summary report - energy systems catapult...2018/09/18 · system components (e.g. pv panels, diesel...

1

© Energy Systems Catapult

Energy Systems Integration Guides Project Workstream 2: Distributed Energy

Summary Report

Energy Systems Catapult ESIG WS2 / Distributed Energy Summary Report

2

Contents

0 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 4

1 Background and Context ....................................................................................................... 6

2 Project Overview .................................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Project Scope ............................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Project steps ................................................................................................................. 9

2.3 Deliverables and tools arising ..................................................................................... 10

3 Project Experiences ............................................................................................................. 11

3.1 Case Study Site Characteristics .................................................................................. 11

3.2 General Findings ........................................................................................................ 11

3.2.1 Overview of Site Developer Process ............................................................. 12

3.3 Observation of Site Energy Design process in action .................................................. 13

3.3.1 Stakeholder Engagement and Strategic Objectives ....................................... 13

3.3.2 ‘As Is’ site description, ................................................................................... 16

3.3.3 Candidate Solution Identification ................................................................... 20

3.3.4 Solution Screening ........................................................................................ 23

3.3.5 Conceptual Design ........................................................................................ 24

3.3.6 Solution Modelling, Feasibility and Analysis .................................................. 26

3.3.7 Decision Making and Recommendation ........................................................ 30

4 Projection of Impacts and Benefits ....................................................................................... 33

4.1 Short term benefits ..................................................................................................... 33

4.2 Longer term benefits ................................................................................................... 33

4.2.1 Heat grid ....................................................................................................... 34

4.2.2 Right sizing for future demand....................................................................... 34

4.2.3 Retaining operational control ......................................................................... 35

5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 37

6 Proposals for follow-on work ................................................................................................ 39

7 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 40


3

Document Control

Review and Approval

.

Revision History

Type: Report

Title: ESIG WS2 / Distributed Energy Summary Report

Project Number:

Version: Draft 1

Status*: First Drafts

Restrictions**:

Release Date

External Release Register ID

(if project release process requires)

Version Comments

Author 1.0 Graham Fisher / Andy Compton

Reviewer

Reviewer (if required)

Approver

Date Version Comments

05_07_17 Draft 1 First Draft


4

0 Executive Summary

This report summarises the key learning points and main conclusions arising from studies conducted in Q4 2017 and Q1 2018 by the Energy Systems Catapult and its partners relating to decision making during campus-scale energy system transition planning. The sub-set of the project reported on here sought to address a ‘recommended’ decision-making process that a campus-scale management and engineering team might usefully follow in initiating an on-site energy system transformation project. The project aim was to positively assist those faced with the challenge of initiating a campus-scale energy transition activity through the development of a ‘methodology’ and an associated set of tools and resources – the Energy System Integration Guides (ESIG). These guides are designed to assist the team and to steer them towards ‘good practice’ in energy efficiency and system transition planning. The methodology, and the associated set of tools, developed during the project were created during a ‘real-world’ case study of a campus site. They seek to balance the aim of maximising the benefits of ‘behind the meter’ Distributed Energy with the increasing need to act responsibly and in an informed manner regarding a proposed solution’s consequences to the energy system components beyond the fence. The methodology developed also seeks to:

• Anticipate and assist the appropriate adoption of new technologies and business models in the solutions it arrives at, thereby generating new business opportunities for businesses of all scales and maturity; and,

• encourage cooperation with neighbouring sites and the Distribution Network Operator to optimise the potential of a pool of local co-ordinated assets for mutual benefit - rather than simply pursuing a narrow focus on the self-interest of an individual site.

Many issues were identified as factors affecting the ability of a site energy management team to carry out successful analysis and specification activities. These span a range of aspects from availability of capital through to lack of management time- energy being an invisible aspect of site activity not a primary management priority. Technical, commercial and strategic considerations must align favourably for a specific candidate solution to be successfully adopted – therefore it was necessary for the methodology and tools required to span many aspects (from the abstract to technically specific) with site management selecting those most appropriate for their needs. The need for external specialist modelling and analysis skills to support sites of this complexity in the project feasibility phases was identified. Whereas given a published ITT for a site energy upgrade there are many companies willing and able to undertake detailed design as part of a ‘Design and Build’ project, there are few companies in the UK today able to help a site owner/operator with early stage analysis and planning of their multi-energy system component, multi-vector energy system transformation. This highlights the possibility to build upon this initial methodology to build momentum through application and refinement on further sites leading to the building of a network of like-minded, competitive, SME expert consultants able fill that gap.


5

Although partially constrained by the sparse nature of site data available for the initial project, the methodology highlighted significant potential savings of dynamically controlled adaptive systems over more conventional candidates. Significant financial and Carbon Reduction differences could be achieved examining two nearby sites as a single holistic entity compared to optimising each separately. Further work is proposed to continue to refine the methodology- especially the system supportive / multi-site collaborative analysis challenges and to apply it to a wider range of sites. The aims are to further improve the process and to establish the potential collective financial and Carbon Reduction improvements obtainable when considering a wider pool of sites. We conclude that that it is wholly feasible to include in the transition planning for multiple campus sites mechanisms allowing them to (i) share assets; (ii) be coordinated in real time to participate in Demand Response, Balancing Mechanisms and/or other Reserve Services and (iii) to play an active role in supporting the UK energy networks. This will, by better asset utilisation help reduce overall cost of energy supply to the coordinated customers through new trading opportunities, and avoidance of reinforcements and new assets to serve short-duration and avoidable, peaks. We note that there is only a relatively small difference in the technical infrastructure required to operate a ‘smart micro-grid’ on campus and to also profile imports/exports to the external distribution networks in response to external signals. The roll out of such infrastructure across the public estate is an obvious target as the assets are under common control and the stakeholder needs span short-term financial optimisation, carbon reduction targets. In addition, the assets are sufficient in scale, both individually for supporting the proposed Distribution System Operators (DSO) and, in the aggregate, to support the national system. As a result, the public estate can play a meaningful role in supporting stable, low cost, secure national energy network operation.


6

1 Background and Context

This is a report summarising work undertaken during, and conclusions arising from Workstream 2 (Distributed Energy) of the Innovate UK Funded collaborative R&D “Energy Systems Integration Guides (ESIG) Project”. This workstream examined the decision-making processes used by Energy System operators/ owners when faced with the need to alter or update their campus scale energy systems. Campus scale Energy Systems (hospitals, business parks, universities etc) are typically large users of power and heat. In addition, such sites host a large number of car parking spaces for which, the provision of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure is a growing consideration. Their onsite systems are increasingly complex and may contain multiple energy system components (e.g. PV panels, diesel generators, heat pumps, CHP systems), which are operated ‘behind the meter’ to reduce site energy costs. Collectively, across the UK many such campus systems aggregate to significant scale which, depending on the manner in which they are operated, may either assist or aggravate power flows on the distribution and transmission networks. Under normal operating conditions ‘behind the meter’ embedded generation and storage reduces the power drawn from the distribution network reducing the load which is ultimately balanced in real time through a changing mix of large centralised generation plant, distributed renewable energy sources and interconnectors. However, at other times- dictated by maintenance, economics, or in the case of PV the prevailing weather conditions; the site can resume taking some, or all of its power, from its grid connection. Although behind the meter generation reduces the mean energy transfer over distribution and transmission networks, the unpredictable fall-back to grid-supplied power means it does not reduce the potential peak system requirements. It is the peak rating which determines the amount of dispatchable generation required, sizes of cables and switchgear etc., the majority of the costs of which are funded through charges per unit of electricity transiting them. Self-generation and consumption behind the meter whilst maintaining a fully dimensioned grid connection, therefore, also avoids contributing to many of the funding mechanisms on which upkeep of the network depends. It is increasingly important that proposed energy transition solutions are assessed as to whether they are truly ‘cost reflective’ or are relying on short term ‘loopholes’ in regulation or pricing. In terms of the energy trilemma campus-scale Distributed Energy (DE) has the following negative impacts:-

• Energy affordability: Pushes up the distribution and balancing resource costs disproportionately for permanently grid connected users.

• Energy security: Makes the network more unpredictable with steep and unexpected reappearance of ‘invisible’ load on the network.

• Energy sustainability: Typically, CHP, storage and renewable embedded generation equipment for self-consumptions will show carbon reductions and energy savings compared to centralised generation and national distribution. This need not always be the case as pricing of gas and electricity allows small-scale, carbon intensive, embedded generation to be economically deployed in some situations.

On the other hand, if deployed in a cooperative and responsible manner, with the aim of being operated to maximise benefits whilst minimising detrimental effects on the networks, it can have positive impacts:-


7

• Energy affordability: The Distributed Energy (DE) resources on site can be used to reduce load or contribute power back into the Distribution Network on request as one of the resources actively helping balance supply and demand – thereby reducing energy spill from surplus renewables or avoiding the need for additional, rarely used, central generation.

• Energy security: As for ‘energy affordability’ above the coordinated and cooperative use of the local DE assets as flexible demand or supply to help level network peaks and troughs assists at times of network stress. In addition, DE assets can be used to provide ‘customer supplied services’ to assist system operators in dealing with network issues and, in the process, generate revenues for the site operators.

• Energy sustainability: Where techniques such as Combined Heat and Power are deployed effectively and heat re-used, both the avoidance of waste heat from the large electrical generation plants and energy losses associated with the transmission and distribution networks can be avoided – making a significant (~40%) energy saving.

A ‘System Friendly’ approach would yield a system with some or all of the characteristics in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – ‘System Friendly’ Characteristics

This project addresses the decision-making process that a campus management and engineering team would follow in initiating an on-site energy system transformation. It seeks to positively guide this process, through an analysis of ‘real-world’ case studies, proposal of a standardised methodology, and making tools and resources available to illustrate ‘good practice’. Through their use it aims to maximise the benefits of DE to the site whilst acting responsibly and in an informed manner regarding the consequences to the energy system components beyond the fence. Such good practice design can significantly reduce the risks to the site owners from anticipated changes to the energy system that will impact energy prices and pricing structures. On the contrary, anticipation of general trends will allow sensible

System Friendly

Flexibility

Predictive

System supportive

Future Proofing

Responsivity & Availability

Self-sufficiency

Integrated Sustainability

Efficiency

Resilience


8

provision to be made to maximise the opportunities to take advantage of these changes as they unfold. The methodology seeks to;

• assist the appropriate adoption of new technologies and business models in the solutions it arrives at, thereby generating new business opportunities for businesses of all scales and maturity; and,

• to encourage cooperation with neighbouring sites and the DNO to optimise the potential of a pool of local co-ordinated assets- not just the campus site’s ones.

The financial benefits that could arise from adoption of these techniques across a portfolio of mixed use campus sites are presented in Section 4 to show that wider adoption of the methodology’s techniques is also financially compelling. It should be noted that the endpoint for this project is a high-level target design or set of credible design options (referred to as the ‘Informed Design’) which would form the basis of a detailed Request for Procurement (RFP) process. This project aims to help scope and launch such an RFP correctly and does not result directly in detailed designs or plans capable of being implemented without more layers of design being completed.


9

2 Project Overview

2.1 Project Scope Recognising that the case study facilities were busy operational sites the decision was taken to appoint a specialist external energy systems consultant (referred to as the Expert Consultant (EC)) to act as a proxy part of the site owner’s energy transformation team. The EC augmented the limited planning and analysis resource that could be dedicated to the project by the site teams. The Expert Consultants were tasked with addressing the site owner’s needs and strategic aims in respect of the planned Energy System transformation and to produce two key deliverables:

• The ‘Informed Site Design’ document detailing the recommendations of how the site owner’s energy transformation requirements could be best met taking into account the mix of possible technology and business solution options, site specific conditions, and the wider system impacts.

• The ‘Site Design Methodology’ developed and used to systematically reach the candidate solutions proposed in the Informed Site Design document above.

The ESC team concentrated on

• observing the on-site transformation planning as undertaken by the site owner team augmented by the appointed Expert Consultants;

• examining how the potential impacts of future technology and market changes could be accommodated within the methodology; and,

• deriving an adapted reusable process / methodology based on lessons learned and requirement for wider applicability.

2.2 Project steps An overview of the project steps is shown in Figure 2 below. The role of the Expert Consultants supplementing the campus operator’s internal team is shown in purple. The ESC team (yellow) shadowed the work of the Expert Consultants at all stages and were present for all interactions with key stakeholders (CCS, campus energy managers, DNO etc.) and were responsible for developing the overall project plan and coordinating all activities within it. Although Figure 2 represents the project in a linear manner, lessons and findings at each stage were used to iterate the tools, methodology and processes including revisiting and updating activities at previous stages as necessary.


10

Figure 2 - Project Execution Steps

2.3 Deliverables and tools arising For the avoidance of doubt note that there are two separate methodologies/processes produced as part of this activity;

• The site specific methodology used by the External Consultant in arriving at the recommended ‘Informed Design’ for that specific site.

• A methodology, derived from the above but of wider applicability to multiple types of campus environment, proposed by the Energy System Catapult project team as a basis for future work.

These methodologies are supported by a number of tools aimed at assisting energy system managers on campus-scale sites through the methodology steps and providing external resources and good practice guidance. The tools are of two types;

• Templates, forms and other resources to help systematically capture and record information and to guide the user to the identification of possible site energy transformation ‘target’ solutions (initially as a long list and then through the process of scoring and filtering to produce a small candidate set for further study.)

• Tools that can be used to assess the candidate solutions from alternative perspectives including;

o Whether the proposed solutions make a reasonable provision for harmonious operation with the distribution and transmission networks

o Whether any new technologies, innovative solutions or new business models could affect (positively or negatively) the desirability of the candidate solutions.

o Whether, to at least to the degree that they can be anticipated from expert literature and precursor small scale R&D activities, that the candidate solution will remain valid in the light of predictable technology and commercial change.

The tools produced as part of this project can be found appended to, or as separate documents called out from, the relevant methodology definition document.

Deliverables Next steps

Candidatesolution

conceptualdesign

‘As Is’systemcapture

Candidatesolution

longlisting

Solutionscreening

&shortlisting

Stakeholdermapping &

requirementsdefinition

Modelling,feasibility,

futurereadiness &

systemimpacttesting

Final site design and

methodology write

up

Finalsite &

learningreports

FinalESC

methodology

FinalTool-set

Initiation,planning

&stakeholder

meetings

Search for,tender

&appointExternal

Consultant

Identifynext site & prepare toapply and

refinemethodology

Support and Manage External ConsultantsObserve process and stakeholder interactions

Wider system impact assessment tool creation

Innovation maturity assessment and future readiness assessment tool creation

Key = ESC Project Team tasks = appointed Expert Contractor tasks


11

3 Project Experiences

3.1 Case Study Site Characteristics The case study centred on a large hospital (‘the Primary Site’ or ‘the Hospital’) adjoining another publicly owned facility (‘the Secondary Site’), and with both sites purchasing power through Crown Commercial Services who facilitated the necessary introductions to key people on the sites and prepared the way for the project. A third major university site (‘the University’) is located within a mile and could be included in an optimised plan should there be a decision to take forward the outline recommendations made in this project through to a ‘design, build, and commission’ RFP.

3.2 General Findings This section details a number of general observations relevant to the project, further work desired as a follow on to it, or issues that may be applicable to the proposed application of this process on other sites:

• The case study observations were made late in 2017 and early 2018 to a timetable dictated by the project end date of March 31st 2018. The Primary Site is a busy district hospital and this period coincided with a nationwide surge in healthcare demand triggered in part by a national influenza epidemic. Unsurprisingly, the hospital resources were significantly stretched during this period and the priority from the team responsible for the estate and Energy Services was focused on smooth running and upkeep of the care facilities rather than future-facing activities.

• The Primary Site was developed under a PFI agreement with a third party contracted to maintain and run the site energy system and other physical assets covered by the PFI agreement. The complex chain and focus on operational requirements delayed access to fine grain energy usage data for the project.

• Unsurprisingly, those assets within the scope of the PFI agreement are on a planned maintenance and upgrade cycle allowed for at commencement of the agreement but deviations from this can only be made after a lengthy process of discussions with the ultimate financial backers of the PFI contract. A consequence of these constraints is that funding for previously identified energy efficiency improvements is often subject to agreement with the PFI company. One of the backlogged items is remote, multi point, energy metering - identified both by the hospital and Hard Facilities Managers as necessary to provide more usable granular consumption data and, properly analyse and optimise the power flows. In the absence of sub-metering/ distributed power monitoring, the only data available to us for the project was half hourly meter data at the two interconnection points to the Distribution Network (MPAN).

• The additional level of organisational complexity resulting from the PFI arrangement was clearly frustrating at times to the hospital staff as it meant identified potential energy savings through techniques such as swapping out incandescent light bulbs for LED lighting could not be financed.

• The desire to reduce energy costs, update systems, etc. coupled with the lack of access to capital funds was seen to ‘open the door’ to private sector energy companies pushing their private capital backed solutions. Such a development would entail entering into a Power Purchase Agreement on terms which may not be advantageous


12

to the public purse over the longer term. Given the state ownership and long-term commitment when building and operating a hospital, accessing private capital on a more planned and favourable basis would seem possible.

• Throughout the project, whether at site or local DNO level, there was strong support for the concept of the methodology and tools we are proposing. At no point did we find anyone who expressed the opinion that there were standard ways of doing this or that energy managers of complex sites had the time, resources, or up to date knowledge to confidently take on an energy transformation at scale with present practice.

• Both site’s energy managers were running their sites to a good standard despite the limited means and time available to them. For example;

• A regression analysis of gas consumption against Degree Days was performed from the half hour gas meter data at the Hospital site – CHP usage was metered separately. The results in 3 show a good correlation with the mean consumption allowing for the external temperature prevailing at the time. The deviations observed correspond to periods when the CHP was not operating and hence heat was derived entirely from boilers.

Figure 3 - Monthly Regression - kWh : Degree Days

• Similarly, at the adjoining site sophisticated building management systems were in use controlling energy usage based on time of day, occupancy and daylight levels and location dependent specific requirements.

• The potential partner sites are aware of the possibility of more efficient operation through cooperation with each other but have had little resource to devote to exploring the ideas further.

3.2.1 Overview of Site Developer Process The statement of work against which the Expert Consultants were engaged assumed the following process steps to arrive at the Informed Site Design.

• Orientation and kick-off meeting with ESIG team.


13

• Production of ‘As is’ site technical documentation and identification of projected future needs.

• Summary of the ‘As is’ business and commercial models on site and understanding of future aspirations.

• Options identification and shortlisting

• Modelling of shortlisted options

• Results documentation and presentation

The Expert Consultants were free to use their professional judgment to create and use a methodology they thought would best arrive at the ‘informed site design’. A minimum level of available documentation, resource commitment, and pre-project data compilation has been identified as one of the mandatory criteria used in the selection of further sites.

3.3 Observation of Site Energy Design process in action The ESC ESIG team observed the engaged Expert Consultants as they developed their methodology and engaged with stakeholders and other ESIG team members. The key observations are :-

3.3.1 Stakeholder Engagement and Strategic Objectives

3.3.1.1 Analysis As part of the ESIG launch process an initial Stakeholder Mapping exercise had been undertaken, the output of which is a simple table of stakeholder details including their responsibilities. In hindsight we wished, in the first case study project, that we had spent considerably more time and effort in understanding the stakeholder relationships in detail. We proceeded to the next steps once we had populated the stakeholder mapping table. Later we found that the data we had populated did not reflect the full complexity of the situation on the ground at the case study sites. We had not actually identified who had the authority to launch a transformation project i.e. budget control, nor gained a full understanding of the capital projects financial processes, or types of projects for which funding would be available. These shortcomings later affected the shortlisting process as there was insufficient business context against which to assess the options. For future versions of the methodology, the stakeholder mapping tool should be strengthened to ensure strategic, financial, and resource decision-making staff and processes are fully understood before moving on. Anecdotally, from discussions held with DNOs and site facility managers, it appears that site energy managers are having the job of upgrading a complex campus wide Energy System given to them as an additional task to be undertaken alongside business as usual activities. The organisation as a whole does not appear to recognise the magnitude of work required to undertake such a transformation and the whole project therefore lacks the resources and senior level commitment necessary to make it a success. This arises because; • There seems to be an automatic assumption that the expert in running a system and managing all the operational issues therein has the skills and experience to determine the requirements for, and to implement, major system changes.


14

• The Energy System manager may not have any, or recent, experience of undertaking a complete large-scale ‘Analysis, Design, Build, and Commission’ project and will themselves, therefore, underestimate the magnitude of the task and skills required. The danger is therefore that the project is scoped in such a way from the outset that the expectations cannot be delivered, or that it will, through lack of adequate resource, fail to maintain the momentum required to arrive at a procurable specification. A key role of the overall methodology, including the associated tool sets, is to show the Energy Manager and Senior Management Team the level of technical detail and analysis which is required for a transformation project to be successfully undertaken. The early engagement of key stakeholders in securing board level support and monitoring of an energy system transformation project appears to be a critical action. Without buy-in from the top level in the organisation that such a transformation is a major project, requiring significant budget, time commitment, external expertise, and management support, the projects will be launched in such a manner that problems or failure are much more likely to occur. It is similarly essential to recognise the importance of the initial stages of concept development where the project has to be fully aligned with corporate objectives and that this recognition ensures an adequate level of appropriately skilled resources. Additional possible roles arising for the ESC at the stakeholder engagement and strategic objectives stage could be to provide concise energy briefings and case studies to assist site energy managers and senior management in keeping up to date with technology and evolving best practice.

3.3.1.2 Recommendations The entire methodology and toolset should be positioned to play 3 roles in the project launch stage;

• To allow the Energy System Manager to determine whether undertaking the proposed project without external help is within their capabilities. i.e. Whether they have the knowledge and experience to confidently scope the requests for procurement, assess the responses, and support the appointed contractors through the design, installation, and commissioning processes.

• To act as collateral which can be used by the Energy System Manager to correctly scope the duration, magnitude, resources (human and financial), and senior stakeholder support requirement for the project to be a success. Note: The methodology therefore also adds value in the stages leading up to a project launch by mapping out the path ahead.

• Formalising the end of discussion and the launch of a project to transform a system. The transition point from study to a project can be hard to identify. Our observation is that there is a lot of internal discussion prior to the launch of an energy transformation project. At some point the organisation has become aware that change is, or will be, needed. (For instance, it was found relatively late during the hospital case study that there was no actual project underway to transform the site Energy System, just discussions pending the outcome of investment decisions about a possible new facility that may, or may not, be built at that site.) The methodology and tools should guide the scoping of a project using good practice principles. We believe having a methodology and tools laid out will be helpful for the manager in obtaining senior management sign off that the study activity is ‘complete against the methodology’ and that a formalised project will now commence.


15

In the Hospital case study, the potential transformation discussion activity was initiated when there was an awareness by relevant management of two separate issues: 1. that they were close to their maximum permitted electrical load at the connection points to

the distribution network; and, 2. that at some point an additional care unit may need to be built on the site which would

significantly increase the electrical load primarily as a result of additional body scanners being installed in the centre.

The toolsets should therefore include really basic questions enquiring as to the current ‘project’ status to ensure subsequent stages have firm foundations. Typical questions required to better scope this pre-project phase of work are: 1. Why do we need to initiate a project? 2. What is broken? (i.e. What is the issue that must, as an absolute minimum, be resolved

during the project - whether technical, operational, business case, or reliability-related.) 3. What is the time horizon which we will consider? (In the hospital case there is a PFI

agreement which represents a hard cut off for project payback. The energy system, currently, need only operate until the end of the PFI contract. For plans crossing the PFI boundary there must be another set of stakeholders such as the local NHS trusts who have a view as to the longer-term evolution of care facilities within the region – who would need to be involved in evaluating longer term plans.)

4. What else is likely to reach end of life or exhaustion during this period? 5. How can I reduce energy use during this period? 6. How can I save money during this period? 7. How can I earn additional money during this period? 8. How can I improve the operation of the site’s core function? 9. If I work with others in the locality (including the DNO) is there a potentially different answer

to any of the above? At this early stage, determining the organization’s appetite for change, openness to participate in new business models, openness to innovation etc. will help guide the options studied in later stages.

• The methodology should more strongly emphasize the criticality of these early stages and importance of allocating adequate resources dimensioned to the magnitude of the task.

• The stakeholder mapping should accurately represent reporting relationships and decision making /control relationships.

• The correctness of the mapping should be confirmed by double checking with multiple people in the organisation.

• Specific questions should be added about capital project authorisation and control processes as part of using the methodology to assist preparation of a robust set of documents as inputs to these processes.

• The toolset used at this stage should link the project goals to the strategic goals of the organisation, record these, and have them formally signed off by a project management board.

• The methodology should have a control gate meaning that the project cannot proceed to the later stages unless there is senior management commitment to the project, including adequate resources, representation and sign off on project scope, goals and linkage to strategic objectives.


16

3.3.2 ‘As Is’ site description,

3.3.2.1 Analysis This stage of the work is important as it uncovers and documents information on the energy assets available, context of the site as part of a wider system, and the issues and constraints associated with them. For the reasons above, the available documentation on the Hospital site was incomplete. Connection details to the local distribution grid and on-site topology were not available through the hospital. The local DNO was very supportive of this project and fielded a senior team spanning R&D and operational issues for a meeting. The DNO also, kindly, supplied interconnection details for the hospital and surrounding areas on receipt of a letter of authority from the hospital. The DNO reported that they receive approximately 150 applications for connections a month, of these only around 25 quotes will be issued of which one or two sites will go forward. The whole company is driven by customer service focussed performance metrics, including speed of response and time to connect new customers after receipt of a connection request. There was clear frustration that the number of applications, and their very poor quality, inevitably meant much time was spent on servicing poorly thought out applications to the detriment of their performance level to more sophisticated users. They already provide many mechanisms to try and assist the customer in developing their thinking prior to the application for a connection. For example, they will run surgeries with clients wishing to put in multiple applications, as well as on a regional basis. At the moment, there was a feeling that some clients were using the DNO staff as free consultants. They hope that this will change in 2019 when a fee will be imposed for handling a connection request. Anecdotally, the DNO confirmed that many customers are leaving the application for a distribution grid connection far too late in the overall process. They have come across customers who have fully built and commissioned distributed energy systems on a site before approaching the DNO for connection only to be informed that portion of the distribution network cannot accept export. Optimisation of a single region of their network for the mutual benefit of all customers was clearly viewed positively but is considered challenging within the regulations requiring equal treatment of all parties requesting connections. the DNO pointed to some interesting practice in Ireland whereby the DNO announces that a specific region will shortly be optimised and requests all customers to come forward with their plans and questions. They can then plan a region optimising the costs and benefits for all and possibly justifying reinforcement ahead of need rather than making incremental reinforcements on a customer by customer basis. Examination of the Single Line Diagrams relating to the distribution network surrounding the Hospital gave rise to issues mapping physical assets to parts of the customer’s premises. In addition to the two DNO connection points on the hospital site, there were several other hospital related connections to staff accommodation and other buildings/equipment related to the hospital site. Although physically within the hospital property boundaries, these assets do not form part of the ‘hospital’ as defined within the PFI arrangements. Without having enquired further into the detail it appears that these are under separate ownership by the local NHS Trust or, in the case of an additional medical scanner on site, a private Health Insurance Company. Care will be needed in defining the ‘As Is’ situation on other campus sites as similar issues are bound to arise. In the worst case this can create differences between energy usage data and the attribution of it to the correct physical buildings / business functions.


17

Although it is logical that a Private Health Insurance company has provided its own connections given that the available site power is limited, because of the separate ownership and a lack of overall master plan, no use was made of the opportunity to bring in a larger feeder addressing both the Private Health Insurance company’s and hospital’s needs. As part of the ‘As Is’ analysis it was found that it was necessary to also consider permitted usage models of assets located on the site. The hospital has backup generators but the use of these to minimise energy bills through self-generation during red zone tariff periods, for instance, would not be allowed under the PFI agreement terms. A number of questions remain that will need further investigation if the project proceeds further;

• Usage data obtained relating to operation of the CHP plant shows some type of within-day periodic cycling - possibly thermostatically related.

• Reasons why the CHP and backup generators cannot be run simultaneously.

• Switching topology of onsite wiring between distribution points, backup generators, and CHP.

• Whether it is practical to re-introduce segregation of critical and non-critical loads. There is understood to be no segmentation today and whilst other works are being undertaken restoring it may be desirable to make additional energy balancing strategies possible.

Hospital staff have held discussions periodically with the Second Site and the University regarding possible co-operation in energy, but there are no ongoing energy-related projects between them. In terms of ‘neighbourliness’ and increased efficiencies that may be attainable if the sites had been reviewed and optimised holistically we observed that:

• Each site is, as expected, pursuing its own plans independently with the Hospital seeking additional power, and the Second Site seeking bill reductions through the self-generation of power onsite using gas fired CHP generators.

• Although described as CHP, the generators being deployed on the Second Site will be venting the vast majority of the heat produced to the atmosphere.

• the Second Site has previously been granted a connection permit significantly larger than required for current or foreseeable future needs. This reduces the capacity available on the distribution network for the connection of other customers - whether power consumers or generators.

A simplified graphical representation of the Hospital ‘target’ site and its neighbours was created (Figure 4) and is used in later stages of the work as a basis on which to overlay system upgrade options.


18

Figure 4 - 'As Is' Summary diagram

3.3.2.2 Recommendations In order to deliver, in a timely manner, an analysis of adequate quality to trigger a major campus energy system upgrade access to high quality data (without delay) is essential: e.g. site energy asset listings, interconnection plans, energy usage data etc. It is recommended that part of the selection criteria for future sites should be formalised through use of a preliminary / project initiation questionnaire. This could include;

• Availability of half hourly metered data from all connection points covering a full year.

• Energy flow information to and from key energy assets and loads.

• From an authorised letter of introduction, permission for the release of connection information by the DNO.

• That a minimum level of dedicated resource will be made available at the target site and within any sub-contract facilities management companies tasked with maintaining and/or operating the site energy assets.

• Details of the relevant staff at, and needs of, other local large-scale energy users.

We have a strong preference for sites expressing a joint interest in working together. The process of documenting the ‘As Is’ situation could be undertaken by the site energy manager prior to the engagement of any expert consultants. There seems little alternative to making site visits and conducting interviews with key staff to check that all relevant information and constraints have been established as part of the ‘As Is’ documentation process. Many of the factors later used to guide solution identification will be uncovered during this phase of work. The engaged Expert Consultants produced a comprehensive ‘As Is’ site description document which was later augmented with the findings derived from the results of mathematical models of possible solutions and became the key ‘Site Design Report’ deliverable document.


19

For future sites a Sankey diagram would be a good additional method for summarising the ‘As Is’ position and allowing candidate solutions to be assessed. A link to Sankey diagram tools may be helpful as an additional resource pointed to by the ESIG deliverables. The production of such a diagram is a good graphical means of showing the relevant inputs, wastage and useful outputs. It provides a good means of identifying the opportunities for initiatives such as CHP or thermal energy recovery including cross vector interactions. (e.g. Increased electrical load from the operation of air-source heat pumps being used as part of the evaluation of a revised thermal solution.) It can also indicate where large aggregated blocks of demand would benefit from more granular sub-metering to disaggregate the data sufficiently to identify energy usage by function and hence identify targets for efficiency improvements. As an example, Figure 5 shows the graphical representation of the Energy System of the University College London campus. It was produced for use by UCL by the ‘Useful Simple Projects’ company https://usefulprojects.co.uk/project/ucl-energy-strategy/ There is no good graphical representation in widespread use that illustrates peak and mean, directional flows or seasonal representations in Sankey style form. The visualisation of such aspects would simplify identification of multi-campus solutions and is an area for potential further study.

Figure 5 - Sankey Diagram of UCL Campus

A simplified diagram showing at least the supply interconnections, maximum ratings, and current peak demands should be produced for each campus. Undertaking the transformation where the required level of data on usage pattern, demand etc. is not available would, in any case, be unwise. Simplified diagrams (compared to the UCL campus one) would enable the opportunities for heat grids and private wire to be visualised.

https://usefulprojects.co.uk/project/ucl-energy-strategy/


20

The identification of ‘pinch-points’ in the network is emerging as the most tractable way of comparing solutions. Where there is a hard limit pinch-point such as a feeder rating the most efficient system will use that ‘pinch-point’ constricted limit at its full rating all of the time. Techniques to flatten the peaks and reduce the average will bubble into the candidate solutions list by looking at the causes and ways around the pinch point. For the next case study sites consideration of ‘pinch-point’ identification and mapping on flow diagrams (highly simplified Sankey Diagrams) should be evaluated for potential inclusion in the next version of the methodology.

3.3.3 Candidate Solution Identification 3.3.3.1 Analysis A Solution Assessment Matrix template was a key tool created by the Expert Consultants in the ESIG project. It is an optional tool for use in solution long-list creation and subsequent short-listing. The longlist is a systematic way to include all the available solutions, technologies and components and will be particularly helpful in assisting an energy manager in identifying all technology and business model options. A screenshot from the tool is shown in Figure 6. Six categories of criteria are identified: Technical, Environment, Policy & Regulation, Financial, Implementation and Innovation. Against each of these 39 candidate solution elements, grouped into 3 categories (Operational and Flexibility, On-Site Energy Asset Investment, and Commercial Solutions) are assessed. This process requires the tool user to judge for each of the 1482 cells in a 39 by 38 grid, whether the solution meets or contributes towards the listed criteria and to tick those where it does. The tool normalises the results for each of the 6 categories (to accommodate differing numbers of assessment questions in each) and these are carried forward onto the summary sheet where they become 6 of the 7 final solution element scores.


21

Figure 6 - View of the Solution Assessment Tool

To arrive at a final scoring, a 7th and final score is awarded based on the suitability of using each solution element to address Site Specific requirements. This Site-specific suitability is scored (on the scale of 1 to 5) against 10 categories, namely:

i. Applicability to the project objectives i.e. does it meet one, some or all of the objectives partially or fully

ii. Compatibility with the existing site or customers i.e. will it be simple/complex to integrate this new solution, maintain and operate it on the site

iii. Compatibility with local infrastructure e.g. is it easy or difficult to integrate with the local electricity and gas networks, local planning etc.

iv. Disruption to site core mission during installation v. Is there potential for collaboration with a partner or neighbouring site? vi. Wider Energy System Readiness objectives vii. How complex will the end of life/decommissioning process be? viii. Does it offer potential to participate in grid services or perform trading with nearby site ix. Does the solution meet the environmental objectives of the site? x. Does the solution meet all policy and regulation set by the site/ownership body (e.g.

would the solution fall within the PFI arrangement etc)


22

Figure 7 - Site Specific Assessment Example

Some possible areas of improvement noted from using these tools are;

• Until the user works down to iii), v), vi) and vii) they are not guided to look at the elements of local grid friendliness, neighbour and DNO cooperation, or consider impacts on the local distribution network and grid. Ideally these would be considered at an earlier stage.

• A minimum level of understanding of the differences between the solution elements

is required to successfully operate the process. (For instance, one needs to know the differences between ‘energy operations data capture and analysis’, ‘Microgrid controller’ and ‘DER controller’ to successfully score the solution elements individually and consider their use in combination.

• The fine-grained representation of the solution elements is heavy (but

comprehensive). The large number of headings makes it hard to navigate and keep in mind when looking to identify viable scenarios.

3.3.3.2 Recommendations A method has to be found to reduce the number of ‘solution-candidates’ in the Solution Assessment Tool template. Given the number of solutions and the fine distinctions that therefore are needed to distinguish between one another it is unlikely that all but the most knowledgeable and diligent energy expert could confidently complete the entire tool.


23

A reduction in the number of categories would make filling in the score cards linearly less onerous and reduce the number of combinations which need to be considered by the square of the reduction. The 25 separate ‘on-site energy asset investment’ categories have the most scope of simplification. It is proposed that they are separated by heat and power and then by generation, storage, control, energy efficiency and other. Possibly one does not need to go further than grouping all forms of onsite non-dispatchable generation together with questions at a subsequent stage to allow the most appropriate form of onsite renewables to be determined. As explained above, the term ‘System Readiness’ should be avoided and the methodology should be more explicit in explaining the underlying principles of being a good, responsible and cooperative energy system user by breaking them down into a series of actionable steps such as :

• Reducing the loss / spillage of surplus renewable energy • Responding to network stress by reducing load or dispatching power. • Achieving the flattest profile possible, either for a single site, or in cooperation with

neighbours (except where deviations from the mean are, themselves. system supportive (e.g. reduction in demand during Triad periods, supporting DSO operation etc.

3.3.4 Solution Screening

3.3.4.1 Analysis The Solution Assessment Tool is the major mechanism to guide the user through the filtering from the longlist of many options through to a shortlist for detailed further consideration. As discussed above this tool allows the user to work through a large number of possible options, consider their combination, and score their applicability to the target site. Solution screening is accomplished by working through an assessment process on the ‘Solution List’ tab of the tool. For each possible solution a systematic evaluation against the list of criteria is made as to whether it meets or contributes to them. 38 criteria have been identified, grouped into six clusters- Technical, Environment, Policy and Regulation, Financial, Implementation, and Innovation. The advantage of this process is that it forces the user to consider potential solutions from many angles and to decide, for each, whether it is aligned to them or not. The scores are normalised to remove the effects of differing numbers of criteria within each cluster and are one of two score sets which are combined to give a total. The second score set is created by considering the suitability of deploying each solution on a site-specific basis. For instance, the question ‘is there potential for collaboration with a partner or neighbouring site?’ can only be answered on a site by site basis. It is comprehensive but requires patience and knowledge to complete the 39 site-specific solution sheets defined in the tool as they are typically 10 questions on each, with each requiring a score to be inserted against a 5-point Likert scale. A macro function execution button to pull information together from multiple sheets and combine it into a single page summary has been provided in the tool.


24

A second such button to sort the solutions in a descending list ordered by total score would assist the user. After these stages the output takes the form of a weighted list of possible solutions. The step in moving from this list to a handful of scenarios for detailed study seems to require a high degree of energy insight. This may not matter in most cases as the likely next step is the initiation of a process to engage specialist energy consultants or system integrators by means of a procurement action. Enough work has been done at this point for the procurement documents to be produced and for them to pick up the project and take it through its next stages. Guidance regarding best practice for the tool set and for evaluating grid friendliness may be advisable.

3.3.4.2 Recommendations

• As presently scoped, the user has to judge the relative importance of each possible technique. The tool could usefully help steer the solution ranking presenting a descending hierarchy of good practice procedure, such as:

o Reduce energy use. o Increase control and monitoring of energy assets. o Reduce, recover, or reuse waste energy on site. o Reduce, recover, or reuse waste energy in collaboration with neighbours. o Identify site-specific constraint points and consider all techniques to flatten

usage profile at these points through changing the mix and operation of on-site energy assets.

o Identify neighbourhood constrained points and flatten the aggregated usage profile collectively at these points through changing the mix and operation of on site and neighbouring site energy assets.

o Explore new markets to earn income from onsite energy assets. o Explore new markets to earn income from the combination of energy assets on

site and from neighbours.

• The single page (i.e. individual tabs in the Excel workbook for scoring each of the Solution Candidates in the Site Specific assessment process) can be used to impart a lot of knowledge to the less informed user including links to other resources and explanations. A method of keeping these pages up to date as technology and business models evolve is required.

3.3.5 Conceptual Design

3.3.5.1 Analysis The process used by the expert consultants to produce a small number of favoured conceptual designs was to sort the assessed solutions and then carry out an exercise to see which ones could be grouped, either because they were similar in nature, or worked well together in combination to deliver the site’s identified transformation outcome. A simple, consistent, method of graphical representation was used to show the potential energy elements on site, interconnections between them, as well as those on neighbouring sites. (See Figure 8.) Whereas a non-expert user might be able to work their way through a list of pre-populated and relevant system and combination tools, this stage is probably only able to be undertaken by


25

experts. The rationalisation of the large set of potential solutions to a small number of viable candidates requires technical expertise and industry knowledge to spot opportunities for grouping, and selection of combinations that compliment each’s strengths and weaknesses and are of most relevance to the site. For the hospital case, six conceptual designs were arrived at:

1. Onsite generation and storage. 2. Physical interconnection and generation. 3. Heat generation and network. 4. Power to hydrogen. 5. Virtual private wire. 6. Mass electric vehicle enablement.

Figure 8 - Conceptual Solution Designs


26

The Expert Consultants produced a concise summary of each solution and its characteristics, pros and cons etc. allowing the list to be revised down to four candidates which were progressed for more detailed modelling. Under normal circumstances this step would have been undertaken with the key stakeholders but in view of the lack of concrete data used in reaching this point, and the limited time the hospital Energy Manager had available, it was felt that the use of the ESC team for shortlisting would be more appropriate. The two candidate solutions which were dropped at this point were:

• Heat generation and network solution. This solution would have made use of surplus heat from the neighbouring Second Site through the use of a heat grid. Whilst this makes sense from an energy conservation and overall cost point of view it does not address the critical stakeholder requirement - namely to provide additional power on the Hospital site.

• Power to hydrogen. Whilst this concept was thought to have potential, it was judged to be at a too early Technology Readiness Level for this application.

3.3.5.2 Recommendations At the conceptual design stage, the following recommendations arose;

• The use of energy experts for this stage should be recommended unless the Energy System manager is very knowledgeable, suitably experienced and up to date in their understanding.

• The graphical summarisation, at high level and in consistent format, was thought to work well and allowed the different solutions to be considered and options for additions/ combinations to be readily discussed. This aspect should be adopted for future iterations of the methodology.

• The importance of checking back with the stakeholder requirements at each selection option was demonstrated by the heat grid issue which, although logical, would not have addressed the fundamental project needs.

• In arriving at this point in the process a lot of detailed work has been done at previous stages systematically considering all combinations of technologies and opportunities. In this section many of these are now grouped for further analysis. Consideration should be given to the elimination of clearly unfeasible technologies (such as large scale onshore wind generation within a town centre, or hydro-electric schemes where there is no river, prior to the systematic scoring process. In addition, grouping could be considered at an earlier stage. The relative merits of one type of embedded generation over another did not appear until detailed time series analysis was performed during the next process step and could have been grouped until that point.

3.3.6 Solution Modelling, Feasibility and Analysis


27

3.3.6.1 Analysis The Expert Consultants undertook a package of detailed solution modelling and analysis covering energy flows over a full year against various scenarios, simple capital cost and operational cost models. Time series of data was input from all loads, generation, or other power input or output elements. This was a combination of available data from the hospital site, and informed models of the likely characteristics of future energy sources and loads. E.g. PV panel output, anticipated demand from the projected Ambulatory Care Unit (ACU) using assumed figures for energy consumption based on similar medical facilities of the same size, and factoring in typical loads for the medical scanners equating to 1.5MW. An increased connection to the DNO network of 1.5MW was therefore identified as the first potential solution. The present hospital load + ACU became the base case with time series analysis (Figure 9) showing 14 predicted overload events with a constrained import limit of 5.1MW (5.6MW limit as notified by the DNO – 10% margin). Avoiding these events requires an additional 12MWh of energy beyond that which the network could supply. (The CHP is assumed to be generating on site, but that the import capacity must be sufficient to meet the entire site load if the CHP is off-line.)

Figure 9 - Base Case Import Requirement

The Expert Consultants then performed a number of studies looking at provision of storage with imported power (within the present import limits) alone, storage/import with 5MW PV or storage/import + 5MW wind farm. The composition of these and their mapping to Solution Candidates is shown in Table 1 (where (X) refers to the appropriate column in Table 1) .

Base Case (A)

Add new demand for ACU to existing demand and compare to import limit to understand the reinforcement that is required.

-

Storage/Import Only (B)

Model the new ACU demand and determine the size of storage or additional import that is required to meet the additional demand that has been created.

The results from these 3 studies provide results to the site-specific assessment in 8 Solutions 1, 2 and 5. Solution


28

Storage/Import + 5MW PV

(C)

Building on the Storage Only scenario, 5MW of PV generation is added and the size of storage/import reassessed.

1 will use storage to meet additional demand requirements, and Solutions 2 and 5 will use import from partner site via physical or virtual interconnection to meet additional load.

Storage/Import + 5 MW Wind

(D)

Building on the Storage Only scenario, 5MW of wind generation is added and the size of storage/import reassessed.

EV1 + Storage (E)

Model the new ACU demand and introduce EV1 charging profile in order to determine

the size of storage required

Solution 6: EV Focused Solution

Two EV scenarios are considered

EV1 + Storage + 5MW PV

(F)

Building on the EV1+ Storage scenario, add 5 MW of PV generation and determine the new storage capacity required.

EV2 + Storage (G)

Model the new ACU demand and introduce EV2 charging profile in order to determine the size of storage required

EV2 + Storage + 5 MW PV

(H)

Building on the EV2+ Storage scenario, add 5 MW of PV generation and determine the new storage capacity required.

Table 1 Modelling Scenarios

For the storage options, time series analysis was used to identify the additional energy required (12MWh) and find the worst-case events through which the battery must deliver power (6 hours duration with total 2.3MWh energy delivered). An important finding was that there were still 3.5 hours a year where the site energy requirements could not be met because, due to the import constraints, the batteries would not have been recharged sufficiently because of previous correlated periods of high load. This pointed to the need for a more sophisticated arrangement with external power sharing or additional onsite generation (whether generator, PV or otherwise.) The addition of 5MW PV in addition to the storage was identified as the best technical option providing the required power all year within the existing import constraint limits. PV was found to be a better solution than wind as the output was better correlated with the Hospital daily demand cycle.

Figure 10 - Available capacity with 5MW PV and existing CHP


29

Part of the desired methodology was to assess the suitability of the proposed solutions in the face of predictable change. It was felt likely that the hospital site could be especially impacted by the future growth in EV numbers. Crown Commercial Services has established links with specialists in this field as both the provision of EV charging facilities, and the use of carparks for locating carport mounted PV arrays are recurring issues on many of their sites. The original project plan was for these experts to provide an informed view of the potential additional demand EVs will present to both the hospital and science park sites. Unfortunately, it became clear relatively late in the project that due to other work commitments they would be unable to help us model these sites. To enable the Expert Consultants to complete their modelling work, WS2 staff produced a relatively crude internal model based on the number of car parking spaces, shift patterns, National Grid FES 2017 assumptions and other available data. It is clear that for campus sites there is even less reliable EV energy consumption data than for residential and commercial situations. The hospital site is, by its nature, staffed 365 days a year on a continuous basis with its carparks fully utilised for most of the day by both staff and visitors. hospital serves a wide catchment area across the county and is therefore likely to see a higher than average number of visitors making relatively long journeys. Even with a simple model, EVs can be seen to be a major future network stressor. Further, charging patterns must be different for staff and visitors and this needs to be considered and accommodated within a managed charging system, particularly given the desirability of suppressing otherwise unsupportable peaks - especially during the morning day shift, support staff and visitor arrival period. Two EV scenarios were modelled on a half-hourly time series basis based on National Grid FES 2017 EV penetration data and charger use data ;

• EV1- a cautious model assuming 10kWh average energy transfer, 20% of onsite EV’s wishing to use the charging facilities, and an assumption that 20% of all vehicles would be EVs.

• EV2- an aggressive model assuming 10kWh average energy transfer, 30% of onsite EV’s wishing to use the charging facilities, and an assumption that 25% of all vehicles would be EVs.

The summary of the time series analysis is shown in Table 2.

3.3.6.2 Recommendations

• Basing the modelling on time series annual data seemed to be a workable method of starting with the client’s measured/metered data and overlaying additional loads and generation capacities as needed.

• The difficulty of accurately representing future network stressors and business models in a future model can be seen from the EV case. A major load is assumed and carried forward into the detailed modelling and costing work but unless the hospital deploys charging points proportionately with EV uptake the load will not present itself. Further, the hospital’s attitude to deployment is unknown - this could range from a revenue generating opportunity at one extreme, to cost price charging as a public service at the other.

• An additional area of uncertainty regarding EV charging is the likely future societal expectations of charging infrastructure. In the case of hospital, the issue could simply be avoided by a policy of not offering EV charging onsite. However, a society that will, by all credible prediction, become increasingly reliant on EVs may view this as unacceptable. This will present challenges for large employers in setting policy and installing the necessary infrastructure. More research in the social science field would


30

be helpful, particularly as it relates to mass adoption versus the behaviour of current ‘early adopters’.

• The issue of EV uptake and the many potential business models available, including third party installation and operation, will be a recurrent theme on campus-scale sites. The ESC should develop a good modelling tool to help evaluate site specific requirements and to regularly update the assumptions used within it by tracking this fast-moving area of technology change.

3.3.7 Decision Making and Recommendation

3.3.7.1 Analysis Decisions start to arise from consideration of the time series model solution outputs as shown in Table 2.

• For the base case demand outstrips supply by 12MWh per year.

• Adding on-site storage only, but still relying on importing of all non-CHP generated power, does not resolve the energy shortfall alone because of the periods where the constraints on import capacity prevent timely battery recharge. This implies that additional generation or interconnect with other sites to share assets or increase overall import limit are required. (The study of costs associated with a private wire / virtual private wire (say to the Second Site who have spare import capacity) can be seen in Table 2 columns B,C,D).

• The combination of a battery storage (of the order of 2.5 MWh) with 5 MW PV meets the projected needs both for the ACU and ‘cautious’ EV1 additional load profiles.

• The same solution comes close to supporting the ‘aggressive’ EV2 load profile and, given that a high percentage of the load will be EVs, smart charging could be used to ensure the Hospital remains unaffected. Clearly this would require EV charging, battery storage management and other hospital systems to be under a coordinated control system.

Other points to note are;

• Additional energy export revenue opportunities are opened by the installation of PV, subject to distribution network constraints.

• The importance of correctly understanding and predicting EV impacts can be seen from the large energy differences to support the two EV model scenarios.

Solutions 1,2,5 Solution 6

(A) Base case

(B) Storage / import

Only

(C) Storage / Import + 5MW

PV

(D) Storage / Import + 5MW wind

(E) EV1 +

storage

(F) EV1 +

storage + 5MW

PV

(G) EV2+

storage

(H) EV2 +

Storage + 5MW

PV

Electrical Energy Import Required (MWh)

21,916

21,916

17,029

8,409

23,592

18,704

25,268

20,380

Peak import (MW)

5.61 5.61 4.83 5.55 5.93 5.08 6.25 5.34

Total electrical energy

7,105

7,105

11,993

20,612

7,105

11,993

7,105

11,993


31

generated on site (MWh)

Additional required electrical energy in excess of network capacity (MWh)

12

12

-

5

41

0

118

2

CAPEX (£m) Storage Physical con Virtual con

-

1-2.2 0.57 0.9-2.2

8.5-9.8 8 9-11

7-8.5 6.7 7-10

3-5

9-11

3-5

9-11

Opex(£m) - 0.01 0.03 0.2 0.03 0.2 0.03 0.2

Table 2 Hospital Modelled Solutions Summary

The Expert Consultants brought a lot of knowledge to bear in translating the technical requirements of the above solutions in to capital and operational cost figures. To perform this operation, one needs to know all the physical elements required to deliver the topology in question. This includes not only the hardware elements, but also costs to provide survey, installation, maintenance, and licence fees. An illustrative sample of the costing model is given in Table 3. There is a challenge of forecasting the price of, say, a future charging point in volume whilst the market is only just becoming established. Undoubtedly these costs will fall, but at present one can only base figures on commercially priced units.

Table 3 Example Section of Costing Model


32

3.3.7.2 Recommendations At this stage a comprehensive but concise set of evaluated options must be summarised into a form that a busy investment management committee can readily assimilate. The Energy System centric considerations are well covered and include a Capex and Opex estimate for each. It was recognized by the Expert Consultants that to allow fair comparisons to be made, the options must be put into a lifecycle cost basis. For instance, the PV panels will have many years of life and the units of electricity they produce for self-consumption must be considered alongside the purchase price of grid-supplied electricity and the cost of capital. As the business models around development of green energy can become very complex, it should also help guide the user through these options in addition to the technical ones.


33

4 Projection of Impacts and Benefits

The restriction of the observation process to a single site, particularly one lacking sub-metering capability, makes any projection of impacts and benefits extremely speculative. Nevertheless, the exercise has proved that there are advantages in considering multiple sites as a single entity and in assessing their combined needs when planning energy system transformations. From the example studied here, both short-term and long-term potential benefits have been identified which justify a wider study on other sites with a view to a programme of planned system upgrades to help reduce costs and carbon emissions, address wider energy system issues, and drive better energy value across the public campus-scale property estate.

4.1 Short term benefits 4.1.1.1 Energy efficiency measures The hospital energy manager has managed to update part of the hospital lighting system with a modern lower energy and digitally controlled lighting management system but has been prevented from deploying this further due to lack of capital. As there is no lighting-related energy data available for the hospital site, analysis of the further potential to save money on the lighting systems can only be approximated. However, it is understood that 10% of the lighting has been upgraded to digitally controllable LED luminaires linked to a Building Management System. In addition to more energy efficient light fixtures, this technology adjusts the level of lighting based on the ambient light available and can result in energy savings of up to 75% of the previous lighting load. Literature [1] shows that in acute hospitals with scanners etc., the lighting and plug-in device electrical load is up to 71% of the total electrical demand and that lighting can account for over 20% of the total energy use or over 35% of the electricity used in a typical hospital [2]. This simplistic analysis neglects further savings in maintenance from the reduced number of failed bulbs, and looks solely at electricity usage reductions:- hospital averages 3.16 MW electrical load (2.16MW import + 1MW CHP) approximating to 27.7GWh / year electrical consumption. Using estimates based on the above figures potential savings; Savings = 0.9 * 0.25* 0.5* 27.7GWh= 3.1 GWh ~ = £296,000 (at 9.5p/kWh) Where 0.9 = 90% of hospital still to optimize 0.25 = assumed % of electrical load comprised by lighting 0.5 = energy saving possible (fluorescent to LED + some zonal saving) The relatively high savings available through energy efficiency improvements on large sites is why they are presented within our future methodology as steps which should be undertaken before moving to more complex and costly energy system upgrades.

4.2 Longer term benefits The outcome of using this methodology indicates benefits arising from multiple routes in the longer term, especially if more complex system upgrades are considered:-


34

4.2.1 Heat grid Two separate business justifications arise if a heat grid is deployed;

4.2.1.1 Re-use of waste heat The heat planned to be vented from the Second Site (a waste product of on-site electricity generation) could be re-directed, by means of a heat grid, to hospital where additional gas is otherwise being used to generate their separate heat needs. hospital has a CHP plant (lowering electricity import and generating useful low-cost heat) so the saving is potentially that heat demand beyond the CHP thermal output. An estimate of value for this is; Base gas consumption at hospital (excluding CHP) = 13.3 GWh for Aug 16 – Jul 17 Temperature dependent consumption = 12.0 GWh for same period Peak demand (base plus weather dependent) approximated to 9 MW So vented heat from the Second Site could comfortably meet hospital’s weather dependent heat load. If it supplied all 12 GWh at a gas price of 2p/kWh (neglecting boiler efficiency (likely around 90%), and losses in heat network), then cost of gas avoided would be £240,000/yr.

• Unless this solution is funded as a holistic ‘best outcome’ for the two sites this saving potential would be lost. A heat grid is not a solution to either site’s needs when assessed individually.

• the Second Site may wish to charge for heat export but these costs have been omitted here as this would be public sector to public sector transfer.

• No capital costs of deploying the heat network have been allowed for.

4.2.1.2 Avoidance of duplicated asset maintenance Both the Second Site and hospital are currently maintaining separate gas boilers. hospital peak thermal energy need is around 9.5 MW against a boiler capacity of 36 MW (spread across five boilers). A heat grid deployed to usefully re-use waste heat from the Second Site’s CHP generators could be operated in the reverse direction to meet the Second Site’s heat load from hospital’s excess boiler capacity if their CHP was not operating. The the Second Site boilers could be permanently mothballed and associated maintenance costs avoided. A nominal £15,000 has been allowed in the calculation – a true cost has not been checked with site manager Of course, if their construction had been avoided through planning at the outset, or if the hospital boilers had been dimensioned closer to actual need, then additional savings on design, build, additional space associated costs, costs of capital, further asset maintenance and asset depreciation could also have been avoided.

4.2.2 Right sizing for future demand The importance of including future sources of demand, beyond those currently foreseen on the site, can be seen from the impacts of the EV load profiles in the modelling work. Planning


35

for worst case loading, were these trends to become reality, allows a conscious decision as to the ‘degree of preparedness’ that should be included in a site energy system upgrade design. On a 10-year basis it is near certain that many EV charging points could be utilised on a site as large as a hospital. The exact number and technical details (connector types, rate of charge etc.) cannot be predicted today but some estimates based on the distances travelled to a hospital site will remain unchanged whether the vehicles are EV / PHEVs or internal combustion engine powered and some sensible provisions can be made. For this site, the lack of available charging infrastructure could become a point of criticism by hospital users and will probably need to be addressed in the near term. Hopefully public sites such as hospitals will have access to funding for such installations as part of the package of measures to assist the move to a low carbon economy. Provision for ease of making additional installations later can be considered as part of the initial design and a ‘least regrets’ option might involve installing feeders and switchgear for an additional tranche, with ducts, space and plinths for additional switchgear for a third tranche. The specific numbers in each category can be determined through the relative costs of civil engineering, disruption, cost of capital and the likelihood of need based on current EV uptake numbers. Charger selection should consider whole lifecycle costs and impact on the wider system. Exclusive focus on lowest capital cost could result in significant issues:

• unpredictable / uncontrollable loads from EVs will undoubtedly lead to further site energy system upgrades. ‘Smart chargers’ can offer the potential to avoid high billing periods and participate in DSR opportunities.

• Poor harmonic quality charging points are not suitable for a site with sensitive electronics such as medical systems, further, widespread use can introduce issues for the local DNO.

Although the EV example has been used, this same principle of looking at the ‘right sizing’ of systems and equipment in the face of future change should be performed for all relevant system elements.

4.2.3 Retaining operational control Building the ability to coordinate the operation of a pool of energy assets as part of commercial balancing or trading arrangements may be extremely powerful when done at the scale of multiple campus sites. Retaining operational control over assets on those sites may therefore be a strategic design principle in their individual energy system upgrade planning.

4.2.3.1 Freedom to combine for best outcome The value of having all relevant energy assets under unified control, and free from operating restrictions, is a future business case ‘enabler’ that is starting to emerge from this site study. Whilst there are back-up generators on site, under the PFI restrictions, they cannot be used for any purpose other than backup. Their use to avoid exposure to TRIAD periods or to help out in some scenarios to provide peak power as an alternative to increased import capability would be desirable but is not permitted even where financially advantageous.

4.2.3.2 Avoidance of restrictive long-term agreements The site energy manager, having limited access to capital, but faced with the need to evolve the on-site energy system and minimise bills, is receptive to approaches from commercial third parties to enter into long-term power purchase agreements. Whilst such an arrangement may,


36

by avoiding capital expenditure, be the best option at the time, later they could become barriers to obtaining best value or may block desired site changes.

4.2.3.3 Sub-optimal finance terms Even at the time of entering the type of PPAs discussed above they are arguably far from best commercial value to the state as, although the type and nature of the customer is low risk, the developer will be receiving a commercial, risk weighted, rate of return. The access to capital through this route therefore translates to long-term increased operational costs. This seems perverse given that bundled up as a pool of investment opportunities (backed by the state) it is probable that capital could be accessed on much more favourable commercial terms.

4.2.3.4 Loss of ability to aggregate and trade If centralised control of public energy asset import export capability was deployed this could bring an estimated 3% of the UK’s power load into an aggregated demand response pool. This is significant on a national scale with multiple small private companies trading profitably with a fraction of this controlled load/generation capability. Further, public sites are expected to show some clustering allowing combinations of energy assets to be used dynamically. The sites can be well instrumented and their behaviour characterised allowing a level of demand prediction beyond that which typical commercial aggregators would see. Entering power purchase trading arrangements as a purchaser who also has this size and scale of demand/supply control must statistically allow better value to be returned. There is only a small delta cost between deployment of a micro grid control system used to coordinate PV, storage, load and distributed generation, (whether on site or via private wire/ virtual private wire arrangements with neighbours) and a smart connection management system controlling import/export to the grid and policing any constraints. Building in the capability to unify site operation under central control via a cyber-secure resilient network should become a consideration in each site upgraded. Many campus sites such as airfields and other military bases are well suited to PV arrays but the value of feed in tariffs continues to drop. With the unit price now negligible (or negative) at periods of abundance, investigating smarter ways of using the energy produced within the public property portfolio should be a priority. Wherever possible freedom to integrate and control on site energy assets should be retained so that decisions and agreements made at a local level do not prejudice wider integration optimisations.


37

5 Recommendations

Prompt communication with the staff at the Hospital was made difficult by the fact that engagement was attempted during the winter months when the facility (in common with hospitals across the country) was experiencing its annual winter surge in demand for services. This demanded the full attention of staff and significantly impacted their ability to respond to the ESC team. Recommendation: Project initiation timing should take account of seasonal work peaks experienced by the facilities team. It is essential that adequate consideration is given to what the organisation’s objectives are for the project and that these are agreed by the key stakeholders. Indeed, a key element of this discovery phase involves identifying and mapping the key project stakeholders. As the project progresses and new information is revealed, it may be appropriate to revisit these requirements in order to revise or reconfirm them. Recommendation: Prior to engaging actively in project implementation all organisational objectives should be identified and agreed with key stakeholders. The use of stakeholder mapping tools would assist in this process. Sound decisions can only be based on a base of reliable data and it is essential that this is available to project team. A project initiation checklist should be used to ensure that all the relevant data is available in a reliable form. This process will help to identify gaps in key knowledge relevant to the project. Further the difficulty in obtaining this data, either due to poor records, organisational boundaries, lack of internal resources etc can highlight the need for external resources to carry out site surveys to fill in the missing information. This information is essential for generating the ‘as is’ design. Recommendation: A project initiation checklist tool should be used to ensure an adequate base of data is available to the project team prior to examining potential solutions. Adequate evaluation of all the technical and commercial options requires a significant level of knowledge that is both multi-faceted and current. Given that site staff’s expertise and focus is operational rather than orientated towards major capital projects, employment of external expertise to run the process should always be considered. Recommendation: Site owners / operators should be encouraged to engage external expertise to run the conceptual design process unless they have recent experience of similar projects. Our search for external consultants demonstrated that there are very few companies routinely offering full spectrum solution design and integration, encompassing both technical and commercial aspects. A number of organisations have subsets of the necessary skills but lack the holistic expertise that complex projects would ideally need. This is a somewhat circular issue given that few projects are currently approached in this manner. Recommendation: Acceleration of a market for multi-vector, optimised campus-scale energy projects would bring forward the development of expertise in the supply chain. Given the multi-vector nature of campus energy systems, a visual representation of all the energy flows, including waste from inefficiencies etc., would assist in identifying all sources and uses of energy as well as pinch points where the system is constrained. Sankey diagrams are an example of such a tool and have been used at the national level as well as for individual facilities. Recommendation: Diagrammatic tools should be used to illustrate the ‘as is’ energy system.


38

Due to the need to create a conceptual design, much of the initial focus on wider system impacts and considerations was considerably diluted. Given the challenges arising from changes to the energy system, it is essential that designs are supportive of the measures that will need to be made to accommodate significant increases in new sources of generation and demand. Indeed, energy transformation projects at campus scale offer excellent opportunities to create significant generation and demand nodes that could offer flexibility to the wider system. Recommendation: Consideration of the impact of the project on the wider energy system needs a high priority in the methodology. The assessment tool requires a large number of technology solutions to be considered from the longlist. When assessing combinations of technologies, this challenge grows exponentially. Each site will have characteristics that enable a number of the options to be eliminated from the process at an early stage, for example anaerobic digestion schemes can be dismissed at sites without ready access to a suitable feedstock. An additional front-end tool that asks the user a series of questions concerning the site could help considerably the number of technology options being assessed. Recommendation: The assessment tool should include a front-end tool that uses site specific information to narrow the options that need to be assessed. The technology assessment tool also requires assessment of each individual technology. For many of the attributes and qualities assessed, there is often nothing to distinguish them. Therefore, as a mechanism for simplifying the process, initially assessment in categories of technologies should be considered. For example, ‘non-dispatchable’ renewable energy technologies could be considered as a group. Should the group of technologies in question meet the needs of the project, further assessment can then be conducted to establish which of the individual technologies within that group is the best fit. Recommendation: The assessment tool should group technologies for an initial assessment, in order to reduce the overall burden of initial data entry. PFI Project structures impose considerable restrictions on the nature of changes that can be made to the site assets. Any project evaluated at a PFI site will need to take account of these restrictions and may require modifications to that contractual structure. This is likely to be a considerable undertaking. Recommendation: Information regarding previous successful modification to PFI contracts to facilitate capital projects should be gathered in order to better understand how this might be approached should it prove necessary for project implementation. A primary barrier to the deployment of both transformative energy-related projects and relatively simple energy efficiency schemes is the availability of capital budget. Energy-related projects may not be viewed as a priority versus ensuring the delivery of core services, for example providing patient care. As a result, projects with acceptable payback periods may still find it difficult to secure capital for implementation. As a result of this constraint, PPA-type solutions, where finance is provided by the solution provider, can be seen as the best available option. However, these types of solution are unlikely to offer better value than self-funding and are often technically one-dimensional in their approach. As a result, wider issues, both on and off site, are likely to receive inadequate attention. Recommendation: Access to capital would significantly accelerate the introduction of a range of projects that would deliver energy and cost savings that have often been previously identified.


39

6 Proposals for follow-on work

A number of items recommended for further study have been identified during this project: Guidance to campus energy systems managers

• A repository of information on sources of funding for energy efficiency projects.

• A method of connecting to sources of private project funding for green energy projects on campus sites.

• Guidance to campus Energy System managers to enable them to find suitable expert consultants. A directory of pre-qualified experts? Collaboration with Energy Managers Association?

• Pointers to companies capable of instrumenting a site to obtain energy flow information for use in time series analysis capture and energy efficiency projects.

• Briefings and training material for energy managers to ensure they have ready access to best practice and latest technology information.

Tool sets to assist methodology execution A suite of online tools including:

• Data import and cleaning tools.

• Time series visualisation and analysis tools.

• Up to date typical Energy System component parametric and cost data e.g. Output per metre of solar cells, cost per metre of feeder cable installation etc.

• A simplified Sankey diagram creation tool.

• A simplified version of ANO4 assessment tool.

• A method of keeping solution component information and links up to date with it in the ANO4 assessment tool (automatic in the case of an on-line tool).

• An EV demand estimator tool- capable of taking arrival/departure statistics and estimating time series loads.

• Battery storage charge and discharge time sequence estimation tool. Tools to help translate methodology output to action A suite of tools to assist turning the output of the methodology into a statement of work for an RFP. Including:

• RFP templates,

• boilerplate text,

• payback / business case automated template Linkage to other Energy Systems Catapult activities

• Re-run of the improved methodology (as laid down in ‘Campus-scale System Evolution Methodology’ March 2018, Energy Systems Catapult) on a second site.

• Use of campus site transformations as case studies within FPSA next phases of work.

• Work to drive energy system efficiencies of the public estate forward by holistic treatment and introduction of investment capital in a planned and facilitated manner rather than ad-hoc site by site opportunistic local deals.

• Aggregation of clusters of public estate assets into centrally controlled asset to drive value from Demand Response or balancing markets or targeted reduction in imports during high cost periods.


40

7 Conclusions

We conclude that:

• The present ad-hoc approach to campus-scale energy system upgrades with sites evolving on an individual site by site basis is far from optimal.

• From this work, the use of a more formal methodology examining clusters of campus-scale sites and optimising their collective energy system properties and behaviour is believed capable of achieving significantly improved outcomes.

• The methodology proposed as a result of this project is a practical starting point. It will need to be developed and refined following application to further sites, of different types and complexities.

o Simplifications may be achievable and ‘standard solution’ models may later be possible for specific identifiable families of sites with common attributes but this will only emerge from application of a repeatable methodology to further sites.

• It is too early to realistically estimate the potential collective financial and Carbon reduction improvement targets. These could be in the range 5 to 10% - possibly more. This is based on the limited evidence of one case study and there is no way of determining yet whether it is typical or atypical of such campus-scale sites

• Our work points to the need to solve a number of simultaneous problems for site Energy Managers if significant improvements over the present ways of working are to be achieved:

o Access to advice and best energy transformation practice needs to be made available to site owners and operators facing the challenge of upgrading or optimising a system. We do not believe that many Energy Managers will be confident to perform the necessary analysis and modelling work for a major system transformation without external help and support.

o Specialist analysis and modelling skills need to be made available backed up by current cost, & energy use data and supported with tools to visualise, analyse and model multi-technology, multi-site energy flows.

▪ There are opportunities here to create a strong UK SME base of consultants skilled in multi-site, multi-technology analysis and design.

▪ Given that the challenges of developing the energy system have considerable commonality across developed economies, it can be anticipated that a developed UK supply chain could have export potential.

o Capital funding needs to be available for energy efficiency and transformation projects without tying up the funded assets in inflexible, long term and expensive arrangements. All analysis shows that the future energy system will be far more active with the requirement to adapt load and generation at all levels of the network – i.e. behind the meter, within the Distribution Networks and at the Transmission Network / transmission-connected generation levels. Maintaining the operational freedom to vary usage of energy system assets will therefore be essential for sites to help support the lowest collective cost, highest utilisation / throughput energy networks. It should be a strategic aim on public-sector sites allowing them to be used in a ‘grid friendly’ manner to actively support the wider energy networks as well as meeting site specific energy needs.

o Some mechanism of allowing site Energy Managers to devote time to supporting the execution of the methodology needs to be provided - whether by backfilling of part of their present role, augmenting their teams with dedicated consultants for a period, or other means.


41

• Planning for future change and considering ‘decisions of least regret’ when planning a site energy system upgrade should be a standard feature of a good practice methodology.

o The re-visiting and re-working sites for predictable and forecastable reasons brings additional and avoidable costs.

• The ‘price signals’ received at the level of a campus-scale user are not correctly representing the true system costs and are leading to ‘non system-friendly’ behaviour which increases problems of system balancing by aggravating peaks and troughs.

o The true cost of practices such as using the grid as ‘the network of last resort’ needs to be communicated and the likelihood of corrections to rebalance per unit consumption and connection / transmission cost elements represented as a short-term project risk in projects exploiting these anomalies.

▪ An assessment of whether a solution is still viable if truly ‘cost reflective’ pricing was applied should be made as part of selecting/short-listing options to implement.

• It is wholly feasible for multiple campus sites to be coordinated in real time to participate in Demand Side Response, Balancing Mechanisms, other reserve services etc. to play an active role in supporting the UK power networks and/or driving better overall cost of energy supply to the coordinated customers through new trading opportunities.

o The underpinning capabilities needing to be developed would be ▪ Cyber secure real-time communications and control network ▪ Dispatchable load or Demand / Response compatible controlled load

elements (typically interruptible or deferrable activities such as heating, cooling, pumping, EV charging etc)

▪ Intelligent network control balancing site requirements with active support to the UK energy networks.

• The public estate is an obvious candidate as the assets are under common control and the stakeholder needs span short-term financial optimisation, carbon reduction targets and playing a role in stabilising and supporting stable, low cost, secure network operation. In addition, the relationship between site owner and user is long-term and less transactional than a typical landlord-tenant arrangement in the private sector, which eliminates disincentives towards long-term decision making and cost appraisal.

o A larger project applying and refining the methodology techniques developed in this project to a selection of public assets to evaluate the business case for wider deployment would be a logical next step.

References

[1] Paula Morgenstern et Al; “Benchmarking acute hospitals: Composite electricity targets based on departmental consumption intensities.”.

[2] Carbon Trust, “Sector overview, Hospitals Healthy budgets through energy efficiency”. CTV024.

summary report - energy systems catapult...2018/09/18 · system components (e.g. pv panels, diesel...

Documents