FAWG and todos November 29, 2021
Today's meeting was great. Thank you for the wonderful attendance.
The recording (with the integrated audio transcript):
1) There was agreement to have a group of interested parties come together to discuss how to bring this to the FAWG:
Standardization of interaction between the grid and the customer
- this may include Green Button data model/XML schema
- it may include prices
- it may include power/consumption carbon intensity (mix)
- it may include digital capacity management (agreement/handshake with power network)
Small group meeting: December 8th at 10a/1p/7p (you have received an invite).
2) There was agreement to come together to go through the projects and architects to understand the LF Energy portfolio and how we can use the reference architecture tooling to facilitate interoperability and connection.
- Let's discuss this in the TAC December 14th
3) We didn't come to a conclusion about "advancing" the architecture in a formal way. But, the general sense is we are going in the right direction. That there are a number of views into the architecture starting at high-levels down to more granular that are necessary for the overall mental model.
- Let's discuss how and whether to advance at the December 14th TAC
This has been a historic and amazing year.Have a wonderful holiday. See you on the other side.
Please feel free to reach out.
Hello all, hi Shuli
For those who missed it, the FAWG meeting yesterday (European time) was interesting. A couple of ad‑hoc thoughts.
A presentation from EPRI (didn't record their name, sorry) described the ArchiMate (see wikipedia) enterprise architecture modeling language and associated visualization tooling. There will be a LF Energy presentation on the package on Thu 20-Jan-2022 07:00 -0800 (PST) and I believe Shuli is also trying to negotiate a community license.
The current LF Energy descriptions of information transfers (if I am not mistaken) do not include public interest information flowing to policy makers, researchers, and the interested public. Such information transfers are the subject of increasing interest. Two examples. First, the European Commission wants to mandate the flows of privately‑held data under its proposed Data Act — to the point where the Trade Secrets directive may need modification to accommodate its new reporting requirements. And second, the UK Ofgem report released 15 November 2021 (cited below) covered, among other things, public interest information flows. Ofgem also hints at legislative revisions if necessary. I am not familiar with the regulatory landscape in the United States, but I guess the Public Utilities Commissions would likewise need similarly unencumbered public information. Moreover the analytical modeling (for instance, using the SWITCH framework) would probably best be populated with open data.
In parallel, the need for open data standards, including data definitions, is likely to become increasingly necessary (and probably controversial). For instance, the Ofgem report mentioned earlier sits on the fence in relation to the IEC Common Information Model (CIM). Pure speculation on my part, but my guess is the fact that CIM is proprietary will have instilled some reluctance on the part of the regulator to endorse it.
Both the above points are interconnected. And a high degree of transparency will be required going forward to bring the public along on this rapid and deeply transformative journey.
But neither of the points raised above are core to digitalization. But nor should they be ignored or seen as something to tack on as an afterthought. Taking the energiewende in its entirety, the rate and scale of change we expect the public to accept, adopt, and embrace is unprecedented (at least outside of armed conflict).
with best wishes, Robbie
On 30/11/2021 00.52, Shuli Goodman wrote:
-- Robbie Morrison Address: Schillerstrasse 85, 10627 Berlin, Germany Phone: +49.30.612-87617