Third Benchmarking Report on Quality of Electricity Supply

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.5 Assumptions for benchmarking of actual levels of continuity of supplyBecause of different measurement practices in European countries, available data on actual levelsof continuity of supply are not always comparable. It is important to consider the country specificconditions detailed in the Annex to this chapter. In particular the following should be noted:· First, whilst the scope of benchmarking interruptions has been extended to include short interruptionsas well as long interruptions, not all countries separate their interruptions data intothese two categories.· Second, there are different ways of measuring supply interruptions. Continuity data may becollected at all voltage levels or may exclude some voltage levels, this will be identified laterin the report. Furthermore, continuity indicators may refer to all customers or be split betweencustomers at different voltage levels.· The final and perhaps most important factor to take into consideration is that continuity indicatorsare not always defined in a comparable way. Continuity indicators can be weighted bythree different methods; by customer, transformer or contracted power. This can give rise todifferences depending on which weighting method is used.Measurement practices have an important role in the definition of standards and in the design ofincentive/penalty regimes. The relationship between continuity measurement systems and standardsand/or incentive/penalty regimes will be discussed in depth.This section contains comparative information about: the type of interruptions monitored, the statisticalindicators calculated, the guidance rules for recording interruptions and the technologyinvolved, as well as the audit procedures.1.5.1 Interruption monitoring and communicationWith very few exceptions, all the surveyed regulators monitor long (>3’) planned and unplanned interruptions arisingfrom distribution. Interruptions at the distribution level are not currently monitored in Poland. In Slovenia some dataare available, however, the recording is not yet systematic. In Latvia no distinction is made between planned andunplanned interruptions. In Ireland no distinction is made between short and long interruptions (all interruptions longerthan 1 minute are registered).It is clear from the survey that significant differences exist with regard to accuracy, as well as completeness in themeasurement and registration of the data. In addition, monitoring of continuity data by the regulators is a fairly recentactivity for numerous countries. Robust data would require at least three years of historical measurements, consistentwith unambiguous recording rules. Consequently, even if most of the regulators indicated in the questionnaire thatthey register long interruptions, fewer countries met the requirements chosen for inclusion in the data comparison.Only a restricted number of countries register interruptions originating from all voltage levels, HV (high voltage), MV(medium voltage), and LV (low voltage) 9 (Czech Republic, Finland, France, Greece, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy,Lithuania, Norway, Portugal, and Sweden). In most cases recording is limited to HV and/or HV and MV (Austria,Estonia, Ireland, Latvia, Slovenia, and Spain). In this case, the number and duration of interruptions actuallyexperienced by consumers will be higher than indicated (interruptions with origin on the LV network are not registered).In Belgium (Wallonia) interruption data are divided between HV and LV, but LV interruptions are recorded onlyif longer than 15 minutes. A number of monitoring systems are under development.9Generally LV means below 1 kV, MV means between 1 and 35 (or 60) kV and for this report HV includes those voltages thatare generally referred to as EHV. Voltage levels are not the same in all EU countries.7<strong>Third</strong> <strong>Benchmarking</strong> <strong>Report</strong> on Quality of Electricity Supply – 2005 · Chapter 1
Interruptions shorter than three minutes are (separately) measured in only a few countries (Finland,France, Hungary, Great Britain, Italy). A group of countries is preparing to measure short interruptions,for instance Lithuania and Czech Republic. From 2005 Norway will also require companies to recordshort interruptions, albeit at a less detailed level than for long interruptions. From 2006 companies inNorway will be required to record and report short interruptions in the same scheme as long interruptions.It should be noted that as customers make increasing use of computers and other electronicequipment they are increasingly concerned about short interruptions. For this reason, both long andshort interruptions should be measured.Concerning the spatial scope of monitoring, large differences were found across countries. Estonia,Ireland, Latvia, and Slovenia collect data at country-level (note that in Ireland and Latvia there isonly one distribution company). In all other countries continuity is monitored at a more detailedlevel: by distribution company, in Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Czech Republic, Great Britain,Hungary, and Norway; by administrative region (and in the future by concession) in France by concessionin Sweden. A good number of the countries use a classification of territorial areas in orderto distinguish at least among urban and rural (and thus set differentiated standards). Such distinctionsare meant to capture technical differences among networks (overhead lines vs. undergroundcable, and so on). The criteria used for territorial classification vary from one country to another:· Per number of inhabitants, at municipality level (Italy and Lithuania) or at locality level (France);· Per number of customers, at municipality level (Spain and Latvia) or at locality level (Portugal);· Other criteria: Greece (based on the distance from the nearest service centre), Finland (basedon the percentage of cable – 5 categories); Ireland (by network configuration); Sweden (on thebasis of meters of line per customer).ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1.1 – COMPARING PERFORMANCE ACROSS COMPANIESIn Great Britain there is no territorial classification, but the regulator developed a methodology forbenchmarking company performance that is used also to set targets for the interruption incentivescheme.Ofgem collects physical characteristics and performance information for each MV circuit for eachdistribution company. These circuits are then divided into 22 circuit groups with physically similarcharacteristics. The groups are defined so that differences in the percentage of overhead line, circuitlength and number of connected customers are minimised and that no group is dominated bya single company. Performance is compared and benchmarked within each circuit group. Ofgemthen establishes an overall benchmark for each company based on its mix of circuits and comparesactual performance with these benchmarks.The vast majority of regulators require companies to submit information on continuity data on ayearly basis, with the exception of Portugal and Lithuania where data are collected quarterly, andSlovenia where they are collected at the request of the regulator. Usually regulators publish annualreports that include data on continuity (not in Belgium, Wallonia). Other forms of communicationsof these data include publication from Ministries and on the websites of the regulator or ofthe companies.8Council of European Energy Regulators – Ref: C05-QOS-01-03
Page 1: Council ofEuropeanEnergyRegulatorsT
Page 4: Council ofEuropeanEnergyRegulatorsE
Page 10: CHAPTER 1 - Continuity of SupplyCON
Page 13 and 14: ··utes are defined as “short in
Page 15: interruptions is very small. AIT is
Page 19 and 20: 1.6.1 Weighting methods used for co
Page 21 and 22: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1.3 - NOTICE
Page 23 and 24: and in Italy the integration of the
Page 25 and 26: 1.6.3 Rules for recording short int
Page 27 and 28: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1.8 - AUDITS
Page 29: SAIDI1.7.1 Unplanned SAIDI not attr
Page 34 and 35: FIG 1.7 UNPLANNED INTERRUPTIONS Sho
Page 36: ···There is some evidence to sup
Page 40 and 41: THE USE OF STANDARDS AND INCENTIVES
Page 42 and 43: 2.2.1 Continuity measurement system
Page 44 and 45: Almost all countries having adopted
Page 46 and 47: 2.2.3 Findings I: Quality measureme
Page 48 and 49: The incentive is symmetric and rela
Page 50 and 51: In Sweden, a quality of supply inde
Page 52 and 53: Regulators’ concern with the vola
Page 54 and 55: In Great Britain the regulator (Ofg
Page 56 and 57: ··A regime to avoid overquality i
Page 58 and 59: ··gets”; introduction of an upp
Page 60 and 61: FIG 2.4/b CONVERGENCE EFFECT OF THE
Page 62 and 63: 2.4 Continuity standards at single-
Page 64 and 65: Observation suggests that there is
Page 66 and 67:
2.4.2 Multiple interruption standar
Page 68 and 69:
2.4.3 Single-customer standards rel
Page 70 and 71:
E SIStandard for long interruptions
Page 72:
introduce single-customer standards
Page 76 and 77:
STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL QUALITY REG
Page 78 and 79:
Commercial quality regulation attem
Page 80 and 81:
The evaluation of the actual level
Page 82 and 83:
TABLE 3.5MOST FREQUENTLY USED COMME
Page 84 and 85:
the standards relating to a particu
Page 86 and 87:
Quest.2.1.19Supp.1Recomm.✰✰✰
Page 88 and 89:
3.3.3 Problems associated with volt
Page 90 and 91:
the compensation paid by the electr
Page 92 and 93:
Quest.2.1.23Supp.0Recomm.✰✰✰D
Page 94 and 95:
answered (for instance Portugal and
Page 96 and 97:
countries who supplied data have a
Page 98 and 99:
metering problems, customer’s que
Page 100 and 101:
step. CEER recommends that member s
Page 102:
CHAPTER 4 - Voltage Quality Monitor
Page 105 and 106:
For the rest of the voltage quality
Page 107 and 108:
·In Czech Republic a monitoring sy
Page 109 and 110:
tion point of single customers: in
Page 111 and 112:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 4.2 - POWER
Page 113 and 114:
ator must advise clients connected
Page 115 and 116:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 4.3 - CUSTOM
Page 117 and 118:
mandatory such values are applicabl
Page 120 and 121:
ANNEXES - ANNEX TO CHAPTER 1.Sectio
Page 122 and 123:
Appendix - BELGIUM - Wallonia1. Acc
Page 124 and 125:
(CONTINUE) SECTION 2 - PLANNED INTE
Page 126 and 127:
TABLE 3.4 - UNPLANNED INTERRUPTIONS
Page 128 and 129:
TABLE 3.10 - ENERGY NOT SUPPLIED AS
Page 130 and 131:
TABLE 4.2 - VOLTAGE LEVEL ANALYSIS
Page 132 and 133:
The classification of continuity da
Page 134 and 135:
The same pattern emerges with the i
Page 136:
ANNEX TO CHAPTER 2.Annex 2.1 - Comp
Page 139 and 140:
Quest.2.1.18Supp.0Recomm.✰✰DSO5
Page 141 and 142:
Quest.1.1.9Supp.0Recomm.✰✰✰DS
Page 143 and 144:
3.3.10.4 HungarySupply level in the
Page 145 and 146:
TABLE 3.2INDICATORS1.1.1. Average w
Page 147 and 148:
TABLE 3.3.AINDICATORS2.1.1. Respond
Page 149 and 150:
TABLE 3.3.BINDICATORS2.1.1.Respondi
Page 151 and 152:
TABLE 3.4INDICATORSAustriaBg Flande
Page 153 and 154:
TABLE 3.6 ESTIMATING CHARGES (WORKI
Page 155 and 156:
TABLE 3.10 CONNECTING (SUPPLY AND M
Page 157 and 158:
TABLE 3.14 AVERAGE TIME TO PROVIDE
Page 159 and 160:
TABLE 3.18 METER PROBLEMS (WORKING
Page 161 and 162:
TABLE 3.22 RESPONSE TO CUSTOMER LET
Page 163 and 164:
TABLE 3.27 AVERAGE WAITING TIME IN
Page 165 and 166:
TABLE 3.32 NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS PER
Page 167 and 168:
TABLE 3.38PREPAYMENT METER FAULT (W
Page 169 and 170:
TABLE 3.43NUMBER OF REVISED BILLS P
Page 172 and 173:
ANNEX TO CHAPTER 4.ANNEX 4.1 Voltag
Page 174 and 175:
TABLE 2: NORWAY: Flicker severity l
Page 176 and 177:
TABLE 5: PORTUGAL: for EHV and HV,
show all

Third Benchmarking Report on Quality of Electricity Supply

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?