (DNO) Problem: Cannot directly attribute DG to single GSP

11 11 Gross Supplier Model  Distributed Generation Tariff + Gross Demand Tariff  Charge Suppliers on Gross HH imports & Gross HH metered output (versus) current net.  Sub-options for calculating DG Tariff  Average Maximum export  DG Capacity (e.g. over triad)  Net Locational Tariff + Gross Residual to demand  TNUoS split into locational + residual elements  Charge locational to both Suppliers & embedded  Gross residual charged only to suppliers (demand)  Sub-options for Gross demand charges – similar to DG Tariff  Reminder: NGET’s overall revenue recovery remains unchanged

12 12 Embedded Charging – Way Forward  Main Interaction: CMP213 – Project Transmit.  Workgroup Consultation closed 15 th January 2013  Expect Final Mod Report to be with Ofgem April 2013  Proposed way forward: Seeking Views  Re-establish expert group April / May  Review previous (GB-ECM23) work;  Consider consequences of CMP213  Interaction with DNO charging?  Other options?  Possible Timeline:  Raise CUSC modification proposal May / June  Ofgem decision, 2014  Transition period up to 31 st March 2016  Raise Consequential code changes during that time.


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

Similar presentations


Ads by Google