Our Connectologists® were all thrilled to receive a testimonial from one of the most respected network engineers in the UK, whose feedback is all the more valued given the relevance of his extraordinary track across his DNO career (he would be far from out of place alongside Philip Bale and Pete Aston, in this regard).
He has since joined one of the most respected developers in the country, which is where he read a Roadnight Taylor curtailment assessment report:
“Across our industry curtailment assessments aren’t so much of a dark art as opposed to a stab in the dark, providing a lucky dip outcome for even the most experienced recipients depending on where in the country you’re applying for a connection. Some assessments have supporting data provided, offering the opportunity to sense check the outcomes and produce more confident percentages. Others are simple two-page affairs referring to old data sets and vague charts. Others don’t offer an assessment at all and hand over the crunching to the applicant. As we see more connection offers come out with flexibility expected – where we have to accept a level of constraint to our export onto the Grid – the problem is only becoming more acute.
I can appreciate the DNO’s conservative approach to offering data – the fear of challenge if more constraint is experienced than an initial assessment provided, are profiles actually reliable – the ‘what if’s’ are extensive so I get the subsequent avoidance of giving precise numbers. But, for developers this variance in assessments and confident data on how our schemes may be constrained is an ongoing concern, adding risk and confusion to an already difficult investment journey and getting renewables connected to the grid.
I recently reviewed a curtailment assessment produced by Philip Bale of Roadnight Taylor, using data from a curtailment assessment (and supporting data) from a DNO. The report answered every question I had, and even some I didn’t know I needed the answer to until I read through it and thought “Wow, that IS useful”.
The report gave not only the core outcomes in simple, accessible format but also additional points it would be worth further exploring to give greater confidence. The breakdown of data provided and questions posed to the DNO during the reporting process was exhaustive, insightful and provided a summary well in excess of anything the DNOs are providing at this time. The report isn’t lengthy or peppered with jargon, opting instead for balanced, pertinent detail and use of accepted terminology and clearly written text.
The core element of the report is a table of scenarios which have been modelled by Roadnight Taylor, with full awareness that it brought out the ‘Geek’ in me this table was utterly brilliant and exceptionally useful. Assessing the likely blend of technologies, export profiles, network utilisation and queue positions, in this case seven (yes, seven!) different scenarios were modelled – each one written clearly, with detail on assumptions and points of note resulting in the clearest, most confident curtailment assessment I’ve seen to date. One scenario even reversed the process and set the conditions required to hit an ‘acceptable’ percentage of curtailment, as I said – utterly brilliant.
My hope is the Roadnight Taylor curtailment assessment report has made it to the DNOs as part of the ongoing reform in providing curtailment assessments. In my opinion the bar has been set – this is what the industry needs to see when it comes to constrained or flexible connection offers.”