The Westminster Forums are impartial, cross-party seminars that enjoy substantial support and involvement from key stakeholders in Parliament and Government, and from regulatory bodies, industry, consumer organisations and other interested groups.

Speakers at this particular event included Jacqui Russell, Head of the Smart Meter Rollout Team at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, and other leading smart metering industry figures. Proceedings were chaired jointly by Peter Aldous MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group for Intelligent Energy and Lord Oxburgh, Board Member, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST).

What impressed me most about this smart metering forum was the sheer amount of ground covered in a single four-hour session. The event was billed as a timely opportunity to assess progress and next steps in the delivery of the Government’s vision for every home in Great Britain to be equipped with smart energy meters, as we move towards the programme’s mass rollout stage in 2014. A comprehensive set of topics, including questions and comment from the floor, was covered, effectively providing a state-of-play snapshot of the UK smart metering programme.

So, what exactly did we learn about progress made to date and the impending transition to mass rollout?

Not surprisingly, given the wide range of stakeholders present on the panel and in the audience, we heard a full range of views. There were extremely positive messages about programme progress and status. There were negative messages, too, which highlighted gaps that need to be addressed before the programme can move forward. One or two of the more extreme views remain around the overall cost of the programme and whether the anticipated benefits will be delivered. Overall, I detected a sense of frustration on some topics, particularly the technical specifications, which are vital for the supply chain to be able to move forward with confidence and appear at the present time to be impeding progress during the foundation phase.

Returning to my headline question, my view is that we cannot expect a smooth transition from foundation through to mass rollout. Here’s why…

When mass rollout commences in 2014 the whole architecture of the industry will change. Up until that point, suppliers will be doing their own thing.  The next few months will herald the beginning of a whole new industry structure governed by the new Smart Energy Code, which is a fundamental component of the new regulatory framework.

At this point, new entities come into being and, to a certain extent, begin to take control: the DCC (Data and Communications Company), the DSPs (Data Services Providers), and the CSPs (Communications Services Providers).  Few of the people involved will be able to say, “Been there, done it” and, I would suggest, a whole series of new technical and commercial issues will need to be addressed.

It’s for this very reason that DNV KEMA put together its two key service sets for the UK smart metering industry: Testing, Certification and Interoperability and Technical and Operational Excellence.

Like the Forum, we may not have every single answer just yet. However, the fact that we have been there and done it in the US, and are actively involved in most of the European programmes will be of considerable benefit to our UK smart metering industry clients and partners.

If you would like to further discuss any of these points, or would like support with any of your smart metering initiatives please don’t hesitate to contact me at matt.freeman@dnvkema.com

Growing a renewable business in the midst of an economic recession is not a simple task and here are what I regard as the top three challenges facing the offshore wind power industry in Europe, going forward.

Need to upgrade

Upgrades to grid infrastructure will be an unavoidable challenge over the coming years.

The electrical grid across all of Europe is now in dire need of upgrades – not only to accommodate the surge in embedded generation, but also to push forward with smart grid implementation and to press ahead with the large-scale integration of renewables. The number of renewable sources attached to the somewhat outdated grid continues to rise, forcing a 200% increase in the number of forced shutdowns of wind farms in 2011 alone, due to issues with grid congestion and constraints.

Reduce the Cost of Energy

During the current economic recession, the squeeze on capital available means that only the industries offering the largest return and lowest risk on an investment will attract investors. The cost of energy is a central factor in the present and future energy landscape and wind power is competing with the relatively low cost of gas and coal. Experience indicates that consumers can tolerate higher electricity prices for green energy – but there is a limit and the way forward for the wind industry should be to to aim for a reduction in the Cost of Energy.

The wind industry must continue to reduce its cost in order to grow its market share. This applies to the entire life time process of an offshore wind farm including refinement and upgrades of the turbines themselves, refining and developing optimized turbine foundations, stream-lining the installation process and develop rational O&M procedures among others.

Central to overcoming this challenge is a vital need to increase transparency, efficiency and reliability in all areas of the business – whether that’s something as seemingly ‘bureaucratic’ as being able to guarantee future subsidy levels and legislation, or as specific as optimizing the wind farm lay-out and turbine selection, the installation process or ensure an un-interrupted flow of power from the turbine to the consumer.

One specific area that I believe is indicative of this is reliable cabling for offshore farms. We are all aware of the exciting advancement offered by the development of the world’s first high voltage, direct current (HVDC) offshore substations.  Reliable HVDC or HVAC long distance subsea cabling is an area of concern and there is a need to focus on developing an internationally acceptable recommended practice for offshore renewable cable connections such as the ongoing DNV KEMA CableRisk JIP.

Keeping support

Reliability is also essential to the challenge of maintaining support for wind energy in the coming years. Whilst some areas of Europe may have finally come out of the financial recession it’s inescapable that the long-lasting impact of the downturn will persist, as the rest of the continent attempts to stabilize economically.

As above, investment will only continue to support the wind sector if we can maintain public and political support for our industry, keeping subsidies and legislative support at a stable and transparent level.

Political support comes at a price and the economical down-turn is taking its toll. With budgets stretched, we can only hope to keep momentum for as long as public opinion is on our side. In turn, reducing the perceived financial risk of the wind industry, introducing transparent, coordinated, long-term incentive schemes and pushing for legislative stability is an important element in growing the renewable industry.
 

By: Kim Mørk, Vice President & Business Director, Cleaner Energy Services, DNV KEMA

Even if the integrity of smart metering products is underpinned by specifications such as SMETS and CHTS – and then by subsequent independent testing – what technical assurances are there that each and every device will be able to communicate with other equipment in the wider UK smart meter network? This isn’t just a concern for day one. Whenever a software upgrade is performed, the device owner must ensure that nothing will impact on the integrity of the existing system. The only way to do that, of course, is to:

a) make sure the device is designed for all such eventualities – before it is despatched and fitted!

and

b) ensure that appropriate technical assurance processes are in place on an enduring basis.

I have pointed out in other articles that (at March 2013) no licence conditions are in place to enforce interoperability.

Using established communication protocols will address some concerns, but not all.

Indeed, DLMS/COSEM is an internationally recognised standard chosen for the smart metering programmes in the Netherlands and Spain, and now for the UK programme.

World-leading DLMS testing facilities are readily available from DNV KEMA for all UK programme participants. DNV KEMA is very active on the DLMS User Association, contributes to the development of the standard, and has developed the DNV KEMA DLMS Test Suite. This comprises:

• DLMS Test Facility — an extensive test environment supporting automated DLMS testing and test script generation
• DLMS Analyser — a product designed to monitor DLMS traffic in real-time
• DLMS Test Client — a tool for testing DLMS servers.

As well as software licences, DNV KEMA provides service agreements, technical support and training around the DLMS protocol.

Our DLMS experts also translate specifications and standards into workable test regimes. For example:

We take a single device and:

• Test basic protocol functions against an agreed set of rules
• Test if the device has the correct objects and data types
• Test if the device meets functional requirements contained within the companion specification.

We then turn our attention to multiple devices and:

• Test if devices can communicate with each other seamlessly.

Critically we go beyond theoretical interoperability and assure real-world interoperability.

Rigorous functional testing of the entire smart metering architecture needs to take place – and an industry-wide approach is vital. Crucially, there can be only one version of the truth if the UK smart metering programme is to succeed.

No single UK smart metering stakeholder is likely to take the lead role as seeker and definer of the truth. After all, which single company or body would wish to pay for this initiative and then effectively give the answer away for free to others in the industry?

So who will step forward and speak the truth on behalf of the nascent UK smart metering industry?

DNV KEMA has performed this industry-connecting role in other countries where there have been difficult challenges to overcome. In doing so, DNV KEMA has brought separate entities together to collectively mitigate major risk and to make sure that an industry, as a whole, can move forward in a timely manner.

Now DNV KEMA is ideally positioned to provide this kind of service to UK smart metering industry players. Over the next few months we will see if there is the collective will to follow this eminently pragmatic route in the UK.

If you would like to further discuss any of these points, or would like support with any of your smart metering initiatives please don’t hesitate to contact me at Matt.Freeman@dnvkema.com

So let’s explore the risk inherent in the technical specifications, and their interpretation, in more detail.

SMETS 2 (Smart Metering Equipment Technical Specifications), the CHTS (Communications Hub Technical Specification) and the GB Companion Specification will be approved by the EU in November this year. These documents should provide the sound basis for smart meter design, functionality, performance, interoperability and so forth.

I say ‘should’, because no matter how comprehensive a specification is perceived to be, there will always be differences in interpretation.

To this warning, we can add two more observations that hold true at March 2013:

1. No process is yet in place to independently prove/verify SMETS/CHTS compliance once they have been finalised
2. No licence conditions are in place to enforce interoperability.

 
We know also that ownership of the communications hub (and, indeed, separate ownership of the smart meters by multiple energy providers) will introduce potential pitfalls, because wherever there’s an interface there’s a risk.

Then there are specific areas of product assurance to consider for each smart meter and/or comms module:

• Accuracy, of course, is essential
• Physically, each device must also be up to the job
• Functionally, can the product correctly perform the tasks it is supposed to? And how does it perform in the critical areas of communications, security and interoperability?
• Electrically, the design of the smart metering device must be robust and safe
• Sustainability over the product’s life cycle – and beyond – is another issue that raises a long list of questions:
  • What materials are used?
  • Where are materials sourced?
  • Where and how is the product manufactured?
  • What will happen to the product at the end of its useful life?

 
All in all, a tough set of demands will be made of UK smart meters and associated products. So, before they are fixed to the wall, we need to be sure these devices are made of ‘the right stuff’. This leads to the big question of ‘asset life‘ or rather the longevity of the devices because the outcome of this question will be a direct result of the manufacturing process, the quality of components, and the correctness of the interpretation of the specifications (both in hardware and software terms).

Major investments in the UK smart metering industry are being based on assumptions that these devices:

a)      will operate and interoperate correctly, and

b)     will be in situ, operating reliably, for a specific period of time.

Deviations from these assumptions in real-world operations could, in the worst case, have a catastrophic impact on the investment case.

Smart assumptions based on hard facts are required – and that’s what DNV KEMA can deliver. With its world-leading testing and certification facilities, plus experience in other European smart metering programmes, DNV KEMA is set up to provide the assurances required by the key stakeholders in the UK programme: the DCC (Data and Communications Company), smart meter equipment manufacturers, communications services providers, meter asset providers, energy suppliers, distribution network operators et al.

If you would like to further discuss any of these points, or would like support with any of your smart metering initiatives please don’t hesitate to contact me at Matt.Freeman@dnvkema.com

The level of risk in the programme is substantial, and this is to be expected given the size of the anticipated spend. To summarise, the key areas of risk are:

• Being different. The UK smart meter programme is retailer-led, unlike programmes to date in the Netherlands, Spain and US. We are on new ground, creating a whole new industry structure. Let’s not underestimate the size of the challenge.
• Interoperability. Wherever there’s an interface, there’s a risk. No process is yet in place to independently verify SMETS compliance. Nor is there a licence condition in place to enforce interoperability. Equally important, real-world interoperability testing must be carried out on multiple devices to prove that they can communicate with each other seamlessly.
• Technical specifications as related to product assurance and functional performance. The specifications as they stand are very high level and need enhancing to provide a suitable basis for designing physical and functional assurance regimes. This is a prerequisite if we are to ensure that each and every smart meter is up to the job in terms of performance, robustness (asset life), safety and interoperability.
• Technical specifications as related to security. This is a massive subject that includes two key areas: data integrity (including the risk of fraud and malicious activity through data message interruption, interception, modification and fabrication); and data privacy. I shall be writing in more detail on these areas in this blog in the coming months.
• Data quality. Today, poor data quality can (and does) lead to billing, settlement and change of supplier issues. Mass roll-out could address these issues but there are more devices to manage going forwards and challenging installation targets. Action is needed now.
• Legacy. We have created multiple legacies to manage, from the traditional metering population through foundation metering – pre-SMETS1 and SMETS1. The process for switching energy supplier should be made easier in future but robust systems and processes must be in place to facilitate this.

Yes, it’s one of the few certainties of the UK programme: there will be many risks to monitor and manage.

A pessimistic outlook? Certainly not. At DNV KEMA, our deep experience in European smart metering programmes, and similar change programmes in industries such as oil and gas, enables us to be both entirely pragmatic and positively active.

Our approach is to help the key players in the UK smart metering industry understand the risks – and then manage and mitigate those risks. That’s why DNV KEMA has aligned its smart metering services under two key banners:

• Technical and Operational Excellence – including strategic planning, cost/benefit analysis, system design, procurement management, deployment integration, quality and technical assurance, performance enhancement, and project and programme management.

 
and

• Testing, Certification and Interoperability – including testing regimes, technical support and training around communication protocols (the DNV KEMA Protocol Competence and Test Centre is a world leader in the testing of smart meter and smart grid communication implementations).

By doing so, we are making things significantly easier for the key players in the UK to work both independently and together to achieve a successful smart metering programme roll-out.

If you would like to further discuss any of these points, or would like support with any of your smart metering initiatives please don’t hesitate to contact me at Matt.Freeman@dnvkema.com

DNV KEMA is committed to driving the transition toward a safe, reliable, effective, and affordable clean energy future.

Energy losses are an unavoidable part of energy grids around the world. Many of these losses have technical explanations, such as inefficiencies in transmission infrastructure or faulty connections. While these losses can be mitigated by improved technologies and infrastructure, it is unlikely that they will ever be completely eliminated. A major concern for utilities is nontechnical losses—those attributed to diversion of energy flow delivered to each customer…Learn more.

More often than not, the best sources of power are far away from most energy users, mandating the need for costly long-distance transmission infrastructure. Hydro power is typically located in the mountains, in areas with significant elevation changes. Wind power is best along ridgelines or in empty plains. And fossil fuel-burning power plants are often placed away from population centers in order to mitigate air pollution, or near the mouth of a coal mine to cut down on transportation costs…Download the full eBook here.

The uncertainties in our future energy mix can be addressed with a detailed Smart Grid roadmap. A well-built Smart Grid infrastructure provides the flexibility required to handle new or changing sources of generation. While these infrastructure improvements require an investment by utilities, a smarter grid can manage far more capacity than a traditional
one. This means that by investing in smarter grid technologies, utilities can keep up with increasing demand without the need for extensive grid expansion, which will likely be costlier than Smart Grids…Download the full eBook here.

Smart Grid security management system
Although there is a large overlap between security and privacy, security will deal with more issues then privacy alone.

The scope of a Smart Grid security management system covers process control systems used by the energy utility industry for controlling and monitoring the generation, transmission, storage and distribution of electric power, gas and heat in combination with the control of supporting processes. This includes in particular the following systems, applications, and components:

• The overall IT-supported central and distributed process control, monitoring and automation technology, as well as IT systems used for their operation, such as programming and parameterization devices.
• Digital controllers and automation components such as control and field devices or PLCs, including digital sensor and actuator elements.
• All further supporting IT systems used in the process control domain, e.g. for supplementary data visualization tasks and for controlling, monitoring, data archiving and documentation purposes.
• The overall communications technology used in the process control domain, e.g., networks, telemetry, telecontrol applications and remote control technology;
• Digital metering and measurement devices, e.g., for measuring energy consumption, generation or emission values.
• Digital protection and safety systems, e.g., protection relays or safety PLCs;
• Distributed components of (future) Smart Grid environments.
• All software, firmware and applications installed on the above mentioned systems.
• Legal obligations like privacy laws and regulations and TSO/DSO specific regulations [1].

Most of the Telecommunication systems and communications engineering used in the process control environment need to be addressed in a smart grid security management system. These are covered by the standard “ISO/IEC 27011 Information security management guidelines for telecommunications organizations based on ISO/IEC 27002:2005.”

In the USA, NIST has published the NISTIR 7628, Guidelines for Smart Grid Cyber Security: Vol. 1, Smart Grid Cyber Security Strategy, Architecture, and High-Level Requirements.

These are all relevant documents to keep in mind while designing a smart energy system. In the European context the ISO standards are widely accepted. Derivatives of ISO/IEC 27001 and ISO/IEC 27002 are used as mandatory regulations to secure national and regional governments. To create a European awareness of (information) security, the use of ISO/IEC standards should be mandatory. The NIST standard is more specific and should be used as reference material.

European context
In the European context changes are coming. A new privacy act is in its last draft version ready and a Smart Grid task force is working on al aspects of privacy and security in a Smart Grid environment. Smart Grid Task Force (SGTF) has been renewed for two years. EG2 is one of the four Expert Groups of the SGTF and is responsible for regulatory recommendations for privacy, data protection and cyber-security in the Smart Grid Environment. Regarding privacy and data protection, the mandate of EG2 defined by the SGTF is to provide a Smart Grid Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) template. This template has been submitted to the Article 29 Working Party for consultation according to the point 5 of the Recommendation adopted by the Commission on the roll out of smart metering systems. The EG2 working group draft DPIA does not only consider data protection-issues but has a wider scope and also includes privacy and cyber security and their associated risks.  Using this DPIA has a number of important benefits:

• Preventing costly adjustments in processes or system redesign.
• Prevention of discontinuation of a project by early understanding of the major risks.
• Reducing the impact of law enforcement and oversight involvement;
• Improving the quality of data.
• Improving service and operation processes.
• Improving decision-making regarding data protection.
• Raising the privacy awareness within the organization.
• Improving the feasibility of a project.
• Strengthening the confidence of customers, employees or citizens in the way which personal data are processed and privacy is respected.
• Improving communication about privacy and the protection of Personal data.

By: Hans Baars, senior consultant, Management & Operations Consulting, DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability

___________________

[1] In the Netherlands the Gas- en Elektriciteitswet, NTA 8120 and Wet Bescherming Persoonsgegevens with the AV-23 as a combination of privacy law.