Local Electricity Network Coordination Group minutes: February 2024

Attendees and apologies

• Onshore Electricity Policy, Scottish Government

• Heat in Buildings, Scottish Government

• Heat Networks in Buildings, Scottish Government

• Transport Scotland (TS)

• Scottish Power Energy Networks (SPEN)

• Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN)

• Charge UK / Osprey Charging

• Scottish Wholesale Association

• Winchburgh Developments

• Confederation of Passenger Transport Scotland

• Scottish Futures Trust

• Energy Saving Trust

• WarmWorks

• Ofgem

• Community Energy Scotland

Apologies

• Connected Kerb

• Homes for Scotland

• LastMile UK

• Highlands and Islands Enterprise

• Network Rail

Items and actions

Add Master Plan issues to Challenge Document. (SG)

Community Energy England to link up with Community Energy Scotland to discuss local representation on governance boards. (Stakeholders)

Circulate Connections Action Plan, outlining Ofgem and DESNZ expectations.(SG)

EV charging update before next meeting. (TS)

Opening Remarks

The Chair gave an overview of the agenda and welcomed new attendees, mentioning one individual would be dialling in via laptop.

Minutes from the meeting on 18 August were approved.

Actions from the last meeting were reviewed, all actions were complete.

The Chair gave brief opening remarks and highlighted some of the key policy developments since the last meeting in August.

Ofgem

Ofgem gave a presentation on the Regional Energy System Planners (RESPs) they are currently developing, and explained they are moving into the detailed design phase.

RESPs are intended for mid-decade implementation, with Ofgem responsible for their design and the NESO for implementation and delivery.

They are intended to provide a regional context with a whole-system approach to distribution.

They should not affect more detailed network planning done elsewhere.

Ofgem will retain sign off for business plans.

Consultation will come out some time over summer 2024, with a detailed design policy which will be open to respond to.

They are particularly interested in how many RESPs Scottish stakeholders feel should exist here – one or two?

Discussion focused on how much each RESP would interact with others, considering collaboration / sharing of best practise / addressing of adjacency issues.

It is vital the governance structure covers these.

Concerns around timing were flagged by stakeholders, as the NESO (ultimately responsible for implementing the RESP) will have a lot to cover.

Both DNOs highlighted the need to avoid duplication of work by the RESP, especially in the governance.

The idea that some RESPs would be more hands on than others, based on best practise already on-going in some regions, was suggested. Support should reflect local need.

How the NESO would get out and engage with Scottish stakeholders was questioned – currently they have no presence here, so they will need to establish new relationships.

The importance of Ofgem’s RESP design considering devolved policies was made – including the potential need for Scottish-specific considerations of governance structures.

There was interest in what the transitional model would be. Scottish policy ambitions for 2030 are not far away and need careful considering.

The need for community representation on governance structures was made. Hundreds of community energy projects across Scotland are often forgotten, because of commercial focuses. They need linked in with as well.

The fact Scotland has specific grid constraints and price issues to consider was made. At distribution level, there is need to attract energy intensive users to Scotland to soak this up.

There was interest in how RESPs could help unlock more investment in wind energy, as well as being able to attract more charge point operators and hydrogen users – as other groups who will be high intensity users.

DEZNES already looking into this with AI centres.

The importance of RESPs unlocking demand in the right places was highlighted, alongside complementary storage facilities.

A top down / bottom up coordinated approach was agreed as optimum.

The question of what the case for 2 RESPs in Scotland was made.

One argument was the natural case for using existing DNO boundaries, where local authorities (LA) and SG are used to working on these lines – as well as keeping familiarity for stakeholders.

DNOs also already work and have relationships with existing institutions. This prevents someone new coming and having to establish themselves.

There was a feeling that no strong case had been made for any alternative boundaries – for example rural/urban.

In England RESPs are being divided by transport bodies, which has been deemed the most natural structure to replicate there.

You can contact Ofgem here: resp@ofgem.gov.uk for any more information

Substation Legals / Connections

iDNOs raised the issues of land rights and wayleaves working as blockers.

Environmental Indemnities were covered and recognised as a political issue.

This means, to avoid cost going to DNOs or consumers, the person giving the land away is responsible for it being clean and safe to use.

If it is later found to be unsuitable, it is at the original landowners’ expense – with the cost being uncapped.

The idea being the landowners’ energy would be at risk if they were not to comply with the requirements for safe land use.

This situation is often seen to be unpalatable, based on risk, facts, and ground conditions.

Last October SPEN had a Land Rights Policy Review.

This was presented to CEO / Directors and covered how to recognise change in stakeholder requirements, and to taking more ‘risk-based views’ to avoid getting bogged down in legals.

This is not a fully finalised product – for example, some customer funded projects own assets on land but not the land itself, so would not need a lease with all the usual ‘bells and whistles’ when a stripped-down version would be more practical.

This is intended to remove stumbling blocks.

With security of supply as the risk, the customer holds the pen on ensuring the location is appropriate.

This would not dilute security of distribution connections in general, will not affect Section 37 or land rights and license agreements – and would not affect assets on third party land.

‘One size fit all’ approach highlighted as a problem.

SPEN are currently in a group process, mapping all eventualities to process into contractual terms – they will be leading engagement on this from October.

There was general recognition to manage these processes better – with standardisation between discussed across DNOs.

March, subject to design checks, will see processes to support need completed.

This will be followed by a translation into legal conditions, process charts, and directors and executive team sign offs.

Issues specific to EV charging were raised, regarding legal subleases and highway peace.

Smaller issues such as third-party rights and environmental issues are adding up to six months to every charging point applying for a connection across the UK.

Charging organisations stated they were trying to be practical and realistic in their expectations and were looking forward to their upcoming one-to-one with DNOs to discuss in greater detail.

The problem of landlords attempting to roll out charging facilities across their portfolios all at once was raised as another charge-specific problem.

A common approach across regions was suggested as a solution that could save months of issues.

Mapping of connections infrastructure being inaccurate was highlighted as a recurring problem, with instances of information being out of date, or cables in location being found to be either missing or different to what was advertised.

DNOs responded to say they were looking at their asset bases in order to improve accuracy in tracking them.

If this is a regular issue, DNOs are happy to converse on this in more detail.

Legacy cables were also described as something investing projects needed to improve.

DNO Update

The Connections Action Plan has been published since our last meeting.

SPEN sit on the Delivery Board.

Reform of the connections process was discussed – the ESO having recently written about 2 Stage processes being pushed back, which could be impacting some stakeholders.

The use of transmission lines for distribution (generally in generation) was covered.

Currently looking to see where there is capacity for this in Scotland, as there is less ability generally than in England to do this.

Where manageable, this will shorten the review process.

Combined with flexibility, this can see theoretical constraints turned into real connections through release of capacity.

A programme is being developed for the financial year 2024/25 around this.

DFES will be published in early April – DNOs to share an update soon on what they expect the key elements to be (likely technology / regional difference).

There is a lot of stakeholder engagement currently ongoing around this – especially between the DNOs and Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE).

DNOs encouraged everyone to get involved with the DFES process, even though timing issues have meant the request was coming later than intended.

FES should land officially around July 2024.

The possibility of transmission owner plans helping to create capacity for demand elsewhere was discussed.

The ESO are moving to 12-month frequency windows for transmission applications, which will be relevant also in distribution.

This will be contingent on DFES, understanding customer needs and whether they can make bulk applications for transmission or not.

Queue management should start to ease, but not in great timescales. Release of capacity likely to take 12 – 15 months.

Scotland in need of deployment of active energy management, replicating English models.

Load Management Systems were credited with providing 5GW extra capacity for distribution via transmission in SPEN’s region.

Contractual and actual thermal constraints discussed – real time system management will lead to diversification, and potentially the revelation of unexpected connection points.

It is important to recognise English/Welsh ‘good practise’ to learn from them in this area.

Queue Management was highlighted, and whether government / Ofgem should be considering different methods.

The fact some things can be done, but that they will take time, was covered. Clauses must be entered into contracts.

The ESO will be looking for a Letter of Authority to demonstrate planning permission, constraints considered etc. for all applications.

More radical reform could include wiping out the existing queue entirely and starting afresh.

Ideally, each project needs to be considered against specific milestones – only moving into the queue when agreed milestones are met.

Transport Scotland

TS outlined their current focus on the roll out of EV charging in coming years, and the subsequent importance of charging infrastructure to achieve ambitions.

Most local authorities have submitted strategy and expansion plans, going out to the private sector this year to get Provision of Infrastructure Contracts in place.

The Zero Emission Truck Taskforce has been e-mapping infrastructure, with a project at Heriot Watt also looking into HGV moment across Scotland – with fleets of various sizes signed up.

This data will give an idea what HGV energy demand might look like in Scotland.

Fleets are wary of sharing data due to commercial confidentiality, so work to anonymise information given is ongoing.

The work will be iterative, first running outputs to paint a picture over several months, with the idea of later drawing in more participants and refining the processes.

HGV Pathway to be published in the coming weeks, including actions to take over the next few months to broadly compile an accurate evidence base.

A quick background to Charge UK was given – explaining their formation as a result of charging operators coming together to agree what needs to change in the UK to enable greater EV take up in the future.

The need to focus on short term, small, tangible fixes to problems that can be done in the next 6 – 12 months was highlighted as being as important as longer-term planning in this area.

Standing charges with relation to EVs was mentioned as something worth reforming.

Heat in Buildings – Scottish Government

The HiBs team did a short presentation on their current consultation.

A call for input by the closing date was made, and contact details given.