implementation progress – second stage
DESCRIPTION
Implementation progress – second stage. Transmission Transparency Workshop London, 14 November 2008. Outline. Background Project scope Implementation by data type Successful TSOs Work still required Conclusions and feedback. Project background. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Implementation progress – second stage
Transmission Transparency WorkshopLondon, 14 November 2008
2
Outline
• Background
• Project scope
• Implementation by data type
• Successful TSOs
• Work still required
• Conclusions and feedback
3
Project background
Gas Flows Transmission Capacity(F1) Daily flow and
interruptions(C1) Max technical capacity
(F2)Daily prompt allocations
(C2) Interruption probability
(F3)Daily aggregate day-ahead nominations
(C3)Daily commercial firm and interruptible capacity
(F4) Historic gas flows
• TSO agreement on release new data during 2008
• Focus on a priority subset of information
• Three stages of implementation
• Transparency key for market developments
4
Project scope: non-confidential IPs
5
Data types released where < 3 rule applied
TSOLess than three shipper rule applies
Data Type
C1 C2 C3 F1 F2 F3 F4
RWE TNG Yes
Fluxys Yes
GTS Yes
WINGAS TRANS. Yes
Ontras Yes
6
Already compliant
TSOs that report new information release
7
October 2008: overview of progress
8
Impact of delays
9
Overview: Status October 08
E.ON GT
Fluxys
Sven. Kraft.
RWE TNG
Nat. Grid
Interconnector
Gaslink
WINGAS
OntrasGRTgaz
Energinet
Gasunie
DEPSwedegas
GdF DT
GTS BBL
(C1) Max technical capacity
in placein
placeN/A
in place
in place
in placein
placein
placein
placein
placein
placein
placein
placefinal
in place
in place
in place
(C2) Interruption in place2009 ?
N/Ain
placein
placein place
2010?
in place
3 - rulein
placein
placein
placein
placefinal
in place
in place
final
(C3) Daily commercial firm and interruptible capacity
in placein
placeN/A
in place
in place
in placein
placein
placein
placein
placein
placein
placein
placefinal
in place
in place
final
(F1) Daily flow / aggregated Allocation
in place2009 ?
N/Ain
placein
placein place
in place
final 3 - rulein
placefinal
in place
in place
finalin
placein
placefinal
(F2) Daily prompt allocation information
in placein
placein
placein
placein
placein place
in place
in place
in place
in place
in place
in place
in place
N/Ain
placein
placein
place
(F3) Daily aggregate day-ahead nominations
in place2009
?Final
in place
final in placein
placefinal 3- rule
2009?
2009?
final final N/A2009
?in
place2009
?
(F4) Historic gas flow information database
in placein
placeN/A
in place
in place
in placein
placein
place3 - rule
in place
in place
in place
in place
finalin
placein
placefinal
Number of IPs 22 23 1 5 8 4 1 8 3 9 6 7 2 1 5 25 4
3 minus rule IPs 0 8 0 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0
Later Publication Existing October 2008 In place
December 2008 Final Three minus or not required
Overall Implementation Progress
10
December 2008 – Final Stage
11
Late implementation - 2009 ?
12
Conclusions and recommendations
• Positive progress made to date• But significant work remains to be done
– Some companies ahead of the game, others significantly delayed– Delays in key data: daily flows (F1) and day-ahead nominations
(F3)– Knock-on effect of delays– 2009 overruns need to specific on dates
• TSOs commitment is crucial for remaining data• Completion of the project is starting point for further work• Final implementation report to be published February 2009
13
Your feedback matters
All stakeholders1. Accessibility and usefulness of the data2. Quality and consistency of the data published3. Are the definitions for each data type appropriate?4. Improvements to project management and reporting5. Any other key issues?
Transparency project 2009
Transmission Transparency WorkshopLondon, 14 November 2008
15
Where is the discussion at?
• Initial views on the need for a “phase 2” transparency project were discussed at workshop with stakeholders in July 2008
• A second phase should be based on real benefits for users and take into account additional costs for TSOs
• Starting point should be full completion of “phase I”
• The (potential) second phase should keep up with increased transparency requirements in 3rd package, as well as other GRI projects
• User views have been presented on project priorities
16
Consensus needs to be build solidly
17
Our suggested approach
Any future work to based on clear roles and responsibilities, sufficient resources, and commitment to timelines
18