|
|
| Line 57: |
Line 57: |
| | | | |
| | <br/> | | <br/> |
| | + | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Line 62: |
Line 63: |
| | == Milestone 2 (deadline: 31 October 2015)<br/> == | | == Milestone 2 (deadline: 31 October 2015)<br/> == |
| | | | |
| − | <u>TARGET</u>: How and which data should be represented in the Marktstammdaten register.<br/> | + | <u>TARGET</u>: How and which data should be represented in the Marktstammdaten register. Which data are public, sensitive, anonymized, etc. |
| | | | |
| | It might be useful to suggest and collect use cases for the data to help ensure that what is being gathered can help to answer real research problems.<br/> | | It might be useful to suggest and collect use cases for the data to help ensure that what is being gathered can help to answer real research problems.<br/> |
Revision as of 14:53, 14 August 2015
Context
Germany (BMWi, BNetzA) plans to to develop a register of power plant data that covers all plants (“starting from 0 kW”) that supersedes the current “EEG Stammdatenbank” and the “BNetzA Kraftwerksliste”.
- geographic scope: Germany
- content: capacity, technical characteristics, detailed information such as hub height of wind turbines (“master data”)
- detail: individual blocks
- go-live: early 2017
- not included: time series of any sort; yearly generation data
- license: BMWi and BNetzA has not thought about a license yet
http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Sachgebiete/ElektrizitaetundGas/Unternehmen_Institutionen/DatenaustauschundMonitoring/MaStR/Datendefinitionen/mastr_datendefinitionen-node.html
There is a three-step consultation process with three deadlines ("milestones"). Openmod-i plans to submitt comments and recommendations in each of the steps.
Milestone 1 (deadline: 31 August 2015)
TARGET: Determine who should be listed in the register (Marktstammdatenregister) and what numbering scheme should be used.
General points
- We support the idea of a register
- We support the idea to establish a new numbering system as proposed, where each identifier starts with 3 characters for the market player, power plant, transmission grid operator etc. and followed by 10 digits plus a last check digit (according to the EAN (European Article Number))
- We support the idea to link already existing numbering schemes (e.g., identifiers of the "Kraftwerksliste") to the new numbering system
- Should be published under an open license. (suggesting ODbL? [1])
- The register should “think” European by adding country code using ISO 3166-1 alpha 2 - two letters - at the beginning [2].
Specific points
- There are > 800k PV installations - will these be included?
- Does Stromerzeugungsanlagen (EAS) distinguish between generators and boilers?
- Are market roles and functions linked? Or would we have to deduplicate things by hand? Also, what about companies that may have a joint partnership in a power plant? Or subsidiaries? Relations that change over time? Mergers & split
[1] http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ (also used by OpenStreetMap)
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1_alpha-2
Milestone 2 (deadline: 31 October 2015)
TARGET: How and which data should be represented in the Marktstammdaten register. Which data are public, sensitive, anonymized, etc.
It might be useful to suggest and collect use cases for the data to help ensure that what is being gathered can help to answer real research problems.
General points
- Repeat the general points of milestone 1 (support idea, open license, think EU, ...)
Specific points
- Ability to track changes on a power plant site e.g., a wind farm may be built in stages, generators may be decommissed, upgraded, etc. or primary fuel used may change as well. An idea to solve the task is to provide time-stamped datasets or diff-files that provide information about changes from one point in time to another one.
- What format will the data be published in? Will it be machine-readable? The BNetzA xls database is mostly ok in this regard, but columns like Spezifizierung "Mehrere Energieträger" und "Sonstige Energieträger" - "Hauptbrennstoff" are difficult to parse consistently.
- Best would be to provide data in different formats: Georeferenced database table (online accessible and downloadable dump) and Spreadsheet. To keep costs low, spreadsheet should be derived from database table.
=> Relational DB (related tables for plants, operators etc.) to model structure including change history
- Plants could be linked to power network (at least IDs?) to be on target for a possible future power grid database (i.e. grid conection point to medium-voltage power grid)
=> General question: Should we consider interfaces to other potential DBs?
- e.g. "be able to sum up all CO2 emissions for all facilities owned by company X and all its subsidiaries" - for this to be answered, the data structures need to provide links both between organizations and from organizations to their facilities. In other words, through this exercise we're mapping out what types of data should ideally be linked to what other types of data. This isn't just about putting data in tables, it's about if we can link data spread across multiple tables.
- Include spatial data
- Best longitude and latitude, adress data are OK
- Anonymisation of very small (private) EAS => assignment to (unique) grid conection point / local grid ?
- Why not include time-series or annual generation data?
- The coverage of the data should become clear (e.g., "X% of all capacity is included; most missing capacity is small-scale gas-fired plants")
- EIA documentation might help [1]
- Form EIA-923 & Form EIA-860 are excellent examples of how to manage data on the power sector
[1] http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/pdf/technotes.pdf
Milestone 3 (deadline: 31 May 2016)
General points
Specific points
</div>
