D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 1 of 21

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report

Deliverable report

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 2 of 21

NOTICE The research leading to the results presented in the document has received funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under Grant agreement number 619437. The content of this document reflects only the authors’ views. The European Commission is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein. The contents of this document are the copyright of the SUNSEED consortium.

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 3 of 21

Document Information

1 PU Public

RP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services)

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services)

Call identifier FP7-ICT-2013-11

Project acronym SUNSEED

Project full title Sustainable and robust networking for smart electricity distribution

Grant agreement number 619437

Deliverable number D6.2.4

WP / Task WP6 / T6.2

Type (distribution level)1 PU

Due date of deliverable 31.3.2016 (Month 26)

Date of delivery 31.3.2016

Status, Version V1.0

Number of pages 21 pages

Responsible person, Affiliation Ljupco Jorguseski, TNO

Authors Ljupco Jorguseski, TNO

Reviewers Jimmy Nielsen, Aalborg University

Peter Zidar, Telekom Slovenije

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 4 of 21

Revision history Version Date Author(s) Notes Status

0.9 14-03-2016 Ljupco Jorguseski Contents inserted regarding agenda, feedback and discussion summary

Draft

0.91 14-03-2016 Peter Zidar Comments and corrections Draft

0.92 15-03-2016 Jimmy Nielsen Comments and corrections Draft

1.0 30-03-2016 Ljupco Jorguseski Final edits and implementation of review feedback

Final

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 5 of 21

Table of Contents

SUNSEED project ........................................................................................................................................ 6

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 7

1. Workshop in The Hague, The Netherlands, March 8th, 2016 ......................................................... 8

1.1 Workshop description .............................................................................................................. 8

2. Programme at a glance .................................................................................................................. 9

3. Presentation abstracts .................................................................................................................. 10

4. List of posters (and demonstrators) .............................................................................................. 13

5. List of registered participants ........................................................................................................ 14

6. Workshop evaluation feedback ..................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Summary of open evaluation feedback for the SUNSEED workshop ................................... 15

7. Summary of the interactive sessions ............................................................................................ 17

8. Selected photos ............................................................................................................................ 20

9. Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 21

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 6 of 21

SUNSEED project

SUNSEED proposes an evolutionary approach to utilisation of already present communication networks from

both energy and telecom operators. These can be suitably connected to form a converged communication

infrastructure for future smart energy grids offering open services. Life cycle of such communication network

solutions consists of six steps: overlap, interconnect, interoperate, manage, plan and open. Joint

communication networking operations steps start with analysis of regional overlap of energy and

telecommunications operator infrastructures. Geographical overlap of energy and communications

infrastructures identifies vital DSO energy and support grid locations (e.g. distributed energy generators,

transformer substations, cabling, ducts) that are covered by both energy and telecom communication

networks. Coverage can be realised with known wireline (e.g. copper, fiber) or wireless and mobile (e.g. WiFi,

4G) technologies. Interconnection assures end-2-end secure communication on the physical layer between

energy and telecom, whereas interoperation provides network visibility and reach of smart grid nodes from

both operator (utility) sides. Monitoring, control and management gathers measurement data from wide area

of sensors and smart meters and assures stable distributed energy grid operation by using novel intelligent real

time analytical knowledge discovery methods. For full utilisation of future network planning, we will integrate

various public databases. Applications build on open standards (W3C) with exposed application programming

interfaces (API) to 3rd parties enable creation of new businesses related to energy and communication sectors

(e.g. virtual power plant operators, energy

services providers for optimizing home energy use) or enable public wireless access points (e.g. WiFi nodes at

distributed energy generator locations). SUNSEED life cycle steps promise much lower investments and total

cost of ownership for future smart energy grids with dense distributed energy generation and prosumer

involvement.

Project Partners 1. TELEKOM SLOVENIJE D.D.; TS; Slovenia

2. AALBORG UNIVERSITET; AAU; Denmark

3. ELEKTRO PRIMORSKA, PODJETJE ZA DISTRIBUCIJO ELEKTRICNE ENERGIJE D.D.; EP; Slovenia

4. ELEKTROSERVISI, ENERGETIKA, MERILNI LABORATORIJ IN NEPREMICNINE D.D.; ES; Slovenia

5. INSTITUT JOZEF STEFAN; JSI; Slovenia

6. GEMALTO SA; GTOSA; France

7. GEMALTO M2M GMBH; GTOM2M; Germany

8. NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR TOEGEPAST NATUURWETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK - TNO; TNO;

The Netherlands

9. TOSHIBA RESEARCH EUROPE LIMITED; TREL; United Kingdom

Project webpage http://www.sunseed-fp7.eu/

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 7 of 21

Executive Summary

The 2nd SUNSEED smart grid workshop was a very successful one-day event including a morning session oriented to the research community and an afternoon session focused on the industry parties. The number of registered attendees was 41, while during the sessions this number varied between 35 to 39. The workshop attendees were very satisfied with the overall workshop, its structure and the communicated information. Based on the received feedback 85% to 90% of the attendees who filled the evaluation form scored good or excellent on these workshop aspects. The workshop had 10 presentations, 10 posters, 2 demonstrations (also supported by the posters) and two interactive sessions, one during the morning research session and one for the afternoon industry session. Especially during the interactive sessions the participants had a lot of good discussions that are summarized in Chapter 7 of this deliverable. Some important action points that relate to the final SUNSEED workshop (planned at the wrap-up of the project in Q4 of 2016) are as follows:

1) Keep the interactive sessions in the workshop programme with clearly defined statements and discussion points

2) Presentation of the SUNSEED trial results to as wide audience as possible. Also the presentations could include short round of posters and some universities can be invited.

3) Advertise/promote the final SUNSEED workshop via different channels including e.g. LinkedIn, special web-page etc.

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 8 of 21

1. Workshop in The Hague, The Netherlands, March 8th, 2016

Name of the workshop: 2nd SUNSEED Workshop on Smart Grid Observability and Control; Demonstrations and Trials for Real-Time Smart Grid Control

1.1 Workshop description

The workshop was a whole-day event that took place on Tuesday, March 8th, 2016, in New Babylon Meeting Centre, The Hague, The Netherlands. The workshop was divided in two sessions:

- Morning session from 09:00 till 12:45 on SUNSEED intermediate results and trial plans, as well as main results from related European research projects. The morning session included also a poster/demo session as well as interactive discussion session on ongoing research topics.

- Afternoon session from 14:15 till 17:30 where speakers from the smart grids industry gave their insights on the current status for smart grid deployments, utilization and future trends. In the afternoon there was also an interactive discussion session on ongoing topics in the smart grid industry.

The main topic of the workshop was the real-time observability and control of the future smart grids and relevant trials.

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 9 of 21

2. Programme at a glance

Venue Location: New Babylon Meeting Center, Anna van Buerenplein 29, 2nd Floor, Room 3.6 Morning Session on European Smart Grid Research (9:00-12:45) 1. 09:00 – 09:10 Welcome + TNO Introduction

Henk-Jan Vink, Director Networked Information, TNO, The Netherlands 2. 09:10 – 09:25 SUNSEED – evolutionary approach to robust networking for smart grids

Ales Svigelj, SUNSEED Scientific Coordinator/WP4 Leader, Jozef Stefan Institute, Slovenija 3. 09:25 – 10:25 Interactive Sessions and Discussions on Selected Smart Grid/IoT Research Topics

Moderator: Anita Lieverdink, TNO, The Netherlands 4. 10:25 – 11:15 SUNSEED Posters + Demo Session and Coffee Break

SUNSEED WPs intermediate results 5. 11:15 – 11:45 Smart Distribution System Control Over Heterogeneous Communication

Networks – SmartC2Net Hans-Peter Schwefel, Scientific Director, Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien, Austria

6. 11:45 – 12:15 C-DAX: Scalable, Reliable, and Flexible Data Communication for the Monitoring and Control of Future Active Distribution Grids Matthias Strobbe, iMinds – Gent University, Belgium

7. 12:15 – 12:45 Demand Response from two aspects Uršula Krisper, Head of Advanced Services Department, Elektro Ljubljana d.d., Slovenia

12:45-14:15 Lunch Break

Afternoon Session on Smart Grid Industry (14:15-17:30) 8. 14:15 – 14:45 Grid Digitization: creating visibility and control capabilities at all grid voltage

levels Thierry Pollet, Strategy and Business Development Manager Smart Grid, Landys + Gyr

9. 14:45 – 15:15 Interactive Sessions and Discussions on Selected Smart Grid/IoT Industry Topics Moderator: Anita Lieverdink, TNO, The Netherlands

10. 15:15 – 15:45 ICT and Internet of Things (IoT) as a focal point in the transforming energy markets Pim de Groot, Director Utilities, KPN

11. 15:45 – 16:15 Coffee Break

12. 16:15 – 16:45 Alliander – Connectivity for smart meters and smart grid applications Stefan Verwijmeren, Manager Business Development & Service Delivery, Utility Connect

13. 16:45 – 17:15 One Common Smart Energy Standard to Enhance Value Creation Milo Broekmans, Senior Enterprise Architect, Stedin, The Netherlands

14. 17:15 – 17:30 Closure & Evaluations Moderator, Anita Lieverdink, TNO, The Netherlands

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 10 of 21

3. Presentation abstracts

Smart Grid European Research – Morning Session (9:00-12:45)

SUNSEED – evolutionary approach to robust networking for smart grids Aleš Švigelj, SUNSEED Scientific Coordinator/WP4 Leader, Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenija Future developments of smart energy grids will show high dynamics, leading to scenarios where typical former consumers households or industry, act on one hand as energy generators from renewable sources, e.g. photovoltaics, wind) and on the other hand as manageable loads, thus effectively becoming prosumers. Required communication node densities and communication demands in such future smart grid will thus soar immensely. To achieve stable operation of distributed smart grid we must assure that each smart grid node is cost effectively interconnected with reliable and secure communications network. In this presentation we will emphasise the current developments within the Sunseed project towards the robust networking for real-time distribution grid, consisting of high penetration of prosumers.

Smart Distribution System Control Over Heterogeneous Communication Networks – SmartC2Net

Hans-Peter Schwefel, Scientific Director, Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien, Austria Adding intelligence to the power grid requires communication and computation infrastructure, causing additional investments. To be cost efficient, it is therefore essential to leverage existing communication infrastructures for intelligent power grid operations. The SmartC2Net project www.smartc2net.eu developed, implemented, and validated robust solutions that enable Smart Distribution System operation on top of heterogeneous off-the-shelf communication infrastructures with varying properties. The use-cases cover voltage control and power balancing in the low and medium voltage grid with DERs as well as Demand Response via Customer Energy Management gateways. The talk will present the developed solutions for resilient Smart Distribution System Control, show the quantitative impact in a reference grid scenario and discuss the implications for utilities for future Smart Distribution System deployments.

C-DAX: Scalable, Reliable, and Flexible Data Communication for the Monitoring and Control of Future Active Distribution Grids

Matthias Strobbe, iMinds - Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Our power grids are evolving towards smart grids with a lot of dynamic active components distributed all over the grid, such as renewable energy sources or electric vehicles. This dynamicity poses new challenges to the power system stability (e.g., voltage regulation) asking for much more monitoring and control applications that need to process lots of data, often in real-time. Within the C-DAX project (http://cdax.eu) a unified communication platform is developed based on the Information-Centric Networking (ICN) concept, supporting a heterogeneous set of smart grid applications simultaneously, which is secure, reliable and easy to configure. The C-DAX middleware has been deployed in a medium-voltage distribution grid in the Netherlands to demonstrate it simultaneously supports multiple applications with diverse and stringent requirements under real-world conditions. The flagship application of the C-DAX field-trial is synchrophasor-based real-time state estimation (RTSE) of the power grid using fine-grained measurements from Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) devices, thus requiring very low communication delays.

Demand Response from two aspects Uršula Krisper, Head of Advanced Services Department, Elektro Ljubljana d.d., Slovenia

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 11 of 21

Presented were two projects: The first is a research project on the active control of consumers and the production of renewable energy in the distribution network (hybridVPP4DSO): In previous research projects, various market-driven approaches for virtual power plants have been developed. At the same time, different concepts for virtual power plants with a stronger focus on the network and less focus on the market have also been developed, in order to increase the reliability of our future energy supply. The current research project hybridVPP4DSO forms the link between these two approaches and combines grid and market-driven approaches. A concept for a hybrid virtual power plant (hybrid-VPP), including power generators, transmission network operators and consumers (industrial and commercial) is designed and further checked for feasibility. In the course of the project, it will also be investigated, how power supply networks can be ideally prepared for the future challenges which the energy revolution brings along – particularly regarding varying power consumption and a fluctuating electricity generation. Thereby, producing electricity from renewable sources and consumer-side measures can be better coordinated and the electricity system as a whole can be optimized and stabilized. This results in new business and service models for hybrid virtual grids, which will also result in economic benefits for the customer. The second is also a research project on Designing eTrading Solutions for Electricity Balancing and Redispatching in Europe (FutureFlow). To design and pilot test, at a plausible scale, comprehensive techno-economic models for open and non-discriminatory access of advanced consumers and distributed generators to a Regional Platform for ancillary/balancing and redispatching services. The field tests with real energy customers and distributed generation owners aim to experimentally show the synergetic benefits from the collaboration of such C&I consumers, prosumers and distributed generators in FRR markets combined with the cross-border integration of such markets. FutureFlow also intends to analyse the scalability and replicability potential at EU level of the most promising tested use cases as designed for the four involved countries.

Afternoon Session on Smart Grid Industry (14:15-17:30)

Grid Digitization: creating visibility and control capabilities at all grid voltage levels Thierry Pollet, Strategy and Business Development Manager Smart Grid, Landys + Gyr This presentation focuses on the motivations for the grid digitization, what are the important steps towards grid digitization (e.g.measure/monitor, analyse, automate, and act/control), and presents also several example use cases of grid digitization.

ICT and Internet of Things (IoT) as a focal point in the transforming energy markets Pim de Groot, Director Utilities, KPN In this presentation KPN focuses on the transition in the energy markets and on how ICT and specifically the Internet of Things (IoT) solutions can be used as important tools to make this transition possible. In this context KPN distinguishes three important areas: Communication services, Smart Data handling, and Privacy & Security. The presentation will give more details on these areas and on the Internet of Things (IoT) positioning for different communication services such as LoRA, M2M and CDMA.

Alliander – Connectivity for smart meters and smart grid applications Stefan Verwijmeren, Manager Business Development & Service Delivery, Utility Connect

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 12 of 21

In 2015 Alliander, the largest Dutch DSO, has taken both a fiber and a wireless network into production. The wireless network is operated by Utility Connect, a joint venture of Alliander and Stedin. In this presentation Alliander will explain the reasoning behind their choice of building private telecommunications networks for critical applications. High voltage applications are connected via a fiber network. Medium and low voltage applications use the wireless network. Small scale roll-out of smart meters and smart grid applications is taking place as we speak. After the presentation you will have insight into the goals, understand current challenges and have an outlook to expected future developments of connectivity for smart grids and smart meters at Alliander.

One Common Smart Energy Standard to Enhance Value Creation Milo Broekmans, Senior Enterprise Architect, Stedin, The Netherlands · How flexibility impacts the system · What flexibility market processes look like · How working together along one common standard enhances value creation for all

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 13 of 21

4. List of posters (and demonstrators)

1. Assessment of LTE Wireless Access for Monitoring of Energy Distribution in the Smart Grid Germán C. Madueño, Jimmy J. Nielsen, Dong Min Kim, Nuno K. Pratas, Čedomir Stefanović, and Petar Popovski (AAU)

2. Ultra-reliable M2M Communications using Multiple Interfaces Jimmy J. Nielsen and Petar Popovski (AAU)

3. Communication Solutions for Connection of Measurement Devices in SUNSEED Field Trial Gregor Skrt and Jurij Jurše (Elektro Primorska)

4. Scalable and Interoperable Demand Respons Architecture Eelco Cramer, Casper van den Broek, Bob Ran, Arun Subramanian (TNO) also as demonstrator

5. Dynamic Credentials Distribution to Secure Smart Grid Applications Herve Ganem and Christian Richter (Gemalto) also as demonstrator

6. Active Network Management in the SUNSEED Context Silviu Nistor, Ziming Zhu and Zhong Fan (Toshiba Research)

7. Short Term Wind Generation Forecasting Ziming Zhu, Doudou Zhou and Zhong Fan (Toshiba Research)

8. Smart Meter Consumption Prediction for the Distribution Grid Observability Analysis Blaz Kazic, Maja Skrjanc, Primoz Skraba, Klemen Kenda, Dunja Mladenic, Urban Kuhar, Kemal Alic, Roman Novak, Ales Svigelj (JSI) Jurij Jurše (Elektro Primorska)

9. LTE Delay Based Capacity Analysis for Smart Grid Applications Ljupco Jorguseski, Haibin Zhang, Onno Mantel, Michal Golinski (TNO)

10. Utility and Telecom Operator Coop Bussiness Models for Communication Nets in Distribution Smart Grids Danijel Navodnik, Radovan Sernec (Telekom Slovenije) Jurij Jurše (Elektro Primorska)

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 14 of 21

5. List of registered participants

In total, 41 registered participants. First name Last name Email address Affiliation

Ljupco Jorguseski ljupco.jorguseski@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Jimmy Nielsen jjn@es.aau.dk AAU, Denmark

Haibin Zhang haibin.zhang@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Casper van den Broek casper.vandenbroek@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Max Schreuder max.schreuder@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Zhong Fan zhong.fan@toshiba-trel.com Toshiba Research, UK

Peter Zidar peter.zidar@telekom.si Telekom Slovenije, Slovenia

Aleš Švigelj ales.svigelj@ijs.si Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenia

Alphons Evers alphons.evers@kpn.com KPN, The Netherlands

Pim De Groot pim.degroot@kpn.com KPN, The Netherlands

Milo Broekmans mbroekmans@usef.info Stedin, The Netherlands

Matthijs Klepper m.klepper@kpn.com KPN, The Netherlands

Stefan Verwijmeren stefan.verwijmeren@utilityconnect.nl Alliander, The Netherlands

Urban Kuhar urban.kuhar@ijs.si Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenia

Kemal Alič kemal.alic@ijs.si Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenia

Marco Leenen marco.leenen@utilityconnect.nl Utility Connect, The Netherlands

Paolo Romano paolo.romano@epfl.ch EPFL, Switzerland

Bob Ran bob.ran@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Arun Subramanian arun.subramanian@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Hans-Peter Schwefel schwefel@FTW.at FTW, Austria

Thierry Pollet Thierry.Pollet@landisgyr.com Landys & Gyr, Switzerland

Ursula Krisper Ursula.Krisper@elektro-ljubljana.si Elektro Ljubljana, Slovenia

Matthias Strobbe matthias.strobbe@intec.ugent.be iMinds - Gent University, Belgium

Ziming Zhu ziming.zhu@toshiba-trel.com Toshiba Research, UK

Jurij Jurše jurij.jurse@elektro-primorska.si Elektro Primorska, Slovenia

Blaž Kažič blaz.kazic@ijs.si Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenia

Gregor Skrt gregor.skrt@elektro-primorska.si Elektro Primorska, Slovenia

Silviu Nistor n_silviu@yahoo.com Toshiba Research, UK

Klemen Kenda klemen.kenda@ijs.si Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenia

Miha Smolnikar miha.smolnikar@ijs.si Jožef Stefan Institute, Slovenia

Manolis Chrysallos manolis.chrysallos@philips.com Philips Lighting, Netherlands

Anita Lieverdink anita.lieverdink@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Rene Hooiveld rene.hooiveld@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Onno Mantel onno.mantel@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Christian Richter christian.richter@gemalto.com Gemalto, Germany

Herve Ganem herve.ganem@gemalto.com Gemalto, France

Bjorn Hakansson bjorn.hakansson@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Michal Golinski michal.golinski@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Gert van Kempen gert.vankempen@actility.com Actility Benelux

Marc Van Dijk marc.vandijk@tno.nl TNO, The Netherlands

Uroš Droftina uros.droftina@telekom.si Telekom Slovenije, Slovenia

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 15 of 21

6. Workshop evaluation feedback

At the evaluation wrap-up of the workshop, 19 evaluation forms were received from the attending audience. The evaluation included the following multi-choice questions with answers between poor, below average, average, good, and excellent:

1) What is your overall score of the SUNSEED workshop? 2) How well did the workshop meet your expectations? 3) How satisfied were you with the communication relating to the event?

The statistics of the responses for these three questions is shown in the figure below:

As it can be seen from the received responses, the significant majority (e.g. between roughly 85% to 90%) was perceiving the workshop as good or excellent, in regards to how well expectations were met how well the communication was for the event, and overall. In the following sections some open feedback from the received evaluation forms is summarized.

6.1 Summary of open evaluation feedback for the SUNSEED workshop

Which topics or aspects did you find most interesting or useful?

Industry presentations on future smart grid technologies e.g. from KPN, Utility Connect, and USEF

Telecom involvement with smart grids

Definition of observability and control

Wide view on communication paradigms for smart grids

Other view on SG communications and views from other related projects such as e.g. SmartC2net and C-DAX

Communication solutions and concepts for power network observability and control

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 16 of 21

Interactive Discussions

Telecom requirements and flexibility

Security presentations from Gemalto

What did you think about the workshop structure: highlight presentations followed by posters, interactive sessions, demos, etc.? Would you have preferred another structure, if so, which and why?

Good structure, also integrating interactive sessions in the programme. It really initiates the discussion between participants.

Interactive sessions initiated many good discussions. Some questions unclear and requiring reformulations (maybe too many in the 1st session)

Informative presentations

Good interactive discussions. Posters could also be presented in a short common roundtrip session

Good interactive model, maybe put more thought in the clear definition of the questions/statements.

Maybe invite presentations from university

Any ideas to improve the communication about the event?

Presentation of Elektro Ljubljana was unintelligible, unfocused

I am curious to hear about the SUNSEED field trial

Repeat interactive sessions, advertise on LinkedIn (or other forums), keep easy to reach location

Select excellent presenters (as you did now)

Promote in other information forums, LinkedIn, tweakers, etc.

How to extend to broader audience, business/revenue models addressed thus other than technology

Good idea with statements to create discussions but prepare statements more carefully and clearly

Presentations and posters should be made available to participants and broader audience.

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 17 of 21

7. Summary of the interactive sessions

The 2nd SUNSEED workshop included two interactive sessions, one in the morning research session and one in the afternoon industry session. In each interactive session the participants were challenged to vote for proposed statements. The statements were based on SUNSEED insights and information gathering during the workshop preparation. The votes were counted as percentage of the total participants and then argumentation was asked from individuals that voted 'for' or 'against' the proposed statement. In the following we summarize the statements (see text with italics below), voting percentage 'for' and argumentations mentioned during the discussions. Summary of the morning research interactive session:

1) The delay requirement for state estimation as input for smart grid control application such as e.g. voltage control, demand response, etc. is 1 s or above.

o Introduction of this statement was given by Aleš Švigelj (JSI).

o 46% of the participants (16 out of 35) agree with the statement.

Agree because for many smart grid control applications delay requirements of 1s and above are acceptable with upper bound of e.g. 15 min.

Disagree because for particular grid control applications, the delay requirement can be even below 1s such as for islanding (e.g. smaller than few hundreds of milliseconds) or micro-estimations.

2) The required grid state estimation accuracy (e.g. voltage and angular precision, etc.) as input for smart grid control applications should be in the range of 95% to 99% and not 99.9% to 99.999%.

o Introduction of this statement was given by Aleš Švigelj (JSI)

o 31% of the participants (11 out of 35) agree with the statement

Agreement because there is no strong voice for 5 nine's accuracy, i.e. there are no smart grid control applications that can be used as examples that need such an accurate state estimation.

Disagreement because a clear definition of the state estimation accuracy is needed (it is not clear for the audience how is the accuracy defined).

3) Wireless communication technologies (e.g. 2G/3G/4G, WiFi, etc.) can be used today and in future for smart grid control applications (e.g. supporting end-to-end delay >= 1s) while only 5G can be used in future also for smart grid protection (e.g. supporting end-to-end delay < 10 ms).

o Introduction of this statement was given by Ljupco Jorguseski (TNO).

o 31% of the participants (11 out of 35) agree with the statement

Agreement because performance of existing wireless networks is satisfactory at the moment. It is also expected (from the requirements phase) that 5G will meet end to end delay lower than 10 ms for some delay critical applications.

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 18 of 21

Disagreement because it is unclear how the statement is defined (somehow there are two statements and difficult to choose if it is voted for the 1st or 2nd or both.

4) Usage of wireless communication technologies (e.g. 2G to 5G, Wi-Fi etc.) for smart grids control applications is more a capacity and a business issue (e.g. business benefits vs total cost of ownership) and not a technology question.

o This statement was introduced by Peter Zidar (Telekom Slovenije)

o 51% of the participants (18 out of 35) agree with the statement

Agreement because provided that the wireless technology can meet all necessary communication requirements then it is naturally a business decision. It also depends what control functions for the smart grids are running on what part of the network.

Disagree because it can be a technology issue how to decide the wireless network solution for smart grid applications.

5) Use cases of real-time (e.g. >= 1 s) smart grid state estimation and demand response schemes for the Low Voltage grid are relevant/interesting trialling use cases at this stage of the smart grid technology development.

o This statement was introduced by Jurij Jurše (Elektro Primorska)

o 31% of the participants (11 out of 35) agree with this statement

Agreement because observability and some local control in low voltage (LV) and medium voltage (MV) part of the electricity grid is really needed.

Disagreement because the statement is not and contains two parts: first part on state estimation and second part on demand response schemes.

Feedback from audience was that it is not clear here exactly where the state estimation will be running (is it distributed or centrally located).

It is also unclear if the distribution system operator (DSO) is allowed to utilize demand/response applications due to regulatory issues and control of end-devices at customer premises. Large group was disagreeing because the DSO might not be in position to perform demand/response applications.

6) The following sub-statements regarding security were presented by Herve Ganem (Gemalto) and were agreed by all participants:

o Security is an important issue.

o It is important to be able to get a global view of which credentials have been given to which client and to avoid ad hoc and manual credential provisioning

o Authorisation management defining the way clients applications may interact together is important.

o Preventing the possibility to clone devices in IOT and more specifically in smart grid application is needed

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 19 of 21

Summary of the afternoon industry interactive session:

1) Improved smart grid control functionalities (e.g. dynamic voltage control, demand response, islanding, enhanced fault localization, etc.) will reduce end-customer bill.

o 46% of the participants (16 out of 35) agreed with this statement.

Agreement because the benefits from more advanced functions in the smart grid should propagate towards the end-user. Further, introducing smart grid functionality in e.g. UK is requesting benefits for the end-users.

Disagreement because the benefits from smart grid functionalities can be returned to the infrastructure owner/operator. Also another option is to have the same end-customer bill but providing more services.

2) Telecom operators can support demanding SLA for the utilities (e.g. low latency/jitter, high reliability, etc.) with a positive business case via their existing network infrastructure used for other traffic (i.e. without installing and running private networks).

o 34% of the participants (12 out of 35) agreed with this statement

Difficult to agree as it really depends what kind of SLA requirements are asked from the telecom operator. For example, what if long-term technology commitment (e.g. 15 years or longer) is asked from the telecom operator?

3) Standardized publish/subscribe approach for data handling (also supported in SUNSEED’s system architecture) are sufficient for handling massive (structure and unstructured) data originated or targeted for nodes in the smart grids (or utilities).

o Difficult to vote on this as the statement definition is not sufficiently clear and easy to make a stand point.

o It is definitely desired to step-away from current (and past) data structures in silos towards more smart data and publish/subscribe approaches

o The migration from legacy data handling towards more granular and flexible approaches such as publish/subscribe, might be non-technical (i.e. more commercial/business arguments might be needed to make this shift).

4) New regulations are needed for fundamental parts of the smart grid operations such as separate spectrum for utilities, ownership of the originated data from smart grid nodes, etc.

o 37% of the participants (13 out of 35) agreed with this statement

Agree arguments: e.g. harmonized spectrum usage within Europe, new business models, EU policy debate is currently booming that will result in changes of the current regulations.

Disagree for example on the primary originated data: the current regulation is OK while some data could be made open and accessible for applications if aggregated and made anonymous (e.g. due to privacy/security reasons).

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 20 of 21

8. Selected photos

D6.2.4 Workshop 2 report, V0.9

SUNSEED, Grant agreement No. 619437 Page 21 of 21

9. Conclusions

The 2nd SUNSEED smart grid workshop was a very successful one-day event including a morning session oriented to the research community and an afternoon session focused on the industry parties. The workshop attendees were very satisfied with the overall workshop, its structure and the communicated information (e.g. 85% to 90% of the received feedback scored good or excellent on these aspects). The workshop had 10 presentations, 10 posters, 2 demonstrations (also supported by the posters) and two interactive sessions (one for the research morning session and one for the afternoon industry session). Especially during the interactive sessions, the participants had a lot of good discussions that are summarized in Chapter 7 of this deliverable. Some important action points that relate to the final SUNSEED workshop (planned at the wrap-up of the project in Q4 of 2016) are as follows:

4) Keep the interactive sessions in the workshop programme with clearly defined statements and discussion points

5) Presentation of the SUNSEED trial results to as wide audience as possible. Also the presentations could include short round of posters and some universities can be invited.

6) Advertise/promote the final SUNSEED workshop via different channels including LinkedIn, special web-page etc.