Feedback: Aggregation by NG Zones

[peterdudfield]

Detailed Description

It might be a good idea to aggregate by NG zones.

Context

• Could be these
  
• We've also discussed Wind constraint boundaries too
• Could be DNO's too

Possible Implementation

• Todo

[dantravers]

https://assets.elexon.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/28170121/CVA_CC235.pdf

[peterdudfield]

Here's some groupings that might help

zones['z1'] = [139,288, 203,57,43, 138, 179, 262,12,6, 18, 94,42,114, 204, 108,154,115,59,239,127,29, 87]
zones['z2'] = [125,225,259, 224,195, 21,282, 232,313,120,99,77,248,311,121, 39]
zones['z3'] = [284,236,50, 98]
zones['z4'] = [11,173,241, 168, 293, 73, 192, 10,200, 268, 277,147,33,46,2,81,247,303,153,97, 193, 93, 62,183,132,131,278, 85, 260,]
zones['z5'] = [22,102,96,71,145, 128,61,95,51, 208,130,198, 185, 161, 184, 252, 170, 171, 172,205,234, 76,244, 129,105, 69,104,
               14,270,149,84,159,31, 79,106,70,167,15,137, 279, 112, 80,44,90,82,265,86,285,306,263,133,91,107,134,141,255, 169,63,
               222, 58,237,123,304,35,223, 83]
zones['z6'] = [228,27,143, 215,178,144,301,271,276,124,294, 272,275,218,146,253]
zones['z7'] = [220,177,119,78, 254,136,162,52,89, 118,235,175, 289,287]
zones['z8'] = [316,230,292,182,72, 25,54,126,122,56,148,231, 28,249,186,165,163,305,37,264,166,273,109,36,221,240,267,312,60,156,
               194,269]
zones['z9'] = [24,298,302,274,66]
zones['z10'] = [111,74,135,103,142,23,206,250,243,309,48, 256, 88,49,308,217]
zones['z11'] = [214,297,38,101,47,226,317,280, 9,34]
zones['z12'] = [227,281,242,26,117,296,295,3,238,196,7,55,155,202, 75,190,229,176,219]
zones['z13'] = [4,5,246, 251,40,110,300,315,291,65,158,310, 209,67,201,100,211,20,266,140,157, 17,189,19,180,150,187,188,]
zones['z14'] = [53,258,245,164,174,290,299,210,314]
zones['z15'] = [116,191,212,30,41,216,32]
zones['z16'] = [8,152,181,1,113,283,64,45,197,199,257]

[dantravers]

Are they GSP, or GNodes? OR..? Looks like might help. Do you have the source of those, as might refer to them.

[dantravers]

Probably good stuff to talk to NG about, as they will be super attuned to constraint boundaries that are most important.. I wonder if we shoudl have added this to the list of possible enhancements to an extension.

[peterdudfield]

Further feedback

• Zonal information would be great as they almost map with the Constraint Boundaries.
• If it was possible to select multiple zones at once, that would be great

[peterdudfield]

This might also help - https://www.nationalgrideso.com/research-and-publications/electricity-ten-year-statement-etys/electricity-transmission-network/scottish-boundaries

[peterdudfield]

Might be a good idea to add the zones to the GSP location table, add dno tag to it aswell

[dantravers]

Jamie Taylor referenced teh same NGESO site as above.

[peterdudfield]

We had another customer feedback that they wanted this today. Reference that Z16 is very important

[dantravers]

John Walsh at NESO mentioned this also as being a desirable feature. See notes here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvnXr0AiFjqJZc_APSxFNpQhvwrshS14dh4VbVB_Ivw/edit#heading=h.xamv6pm0io47

[peterdudfield]

Also these maps on NESO website

[peterdudfield]

https://www.sse.com/media/x3ehjdpg/lcp-d-sse-impacts-of-beyond-2030-network-plans-on-zonal-pricing-october-2024.pdf

[peterdudfield]

Ive mapped out the GSP to zones - thesea re from maps on these pages - https://www.neso.energy/publications/electricity-ten-year-statement-etys/electricity-transmission-network-requirements/scottish-boundaries

Results are here

(The more I look at it, the messay it gets)

or

{'NE Scotland': [6, 43, 57, 87, 92, 121, 195, 203, 224, 225, 259, 262, 282, 288, 120, 232, 248, 77, 313, 311, 68, 99, 125, 139, 179], 'NW Scotland': [11, 12, 21, 29, 42, 94, 108, 115, 127, 138, 173, 204, 50, 236, 284, 154, 114, 59, 18, 239], 'Tayside': [73, 168, 268, 2, 10, 46, 62, 200, 293, 39, 192, 93, 193, 147, 241], 'N Central Scotland': [16, 31, 97, 80, 81, 85, 90, 91, 98, 131, 153, 167, 169, 183, 223, 237, 247, 277, 278, 304, 303, 279, 132, 15, 260, 33, 123], 'S Central Scotland': [22, 44, 58, 63, 86, 96, 102, 133, 134, 141, 149, 161, 170, 171, 184, 222, 234, 252, 255, 263, 265, 270, 285, 306, 130, 128, 95, 61, 145, 185, 208, 104, 105, 198, 76, 14, 172, 51, 137, 69, 70, 71, 82, 205, 129, 79, 106, 35, 107, 159, 112, 84, 244, 83], 'NW England': [36, 37, 118, 119, 143, 163, 175, 177, 194, 221, 228, 235, 269, 273, 124, 267, 148, 231, 249, 305, 109, 56, 28], 'Mersey': [25, 54, 126, 165, 166, 186, 240, 122], 'N Wales': [72, 182, 230, 292, 316], 'N Yorks': [27, 144, 146, 178, 215, 218, 253, 271, 272, 294, 301, 275, 276], 'Humber': [78, 136, 162, 254], 'S Yorks': [52, 66, 89, 160, 207, 213, 220, 233, 261, 287, 289, 307, 312, 286], 'E Midlands': [24, 274, 302], 'W Midlands': [23, 26, 48, 49, 60, 74, 88, 117, 142, 156, 176, 206, 217, 219, 229, 243, 250, 256, 264, 308, 309], 'E England': [38, 47, 101, 103, 111, 135, 214, 226, 280, 297, 298, 317], 'S Wales': [3, 7, 55, 151, 155, 199, 202, 227, 238, 242, 257, 281, 295, 296, 196], 'S Central': [41, 75, 190], 'SW England': [1, 8, 45, 64, 152, 181, 197, 283, 113], 'SE England': [30, 32, 53, 116, 191, 212, 216, 258], 'London': [4, 5, 9, 17, 19, 20, 34, 65, 67, 100, 110, 140, 157, 164, 174, 180, 187, 188, 201, 210, 245, 246, 266, 290, 291, 299, 300, 314, 315, 40, 158, 251, 310, 150, 189, 209, 211]}

[peterdudfield]

GSP likes Osbladwick really dont help us. But perhaps there are some artistic groups we can make

[peterdudfield]

Solves gsp 13 bug

[peterdudfield]

Another useful link - https://openinframap.org/#7.61/56.335/-3.651

[peterdudfield]

Here are the subzones, which can be used to draw contraint boundaries