US Grid Automation Sept2013

xx Title / Section
Presents
U.S. Grid Automation Report
Survey & Analysis By
Table of Contents
Executive Summary........................................................................2 About This Report........................................................................2 Methodology ..............................................................................2 Major Findings .............................................................................2 U.S. Grid Automation Survey Implications.....................................4 U.S. Grid Automation Trends ..........................................................5 U.S. Grid Automation Drivers ..........................................................6 Survey Respondent Characteristics...............................................7 Experience with Distribution Management Systems .................7 Title W ithin Organization .............................................................7 Utility Type ...................................................................................8 Grid Automation Survey Detailed Findings ...................................9 Grid Analytics Software for Distribution System .........................9 Analytics Software Integration ...................................................9 Substation Automation and IEC 61850 ....................................10 Obstacle of IEC 61850 Standard ..............................................10 Advanced DMS Integration .....................................................11 Updating Substations................................................................11 Updating Feeder Circuits with FLISR .........................................12 Initial System Configuration Services for Grid Automation .....12 Obstacles of Initial System Configuration Services..................13 Impact of Distribution System from Utility Rates or Reliability Indexes ......................................................................................13 Funding of Distribution Equipment ...........................................14 Equipment Life Extension Program...........................................14 Level of Renewable Energy Generation .................................15 Future Renewable Energy Problems........................................15 Electric Vehicle Charging ........................................................16 Future Electric Vehicle Charging .............................................16 Demand Management Option ...............................................17 Reasons Demand Response Option Chosen ..........................17 Assisting with Energy Efficiency (EE) Projects ...........................18 Automated Software System for Energy Efficiency and Sustainability projects ...............................................................18 Zpryme Outlook............................................................................19
1 w ww.zpryme.com | www.smartgridresearch.org | www.schneider-electric.us Copyright 2013 Zpryme Research & Consulting, LLC All rights reserved.
Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013
Executive Summary
U.S. smart grid expenditures hav e been compromised largely of adv anced metering infrastructure (AMI ) projects ov er the past fiv e years. Howev er, many utilities are now eager to fully optimize their systems with grid automation projects, which will allow them to fully realize the promise of the smart grid. Grid automation will create a much more reliable and efficient grid, enable optimization of thousands of grid-connected dev ices and distributed generation sources, and allow for faster outage recov ery times. Federal smart grid deployment targets, renewable portfolio standards, and the need to increase grid reliability hav e driv en U.S. grid automation. Howev er, as electricity markets open up in the U.S., grid automation projects will also be driv en by a strong need to increase electric prov ider customer satisfaction. As U.S. utilities embrace global standards such as I EC 61850, v endors with field prov en grid analytics, adv anced DMS, sensors, I EDs, and FLI SR solutions will be best positioned in the market. The long-term result of such inv estments in grid automation will result in a significantly more reliable and efficient grid, higher utility customer satisfaction, and lower energy bills. The major findings in this report show that a large majority of U.S. utilities are ready to take up the task of building a grid that meets the needs of tomorrows Connected Economy. Howev er, utilities will need strong support from industry stakeholders (v endors, integrators, regulators, etc.) and electric customers to meet this goal.
About This Report The purpose of this report is to explore the use of grid automation and analytics among U.S. utilities, assess utility interest in adopting global standards, and examine the lev el of concern utilities hav e in regard to the system impacts of renewable energy sources and electric v ehicles. Additionally, this report identifies key approaches and obstacles utilities face when pursuing these adv anced grid automation projects. Methodology Zpryme surv eyed 83 U.S. utility professionals in Nov ember of 2012. Respondents were asked 23 questions. The surv ey was conducted ov er the I nternet. Major Findings About 3 out 4 (76%) utilities are planning to procure grid analytics software, and they would most prefer analytics software integrated into an adv anced distribution management system (DMS). Six out of ten (63%) plan to adopt I EC 61850 standard for substation automation. They identified other higher priority items, testing/v alidation, and a need for assistance in implementation as the top three obstacles that would prev ent them from adopting I EC 61850. Sev enty percent of respondents prefer to implement an adv anced DMS using multi-v endor best-of-breed components (plus systems integration).
Eight out of ten respondents plan to update older existing substations with intelligent electronic dev ices (I EDs) to support DMS or grid automation capabilities. Six out of ten respondents are v ery or highly likely to use a major equipment v endor to prov ide initial system configuration serv ices for grid automation. The main reasons cited for not using a major equipment v endor for initial system configuration were serv ice lev el agreement concerns for support, desire to perform in-house configurations, and relationship with existing integrator. Respondents indicated that the use of performance-based utility rates or reliability indexes would most likely lead to increased inv estment in: feeder or substation automation, replacing aging distribution equipment, and DMS or ADMS software. Forty-three percent of respondents described their approach to fund a distribution equipment life extension program as retro-filling existing equipment with new Breakers/Switches. Thirty-sev en percent said they replace with new equipment, and 20% said they refurbish existing equipment. Utilities cited av ailability of capital funding and downtime (outage) considerations as the main reasons they chose their approach for their equipment life extension program. About one out of fiv e (22%) respondents indicated that a high-penetration of (future) renewable
energy is expected to cause significant problems on their distribution system. Eighteen-percent of respondents indicated that a high-penetration of (future) electric v ehicle (EV) charging is expected to cause significant problems on their distribution system. Just ov er four out of ten (44%) respondents chose a commercial and industrial customer-oriented demand response program as their most preferred demand management option. Another 25% chose a grid-oriented solution, like Volt-VAR or conserv ation v oltage reduction (CVR). Eighteen percent chose a residential customer-oriented program. Thirty-six percent (36%) of respondents said they are planning to assist large commercial customers with Energy Efficiency (EE) projects to meet EE portfolio standards requirements, with another 31% planning to implement such projects, but the improv ements are not related to Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard requirements.
U.S. Grid Automation Survey Implications

The surv ey results (presented in figures 1 22) in this report offer key insights about how utilities will proceed with grid automation projects in the near future. I n this section we present the major implications of the data, and recommendations that can assist in adv ancing grid automation deployments. U.S. utilities will increasingly embrace grid analytics, thus creating significant opportunities for utilities to lev erage the influx of data coming from thousands of nodes across their entire electrical systems. Analytics will enable faster and more accurate decisions to be made about wholesale peak power purchases, renewable and distributed resource integration, customer billing, outages, prev enting energy losses, and emergency response planning. The result is lower operating costs, higher customer satisfaction, and reducing unnecessary strain on grid equipment. A majority of utilities are prepared to embrace global standards, I EDs, adv anced DMS, FLI SR, renewable energy, EVs, and EE standards in an effort to build a grid that can meet the needs of today and tomorrows Connected Economy. Utilities will seek to increase large commercial customer s participation in demand response programs. Such programs will require a higher lev el of customization to meet the needs of large customers, and also require adv anced energy
management system integration on the customer or utility side. Utilities are going to demand higher lev els of interoperability, scalability, customer support, training, v alidation and testing from v endors before approv ing expenditures on new products, technologies, and software. I n other words, smallscale testing or controlled env ironment use cases will no longer be enough to gain the trust of utilities. Solutions must be prov en in real-world (large-scale) deployments.
U.S. Grid Automation Trends

Data analytics, adv anced substation automation and demand response, and renewable and electric v ehicle (EV) integration are key trends in grid automation that will continue to shape the market in the near term. Data results from the US Grid Automaton Surv ey indicate that 73% of US utilities are planning to procure grid analytics software. They are looking to this solution to lev erage the influx of data coming from thousands of nodes across their electrical systems to enable faster and more accurate decisions about wholesale peak power purchases, renewable and distributed resource integration, customer billing, outages, prev enting energy losses, and emergency response planning. The two approaches most likely to be used for grid analytics software are analytics integrated into an adv anced DMS or a separate analytics application, and the majority of the respondents prefer the former approach. Nearly twothirds (65%) of the utilities surv eyed want to use a multiv endor best-of-breed components system, and the remainder would use an integrated adv anced DMS from a major v endor, plus system integration. Eighty percent of the utilities that responded to the surv ey plan to upgrade older existing substations with intelligent electronic dev ices (I EDs) to support DMS or grid automation capabilities. I n addition, the use of performance-based utility rates or reliability indexes would most likely lead to increased inv estment in feeder or substation automation, replacing aging distribution equipment, and DMS or ADMS software.
A trend in regard to demand response (DR) programs suggests that nearly half of US utilities are looking to employ commercial and industrial demand response solutions, one-quarter prefer a goal-oriented solution like Volt-VAR or conserv ation v oltage reduction, and a small percentage (13%) prefer residential customer-oriented DR programs. There is a trending concern among utility executiv es that high penetrations of future renewable energy and future EV charging will create significant problems on their distribution systems.
U.S. Grid Automation Drivers
isolate any breach to minimize its effect and raise an alarm to speed serv ice restoration.
AGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKFORCE
THE NEED TO REDUCE INDEPENDENCE ON FOSSIL FUELS
The traditional electric grid has been in place since the mid-19th century, and it is aging along with the workforce that hav e managed and maintained it. As with many asset intensiv e industries with complex capital infrastructure, the workforce has grown up with their respectiv e utilities and the majority of them hav e been employed for their entire careers. The dev elopment and implementation of a modern smart grid infrastructure will require attention to workforce dev elopment to prov ide a number of well-trained, highly skilled electric power sector personnel knowledgeable in smart grid operations. A CRITICAL NEED FOR A FAST, RELIABLE AND SECURE INFRASTRUCTURE The smart grid integrates multiple controls and monitoring systems onto a single I P network to help ensure high priority is giv en to grid operations traffic. The network conv ergence enables utility companies to reduce power outages and serv ice interruptions, as well as to reduce response times by quickly identifying, isolating, diagnosing and repairing faults. The security of such a connected structure from physical or cyber-attacks is of paramount importance. The grid needs to be able to detect and
The current electric system has relied heav ily on fossil fuels, including oil, coal and natural gas, as energy sources. These fuels are non-renewable and the reserv es av ailable on the earth are dwindling rapidly. The success of the future electric infrastructure will necessitate a heav y reliance on renewable energy sources. GLOBAL, FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS AND TARGETS The Federal Gov ernment has established smart grid deployment targets and renewable portfolio standards. I n addition, state-based regulatory frameworks, as well as existing and pending state and federal legislation, hav e created road maps and targets that are critical to plan a grid automation deployment strategy. STIMULUS FUNDS BEING REPLACED BY PRIVATE FUNDS More than $9 billion is currently inv ested in priv ately funded projects. I n addition, there is strong interest from v enture capital and priv ate sector funding for the dev elopment of innov ativ e smart grid technologies.
Survey Respondent Characteristics

Experience with Distribution Management Systems Ov er half (62%) of the respondents had three years or more experience with distribution management systems. Title Within Organization More of the professionals identified themselv es as operations personnel (30%) than other types: director/manager (22%), professional staff (15%), superv isory (12%), executiv e (15%), and other (than these choices) (6%).
How much experience do you have with distribution management systems? (figure 1, source: Zpryme)
What is your title? (figure 2, source: Zpryme)

Other Utility Position, 6%
Ex ecutive (CEO, VP), 15%
Over 15 years, None, 8% 14% Less than 1 year, 10% 11 to 15 years, 11% 1 to 2 years, 20%
Operations, 30%
Director / M anagerial, 22%
6 to 10 years, 14%
3 to 5 years, 23%
Professional Staff, 15%
Supervisory, 12%
Utility Type There was substantial representation of all three types of electricity utilities: inv estor-owned (51%), municipal (21%), and cooperativ es (25%).
How would you classify your utility? (figure 3, source: Zpryme)
Other, 3% Electric cooperative, 25%
Investor-owned, 51%
M unicipal, 21%
Grid Automation Survey Detailed Findings

Grid Analytics Software for Distribution System When asked whether their utility was planning to procure grid analytics software, ov er three-fourths (76%) said yes. Analytics Software Integration The two approaches most likely to be used for grid analytics software were: analytics integrated into an adv anced DMS (47%), or a separate analytics application (29%).
Which approach would you likely use for the grid analytics software? (figure 5, source: Zpryme)
Is your utility planning to procure grid analytics software for your distribution system? (figure 4, source: Zpryme)
Definitely no, 5%
Other, 6%
Definitely yes, 21% Probably no, 19%
Not planning to procure grid analytics softw are, 18%
Analytics integrated into an Advanced DM S, 47%
Probably yes, 55%
A separate analytics application, 29%
Substation Automation and IEC 61850 Sixty-three percent said their utility was planning to adopt the I EC 61850 standard for substation automation.
Obstacle of IEC 61850 Standard The main obstacles listed that would stop them from adopting I EC 61850 were other higher priorities (35%), testing/v alidation (18%), need assistance to implement (13%), and training (13%).
What primary obstacle would stop you from adopting the IEC 61850 standard? (figure 7, source: Zpryme)
Is your utility planning to adopt the IEC 61850 standard for substation automation? (figure 6, source: Zpryme)
Definitely yes, 15%
Definitely no, 6%
Higher priorities at this time
35%
Testing / Validation
18%
Nothing, we plan to adopt Probably no, 31%
15%
Probably yes, 48%
Need assistance to implement
13%
Training
13%
Other 0% 5%
6% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Advanced DMS Integration The most popular approach to implement an adv anced DMS would use multi-v endor best-of-breed components, plus systems integration (70%). The remainder (30%) would use an integrated adv anced DMS from a major v endor.
Updating Substations The utility professionals were queried about whether they planned to update existing substations with new electric dev ices to support DMS or grid automation capabilities. 79% said they planned to do so.
Which approach would you prefer to implement an Advanced DMS? (figure 8, source: Zpryme)
Is your utility planning to update older existing substations with new intelligent electronic devices (IEDs) to support DMS or grid automation capabilities? (figure 9, source: Zpryme)
Definitely no, 3%
Definitely yes, 25%
An integrated Advanced DM S from a major vendor, 30% Probably no, 18%
M ulti-vendor best-of-breed components, plus systems integration, 70%
Probably yes, 54%
Updating Feeder Circuits with FLISR They were also asked whether their utility planned to update existing feeder circuits outside of the substation with fault location, isolation, and serv ice restoration upgrades, and 70% said they had such plans.
Is your utility planning to update existing feeder circuits outside of the substation with FLISR (fault location, isolation, and service restoration)? (figure 10, source: Zpryme)
Definitely yes, 26%
Definitely no, 5%
Initial System Configuration Services for Grid Automation Ninety-fiv e percent of the respondents said they would likely (21% extremely likely) use a major v endor to prov ide initial system configuration serv ices for their grid automation.
How likely are you to use a major equipment vendor to provide initial system configuration services for your grid automation? (figure 11, source: Zpryme)
Not likely at all, 5%
Ex tremely likely, 21%
Somew hat likely, 33% Probably no, 25%

Probably yes, 44% Very likely, 41%
Obstacles of Initial System Configuration Services The primary obstacles that would stop utilities from using a major equipment v endor for initial system configuration were: serv ice lev el agreement concerns for support (30%), desire to perform in house configurations (19%), and relationship with existing integrator (18%).
Impact of Distribution System from Utility Rates or Reliability Indexes The top three major impacts on the distribution system from using performance-based utility rates or reliability indexes were: increased inv estment in feeder automation or substation automation (43%), increased inv estment for replacing aging distribution equipment (26%), and increased inv estment in DMS or ADMS software (13%).
What will be the major impact on the distribution system from performance-based utility rates or reliability indexes? (figure 13, source: Zpryme)
What primary obstacle would stop you from using a major equipment vendor to provide initial system configuration services for your grid automation project? (figure 12, source: Zpryme)
Service level agreement concerns for support
30%
Increased investment in feeder automation or substation automation Increased investment for replacing aging distribution equipment
43%
26%
Desire to perform in-house instead
19% Increased investment in DMS or ADMS software 13%
Relationship with existing integrator
18%
Other
Nothing, we are planning to use a major equipment vendor 23% Increased investment for refurbishing / extending life of aging equipment 10%
8%
6%
Other 0%
No impact
10% 20% 30% 40% 0%
4%
10% 20% 30% 40%
Funding of Distribution Equipment Respondents were asked to describe their approach when their utility funds a distribution equipment life extension program. Thirty-sev en percent said that they would retrofit existing equipment with new breakers/switches into the existing structure, 43% would replace with new equipment, and the remainder (20%) would refurbish existing equipment.
Equipment Life Extension Program The main reasons they chose their approach (cited in figure 14) was the av ailability of capital funding (38%), and downtime (outage) considerations (30%). Other less chosen reasons were: physical dimensions/size restrictions (13%), arc flash exposure risk migration (7%), and qualified equipment serv ice prov ider (8%).
When your utility funds a distribution equipment life extension program, which best describes your approach? (figure 14, source: Zpryme)
What is the main reason your utility chooses this approach for an equipment life extension program? (figure 15, source: Zpryme)
Availability of capital funding 38%
Retro-fill ex isting equipment w ith new Breakers / Sw itches (into ex isting structures), 37%
Downtime (outage) considerations
30%
Replace w ith new equipment, 43%
Physical dimensions / size restrictions
13%
Arc Flash exposure risk mitigation
7%
Qualified equipment service provider Refurbish ex isting equipment, 20%
8%
Other
4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Level of Renewable Energy Generation A two-part issue first asked what the lev el of renewable energy generation that was being placed on their distribution system was today. Responses were: none (10%), small lev el (57%), moderate lev el (23%), and large lev el (10%).
Future Renewable Energy Problems The second part of the issue asked whether a highpenetration of (future) renewable energy on their utility distribution system would cause any problems. Twelv e percent said it would not cause any problems; 29% said it would cause small problems; 37% said it would cause moderate problems; and 22% said it would cause significant problems.
A high-penetration of (future) renewable energy on my utility distribution system is expected to: (figure 17, source: Zpryme)
The level of renewable energy generation being placed onto my utility distribution system today is: (figure 16, source: Zpryme)
Large, 10%
None, 10% Cause significant problems, 22%
Not cause any problems, 12%
M oderate, 23%
Cause small problems, 29%

Small, 57% Cause moderate problems, 37%
Electric Vehicle Charging Another two-part issue first asked what the lev el of electric v ehicle charging that was being placed on their distribution systems was today. Respondents said: none (38%), small lev el (56%), moderate lev el (4%), and large lev el (2%).
Future Electric Vehicle Charging The follow -on question probed whether a high-penetration of (future) electric v ehicle charging would cause problems. Sev enteen percent said it would not cause problems; 29% said it would cause small problems; 36% said it would cause moderate problems; and 18% said it would cause significant problems.
A high-penetration of (future) electric vehicle charging on my utility distribution system is expected to: (figure 19, source: Zpryme)
The level of electric vehicle charging being placed on my utility distribution system today is: (figure 18, source: Zpryme)
Large, 2%
M oderate, 4%
Cause significant problems, 18%
Not cause any problems, 17%
None, 38%
Small, 56%
Cause moderate problems, 36%
Cause small problems, 29%
Demand Management Option The next question asked the sample which demand management option they preferred. Forty-four percent said they preferred commercial and industrial customeroriented demand response programs; 25% preferred a grid-oriented solution like Volt-VAR or conserv ation voltage reduction; 13% preferred residential customer-oriented demand response programs; and the remainder, 18%, had another (than these three) preference.
Which of the following does your utility prefer as a demand management option? (figure 20, source: Zpryme)
Reasons Demand Response Option Chosen An open-ended question asked why those demand management preferences were selected (in figure 20); and the most frequent reasons were: Grid oriented preference Cost sav ings Conserv e energy Changing grid dynamics Commercial and industrial oriented Ability to control load on a predictable basis Best ROI because there is a large MW control from a few customers Residential oriented Pass sav ings on to customers Let customer take control of their energy usage
Other, 18%
Residential customeroriented demand response program, 13%
Grid-oriented solution - like Volt-VAR or conservation voltage reduction (CVR), 25%
No theme emerged when some respondents said they were not using a demand response program.
Commercial and industrial customeroriented demand response program, 44%
Assisting with Energy Efficiency (EE) Projects The sample of utility professionals was queried about whether their utility was planning to assist large customers with energy efficiency (EE) projects. Thirty-six percent said yes to meet EE portfolio standards requirements; and another 31% said yes but not related to EE portfolio standards. Another 33% said they were not activ ely pursuing EE sav ings with customers.
Automated Software System for Energy Efficiency and Sustainability projects The last item on the surv ey asked whether the respondents would need an automated software system to track energy efficiency (EE) sav ings and sustainability of such projects. Fifty-three percent said yes (28% to meet EE portfolio standards requirements, 25% not related to EE portfolio standards). Thirty-one percent reported they were not activ ely pursuing such a project, with a remaining 16% responding otherwise.
Is your utility planning to assist large customers with Energy Efficiency (EE) projects? (figure 21, source: Zpryme)
Would your utility need an automated software system to track the Energy Efficiency savings and Sustainability of projects? (figure 22, source: Zpryme)
Other, 16%
No w e are not actively pursuing Energy Efficiency savings w ith customers., 33%
Yes to meet EE portfolio standards requirements, 36% No w e are not actively pursuing Energy Efficiency savings w ith customers., 31%
Yes to meet EE portfolio standards requirements, 28%
Yes but not related to EE portfolio standards, 31%
Yes but not related to EE portfolio standards, 25%
Zpryme Outlook
As U.S. utilities transition from pilot or project mode to full deployment mode, the grid automation market will experience rapid transformation in the near term. Utilities that hav e already started distribution and substation automation will driv e the growth of this market. Progressiv e utilities will pioneer the use of grid analytics, adv anced DMS, sensors, I EDs, and FLI SR. U.S. utilities will chart the path for global adoption of these technologies. Additionally, as grid automation deployments increase, it will become easier for utilities to make the business case (to PUCs, communities, and inv estors) for inv estments in such technologies. Finally, as U.S. utilities embrace global standards such as I EC 61850, v endors will ramp up their R&D and product portfolios to be able to meet utility demand for grid automation products. This increase in competition will lead to lower equipment prices and increased ROI s for utilities. The long-term result of such inv estments in grid automation will result in a significantly more reliable and efficient U.S. electric grid, higher utility customer satisfaction, and lower energy bills.
About Schneider Electric

As a global specialist in energy management with operations in more than 100 countries, Schneider Electric offers integrated solutions across multiple market segments, including leadership positions in Utilities & Infrastructure, Industries & Machines Manufacturers, Non-residential Building, Data Centers & Networks and in Residential. Focused on making energy safe, reliable, efficient, productive and green, the companys 140,000 plus employees achieved sales of 30.8 billion US dollars (24 billion euros) in 2012, through an active commitment to help individuals and organizations make the most of their energy.
About Zpryme:
Zpryme helps energy organizations understand their business environment, engage consumers, inspire innovation, and take action. This practice represents an evolution beyond traditional market research and consulting: combining sound fundamentals, innovative tools and methodologies, industry experience, and creative marketing savvy to supercharge clients success. At Zpryme, we dont produce tables and charts; we deliver opportunity-focused, actionable insight that is both engaging and easy-to-digest.
Disclaimer:
Thes e materials and the information contained herein are provided by Zpryme Research & Cons ult ing, LLC and are int ended to provide general information on a particular subject or subjects and is not an exhaus t ive t reat ment of s uch s ubject(s). Accordingly, the information in these materials is not intended to const it ut e account ing, t ax, legal, inves tment, consulting or other professional advice or services. The information is not int ended t o be relied upon as t he s ole basis for any decision w hich may affect you or your bus ines s . Before making any decis ion or t aking any act ion that might affect your personal finances or business, you should consult a qualified professional advis er. Thes e mat erials and the information contained herein is provided as is, and Zpryme Research & Consult ing, LLC makes no expres s or implied repres entations or warranties regarding these materials and the information herein. Without limiting t he foregoing, Zpryme Research & Consulting, LLC does not w arrant t hat t he mat erials or informat ion cont ained herein w ill be error-free or will meet any particular criteria of performance or quality. Zpryme Research & Cons ult ing, LLC expres sly disclaims all implied warranties, including, without limitation, warranties of merchantability, t it le, fit nes s for a part icular purpos e, noninfringement , compat ibilit y, s ecurit y, and accuracy. Predict ion of fut ure ev ent s is inherent ly subject to both known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual result s t o vary mat erially. Your us e of t hes e and t he informat ion cont ained herein is at your ow n ris k and you as s ume full res pons ibility and risk of loss resulting from the use thereof. Zpryme Research & Consulting, LLC will not be liable for any s pecial, indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages or any other damages what s oever, w het her in an act ion of contract, statute, tort (including, without limitation, negligence), or otherwise, relat ing t o t he us e of t hes e mat erials and t he informat ion cont ained herein.
xx Title / Section
Learn more at www.schneider-electric.us/go/utility
zpryme.com

US Grid Automation Sept2013

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

US Grid Automation Sept2013

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

xx Title / Section

U.S. Grid Automation Report

Survey & Analysis By

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

U.S. Grid Automation Survey Implications

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

U.S. Grid Automation Trends

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

U.S. Grid Automation Drivers

AGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKFORCE

THE NEED TO REDUCE INDEPENDENCE ON FOSSIL FUELS

Survey Respondent Characteristics

What is your title? (figure 2, source: Zpryme)

Director / M anagerial, 22%

Professional Staff, 15%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Other, 3% Electric cooperative, 25%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Grid Automation Survey Detailed Findings

Definitely yes, 21% Probably no, 19%

Not planning to procure grid analytics softw are, 18%

Analytics integrated into an Advanced DM S, 47%

Probably yes, 55%

A separate analytics application, 29%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Higher priorities at this time

Nothing, we plan to adopt Probably no, 31%

Probably yes, 48%

Need assistance to implement

6% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

An integrated Advanced DM S from a major vendor, 30% Probably no, 18%

M ulti-vendor best-of-breed components, plus systems integration, 70%

Probably yes, 54%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Ex tremely likely, 21%

Somew hat likely, 33% Probably no, 25%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Service level agreement concerns for support

Desire to perform in-house instead

19% Increased investment in DMS or ADMS software 13%

Relationship with existing integrator

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Downtime (outage) considerations

Replace w ith new equipment, 43%

Physical dimensions / size restrictions

Arc Flash exposure risk mitigation

Qualified equipment service provider Refurbish ex isting equipment, 20%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

None, 10% Cause significant problems, 22%

Not cause any problems, 12%

Cause small problems, 29%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Cause significant problems, 18%

Not cause any problems, 17%

Cause moderate problems, 36%

Cause small problems, 29%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013

Residential customeroriented demand response program, 13%

Grid-oriented solution - like Volt-VAR or conservation voltage reduction (CVR), 25%

Commercial and industrial customeroriented demand response program, 44%

Schneider Electric Presents: U.S. Grid Automation Report | September 2013