EVALUATION

Recommendations

Info

AN INDEPENDENT <strong>EVALUATION</strong> OF THE LCNF C.4.3 2020 European Research Programmes (Q4.3) Questions: What is your opinion of how the NIA (previously IFI) and the NIC (previously LCNF) fits with the Horizon 2020 European research programmes? C.4.3.1 Summary of Responses Only one respondent answered this question and they felt that the NIC and NIA do not fit in with the H2020, though they should. They believe improved links between the network operators and InnovateUK would aid this. The other two respondents felt they did not have the knowledge to answer the question. C.4.4 Gaps in Present UK and EU Funding (Q4.4) Questions: Aside from the above are there any other gaps or problems that you perceive in the present research funding arrangements in GB and Europe which are a barrier to successful innovation? C.4.4.1 Summary of Responses One respondent mentioned the tension of balancing the comparative regulation and the requirement to share learning. Another respondent identified a problem in that industrial engagement with BIS (RCEP, EPSRC, and InnovateUK) has decreased under RIIO; this makes it hard to justify spending money on energy research. These reductions may lead to a lack of low TRL projects and thus less feedstock into the higher TRL projects that are funded under RIIO. The final respondent felt that not enough support is given to social science by research councils. C.4.5 International Innovation Funding Mechanisms (Q4.5) Questions: Are you aware of any international innovation funding mechanisms that should be considered in our evaluation? C.4.5.1 Summary of Responses One respondent highlighted a new mechanism being introduced – Mission Innovation – and thought it should be considered as a future mechanism to consider interaction with. It takes innovation from research to SME and is supported by big names such as Bill Gates; they have heard it referred to as “Breakthrough Energy”. PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING October 2016 713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx 182
AN INDEPENDENT <strong>EVALUATION</strong> OF THE LCNF ANNEX D – TIER 2 PROJECT ASSESSMENTS D.1 Introduction A qualitative assessment has been undertaken of the Tier 2 projects against the following criteria: 1. Accelerates the development of a low carbon energy sector 2. Has the potential to deliver net financial benefits to future and/or existing customers 3. Generates knowledge that can be shared amongst all DNOs 4. Involvement of other partners and external funding 5. Relevance and timing 6. Effective project methodology, and effectiveness of implementation The criteria were scored on a 1-5 basis and each criteria was weighted. A descriptor of the scores against the criteria and the weighting is detailed in Section D3. The overall scores can be found in Table 3, Section 4.1. These criteria are based on the specific Tier 2 project requirements set out in the LCNF governance documents. Whilst it is recognised that some changes were made to specific criteria as the scheme evolved, the criteria above are felt to be a suitable way to assess all the projects. Whilst the financial benefits are considered qualitatively they are not scored as they have been separately considered in the quantitative assessment, however the grouping between long term and short term benefits, and the overall beneficiaries identified in against this criteria are pertinent to this evaluation. Some projects are incomplete, indeed some only started in 2014/5, so it has not been possible to allocate a score against each criteria, although a comment has been made where relevant. The projects are grouped using the same categorisation as elsewhere in this report, however it should be recognised that for a number of these Tier 2 projects the innovation initiatives may cross several categories. The chosen category here is that which appears to provide the largest, and / or most immediate benefit. D.2 Index Distributed Generation • Flexible Plug & Play. • Low Carbon Hub. • Kent Active System Management (KASM). • Accelerating Renewable Connections (ARC). • Network Equilibrium. PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING October 2016 713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx 183
Page 1 and 2:
AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136: AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 185: AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
show all

EVALUATION

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?