RE: UPAMD and IEEE 2030
Piotr,
I am also in the process of voting on the P2030 document.
The protocols paths are defined in the 2030 guide that are within the
domain, and capabilities of, UPAMD.
While P2030 does not define the exact protocol for each of these paths, it
is establishing that these paths should exist for the future success of the
Smartgrid.
Smartgrid is simply at the start of its agenda. Control of the grid, and the
implied micro-grids, is in the financial, and political, interest of too
many entities for it to do anything other than escalate the adoption.
The financial interest in 'Smartgrid' becoming prevalent is clearly
demonstrated by my local utility's ability to raise the billings to
customers based on the time of day power usage. They are installing "smart
meters" as quickly as possible, even without the customers direct approval
and changing the billing rates based on the smart meter. Attempts at control
of power usage are currently proposed and surely to follow.
While UPAMD does not control the very large power usages, it could certainly
schedule battery recharge etc to off peak billing rates and be of some
demonstrably financial benefit to the user. The messages, currently being
defined, can provide the information for this scheduling process.
A major question is the interconnect point to this Smartgrid information.
Does it come through the adapter via powerline communications or does the
future adapters need to have an LAN/WLAN interconnect of their own?
Currently, this connectivity, is not our problem. It may be in the next
version of UPAMD.
Others are working on this from different perspectives. See
http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/pub/SmartGrid/PAP05Workshop/01-SEP_
2.0_Overview_20100517_w_template.pdf as an example. The grab is on.
http://www.zigbee.org/Standards/ZigBeeSmartEnergy/Features.aspx
Respectfully;
Bob Davis
Chair UPAMD/P1823
bobd@xxxxxxxx
408.353.5990 desk
408.857.1273 cell
bob.davis.scsi.com Skype
-----Original Message-----
From: upamd@xxxxxxxx [mailto:upamd@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Piotr Karocki
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 4:11 AM
To: upamd@xxxxxxxx
Subject: UPAMD and IEEE 2030
I think we all should read IEEE 2030, as UPAMD protocol is one of protocols
from 2030.
We are talking about such 2030 entities as:
AC Loads - Loads on customer site using ac electric power
DC Loads - Loads on customer site using dc electric power
Customer Substation - Electrical transmission or distribution substation
located at customer facility that converts power to distribution voltage
levels, which are then distributed within the customer site. Contains
infrastructure necessary to control, monitor, and protect the electrical
distribution system. Facility may include transformers, buss work, circuit
breakers, capacitor banks, etc.
Customer Distributed Energy Resource - Customer DER includes demand
response, generation, and energy storage located on and connected to the
customer electrical system. Customer generation or storage that is connected
to the transmission system is considered in the Bulk Generation domain
(similar to our UPAMD hub)
And protocols:
PS57 Customer Substation AC Loads Provides for intra-facility
monitoring and control of ac loads. Interfaces include those for protection,
control, and monitoring.
PS58 Customer Substation DC Loads Provides for intra-facility
monitoring and control of dc loads. Interfaces include those for protection,
control, and monitoring.
PS63 Customer DER AC Loads Provides for information
exchange and control DERs and ac loads internally at the customer.
Interfaces include those for protection, control, and monitoring.
PS64 Customer DER DC Loads Provides for information
exchange and control DERs and dc loads internally at the customer.
Interfaces include those for protection, control, and monitoring.
UPAMD protocol should be (could be) superset of PS* protocols, i.e. every
information that is to be transferred in 2030 should be transferred in UPAMD
also.
---
Piotr Karocki