Upload
myron-holland
View
216
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Concept of Data Collection
Vincent ScherrerJunior Adviser, System Development
ENTSOG’s Transparency Workshop
Brussels – 11 September 2012
2
Main goals of the project
Current Situation
Expected PDWS improvements
Conclusion
3
Main goals of the project
Current Situation
Expected PDWS improvements
Conclusion
4
Improve scope and qualityNew Transparency Guidelines> Binding publication> More relevant points (distribution systems, storages, production facilities...)> More data (physical flows, auction requests...)
More detailed ENTSOG deliverables> Demand breakdown (CCGT, final customers, industry)> More scenarios and cases> More accurate modelling
Upcoming tasks> Cost-benefit analysis> Gas quality
5
Streamline the data collection processesData collection among members> Automation> Web-based interfaces> Eliminated redundancy> Warning system
ENTSOG internal data collection> Single repository of data> Versioning> User-friendly manual import mechanisms> More time for analysis and better deliverables
6
Availability and openness
DataWarehouse TransparencyPlatform
Operational data
Future projects
Interruptions
TYNDP data
Auction results
Information should be meaningful, exploitable, and consistent
7
Main goals of the project
Current Situation
Expected PDWS improvements
Conclusion
8
Various data sources
Transparency TYNDP Forecast data
Infrastructure projects Other dataOutlook&Review
Historical data
System Development files
and databases
Transparency Platform/DB
TSOs TSOs TSOs Promoters Third parties (GSE, GLE, …)
Scattered environment, intensive treatment, insulated data
9
Complex aggregation procedures
Balancing zones
Relevant points
System enhancem
ents
DemandSupply
Technical capacitiesFlows
(Re)Nominations
10
Historical data analysisDetailed analysis of historical data and a comparison of multiple periods is a regular part of data processing
2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 -
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
30 Jan - 14 FebAverage demand
Highest 16 dayAverage demand
Highest 16 daysPeak day demand
2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/20120%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
UGS stock level 30 Jan.
Understanding the data and changes to them is crucial
> Different calculation assumptions ?> Uploaded at different points in time ?> Unmatched system enhancements ?
11
Data quality issues
12
Forecast vs Historical
> Data questionnaire corrupted ?
> Non-Standard Gross Calorific Value ?
> What to do ?
13
Varying data from different data sources
Spread ?
14
Main goals of the project
Current Situation
Expected PDWS improvements
Conclusion
Manual data collection : Web-based
15
16
Automated imports : Monitoring
Monitor the flow of messages> TSOs : direct access to the system, warning per mail ?> Detect an inform about odd values> Detect missing values> …
17
Data consistency and data views
Quality control and good datawarehouse practices will enable us to look at the data from many different angles
> Entry flows in a country ?> Exit flows out of a country ?> Aggregated EU-27 demand> For a particular relevant point, what infrastructure projects are planned ?> Analyze cross-border flows and loads> What are the most congested cross-border connections ?> What happened during the 2012 cold snap ?> Maximal and minimal demand over the last 52 weeks for each country ? At the EU
level ?> What is the net demand per country on a daily basis ?> What are the planned infrastructure projects per country ? Per infrastructure type ?
18
Data consistency : Infrastructure projects
Available as a Transparency Module> Different views but same data> Advanced search capabilities
19
Data consistency : Different time scales
From day…
To month…
To year
20
Odd values
Detect odd values with…> Fixed constraints> Comparison with the past> Check if missing> Comparison with previous versions of the same data
Treat odd values with…> Quarantine dubious values> Each value has a state> Associate with workflows (manual or automatic)
21
Data availability
Excel
XML
RSS
Conform to best practices> Push and pull mechanisms
> Most common formats
> Flexible data sets
> Quantitative and qualitative analysis
22
Export flexibility
1/01/2009 7/04/2009 12/07/2009 16/10/2009 20/01/2010 26/04/2010 31/07/2010 4/11/2010 8/02/2011 15/05/2011 19/08/2011 23/11/2011 27/02/2012
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
signed - Zone Germany - Hub - Demand - Energy quantity - GWh/d - Historical-Historical Demand by TSOssigned - Zone Connection Supplier Norway - Hub Germany - Flow Import - Energy quantity - GWh/d - Historical-Historical Flows from imports sent by the TSOssigned - Zone Connection Storage Germany - Hub Germany - Flow Storage - Energy quantity - GWh/d - Historical-historical Flows from storages sent by the TSOssigned - Zone Connection Supplier Russia(Mainland) - Interconnector OPAL - Flow Import - Energy quantity - GWh/d - Historical-Historical Flows from imports sent by the TSOssigned - Zone Germany - NP Send-out - Flow National Production - Energy quantity - GWh/d - Historical-Historical Flows from national production sent by the TSOs
23
Analysis
24
AggregationLNG imports
Hub-to-Hub
25
Main goals of the project
Current Situation
Expected PDWS improvements
Conclusion
The new system will facilitate data collection and processing and should significantly improve ENTSOG’s ability to deliver reports such as TYNDP, Outlooks and reviews
> Comprehensive quality control...
> Drastically expanded analysis possibilitiesfor ENTSOG, members, stakeholders, 3rd parties…
> Flexible data extracts and reports…
> Better deliverables from ENTSOG...
26
Benefits
Sound technical basis to face current and future
Transparency Requirements
27
Do you have any questions ?
Thank You for Your Attention
ENTSOG -- European Network of Transmission System Operators for GasAvenue de Cortenbergh 100, B-1000 Brussels
EML:WWW: www.entsog.eu
Vincent ScherrerJunior Adviser