Hi Everyone -
Thanks for working through the slides yesterday, and apologies for confusion on the timeline slide in particular - I meant for it to recap where we left it last month and re-callibrate (which in essence you all did) but sorry that wasn't clear from the get go.
The conversation seems to be evolving a bit, but of course the scope issues are still the focal point. I added some suggestions based on the meeting discussion to help focus both comments on the scope issues and framing any new scope issues that folks may be working on (see three points in the summary below).
I'll be reaching out to many of you - now that I have my life back. Thanks for your patience with me during this big disruption, and I look forward to digging in more deeply.
~~~~ Meeting Summary on Git Hub~~~~~
The GRID working group met via ZOOM on Wednesday, June 12. Members in attendance are listed below. Ethan Goldman hosted the meeting at the request of Carmen Best (Chair) who was still on jury duty.
June 12, 2019 Recording
June 12, 2019 Slide Deck
Highlights of the meeting:
- Scope was the primary point of discussion
- Members should continue to post issues dedicated to setting the scope of the group; and comment on others' suggestions for scope issues. Please post all issues by June 19th and continue the discussions on git hub (voting on priorities may or may not be necessary depending on how many issues emerge).
- If an issue may overlap with CalTRACK issues, note it in the description of the issue.
- In sharing (or commenting on) a scope issue, please include perspectives on: 1.) Why is the issue important?(i.e. is there a technical gap or a transition needed for meter-based savings) 2.) How does it fit with the purpose of the GRID group of supporting technical issues around savings and the grid planning intersect and 3.) What is the end in mind for the issue? (i.e. what is the practical real world application for a resolution and where will it be used.)