Octopus saving sessions

MultiFuelBurner

mmmmikey said:

On the face of it, Friday looks like a good day for another Saving Session:

https://emoncms.org/ukgrid

Place your bets

Could be although the first session last year I have was the 19th Jan....so it could just be a week early.

Also what I noticed last year on the post Xmas sessions were that they were at different times of day?

MWT

masonic said:

Hence it would be more of a problem if customers make more savings than the supplier's total accepted MWh bids for any HH slot.

In a live event, failure to deliver the amount that had been bid could cause grid failure, so these tests are very much about testing the ability to deliver the volume of savings as falling below the target would potentially have more consequences than over-delivering...

masonic

MWT said:

masonic said:

Hence it would be more of a problem if customers make more savings than the supplier's total accepted MWh bids for any HH slot.

In a live event, failure to deliver the amount that had been bid could cause grid failure, so these tests are very much about testing the ability to deliver the volume of savings as falling below the target would potentially have more consequences than over-delivering...

My post needs to be read with the context from the post I was replying to in order to understand the point I was making. Here is my full post including the quoted text I was replying to:

masonic said:

mmmmikey said:

SuzeQStan said:

Interesting reading the DFS Utilisation Report summary showing what they required and what was generated over last years savings sessions. Only a couple on there that went above their requirement but a lot of close sessions as well 

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/data-portal/demand-flexibility-service/dfs_utilisation_report_summary

Yes makes interesting reading. And it begs the question of who pays who what if Octopus (or any other supplier) bid for an amount of savings and their customers make less savings than expected. Or vice versa. Does anyone know how this works?

I had assumed that the suppliers bid for an acceptance price in £/MWh for a target in MWh, which, if accepted gives them a payout for the number of MWh their customers save up to that limit. If their customers make no savings, they get nothing, and if their customers save an equal or greater amount than the number of MWh bid, they get the full proceeds of what they bid for and no more. Hence it would be more of a problem if customers make more savings than the supplier's total accepted MWh bids for any HH slot.

For the avoidance of doubt, we were discussing the financial impact on the DFS scheme or suppliers of the suppliers bidding for too much or too little. I was making the point that if a supplier bids for more of an energy reduction than they actually achieve, then they are paid the same regardless of the magnitude of the overestimate, whereas if they bid for less than they actually achieve, they would only be paid for their bid and any other payout to customers would need to be funded some other way, which is a bigger problem for the "who pays who what" aspect of the scheme.

Regarding your point about falling below the target, take the most recent live session on 1st December as an example. The DFS data shows that for the 16:30-17:00 period, a 550 MW reduction was required, but bids totalled only 452 MW, and the actual settled amount was only 285 MW (about half what was required and less than two thirds of what was bid). the next two half hours delivered only 60% of what was needed and just over two thirds of what was bid. The test session before it on 16th November demonstrates even more significant over-bidding where only 50% of what was bid was actually delivered.

I suggest that this demonstrates that suppliers are being generous with their bids in order to avoid the situation where their customers save more than expected, which impacts them more than if they underestimate what their customers will be able to save. It seems clear from the data that there is sufficient contingency built in to the grid to cope with significant overestimates. If there was a desire for the bidding to be more in line with what customers can actually save, then something would clearly need to be changed, as recent bids are completely out of line with actual savings. If DFS were sensible, they wouldn't be using supplier bids for balancing purposes, but instead build their own forecasting model based on the settled amounts from the test and live sessions. The suppliers themselves are unlikely to be any better at predicting what their customers will save.

Chrysalis

MeteredOut said:

mmmmikey said:

SuzeQStan said:

Interesting reading the DFS Utilisation Report summary showing what they required and what was generated over last years savings sessions. Only a couple on there that went above their requirement but a lot of close sessions as well 

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/data-portal/demand-flexibility-service/dfs_utilisation_report_summary

Yes makes interesting reading. And it begs the question of who pays who what if Octopus (or any other supplier) bid for an amount of savings and their customers make less savings than expected. Or vice versa. Does anyone know how this works?

Just get Ofgem to add it onto the standing charge

Ofgem's copy and paste solution at this point.

baser999

Still on the subject of the Saving Sessions, but at a slight tangent, has anyone else had trouble in deleting the WhatsApp notifications? I have received all the alerts but 🤬 if I can delete them. Doesn’t seem to be an option on iPhone.

MattMattMattUK

baser999 said:

Still on the subject of the Saving Sessions, but at a slight tangent, has anyone else had trouble in deleting the WhatsApp notifications? I have received all the alerts but 🤬 if I can delete them. Doesn’t seem to be an option on iPhone.

It is an update, so you need to click onto the Updates tab and then read the message, you then should not need to delete them, they will just sit there in the channels part, but with no notification pending. 

baser999

MattMattMattUK said:

baser999 said:

Still on the subject of the Saving Sessions, but at a slight tangent, has anyone else had trouble in deleting the WhatsApp notifications? I have received all the alerts but 🤬 if I can delete them. Doesn’t seem to be an option on iPhone.

It is an update, so you need to click onto the Updates tab and then read the message, you then should not need to delete them, they will just sit there in the channels part, but with no notification pending. 

Ok, thank you; that’s no problem, the earliest notification was back in November and I just couldn’t see any reason to keep them now as all the details are on Octopus. Oh well, looks like they’ll have to stay 

Spoonie_Turtle

If they're really bugging you, you could probably leave the … whatever it's called (channel?) then rejoin, see if that gets rid of the older messages.

baser999

Spoonie_Turtle said:

If they're really bugging you, you could probably leave the … whatever it's called (channel?) then rejoin, see if that gets rid of the older messages.

They’re not bugging me, since they’re ‘in the background’, I just assumed they could be deleted as I would old WhatsApp messages. I delete all old texts, WhatsApps etc if they’re no longer needed so it’s a housekeeping issue more than anything

MeteredOut

baser999 said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

If they're really bugging you, you could probably leave the … whatever it's called (channel?) then rejoin, see if that gets rid of the older messages.

They’re not bugging me, since they’re ‘in the background’, I just assumed they could be deleted as I would old WhatsApp messages.  I delete all old texts, WhatsApps etc if they’re no longer needed so it’s a housekeeping issue more than anything

Boris?