WS1UC2

This page provides space for notes from workshop discussions of use case 2 during Day 2 of WS1.

Interactive elements

The discussions can also benefit from considering the EERAdata storyboard and/or slido comments. See WS1#Interactive_elements

Notes from the morning session

The morning session is dedicated to database discussions with the aim to select 3-5 databases from below's list of databases for further examination. The first table of the WIKI page is filled out by noon.

Draft list of databases

• OPSD
• EIA
• OpenEI
• PSE
• NREL
• ENTSO-E
• SMARD
• WorldBank

Discussion on the choice of databases:

• OPSD
• EIA
• PSE
• ENTSO-E

Notes from the afternoon session

The afternoon session is dedicated to discussing metadata for the selected databases. The aim of the afternoon session is to fill out table 2 of the wiki page for the use case and to decide what to report back from the use case to the plenary session the next day (again, see the WIKI template for a suggested structure).

• Table 2 is filled
• UC2 group discussion notes are summarized to report to the rest of the team as follows.

What to report back to the plenary on Day 3?

• Databases selected (names and short reasoning)
  • OPSD (It is a good example of FAIR and open database with proper metadata)
  • PSE (It is a rich national database with open access)
  • EIA (It is a rich national database with open access)
  • ENTSO-e (It is a major source for European power networks data which is open access)

• Main insights from discussions
  • Based on our discussion regarding current power transmission and distribution networks, there is need to address following challenges:
    • Lack of standardization for metadata taxonomy and common vocabulary (related to I2)
    • Ambiguity on licensing issues for various types of energy data (related to R1.1)
    • Lack of unique identifier for energy data (related to F1)
    • In general, there very limited open access data for the distribution power system. The huge gap is due to the privacy and confidentiality of the data that includes personal information about electricity customers and household owners. Also, there are many players in the power distribution areas including DSOs, electricity retailers, energy management companies, etc. So, collecting, archiving, and sanitizing the data need huge resources.
  • It is not clear for us how to interpret and measure following indices (they seem confusing):
    • R1.2. (meta)data are associated with detailed provenance,
    • A1.2. the protocol allows for an authentication and authorization procedure, where necessary;
    • A2. metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer available;

• Suggested next steps
  • Compare the selected databases regarding their ontologies (e.g. compare SMARD, ENTSO-e, and PSE)
  • Reassess selected databases with an online FAIR toolset (from Andreas)

• Other issues