2 The robustness of the grid
12. The storms in December 2011 and January 2012
were unusually severe, with the Met Office making comparisons
to the exceptional storm of 1998.[7]
It was therefore to be expected that damage to the electricity
network would occur and that some consumers would experience interruptions
to their supplies. However, the extent of such damage and distribution
would have been minimised if the grid had been in a robust and
well maintained state before the onset of any severe weather event.
13. On the current state of the electricity grid
in Scotland, Scottish Renewables told us:
The condition and technological state of Scotland's
electricity network is generally good, with the more central aspects
of the system being very robust. However, there are aspects that
could be better, and this could be attained by increased investment
in grid infrastructure.[8]
14. Both Scottish Power and SSE assured us that they
had been investing in the grid, and that this had resulted in
an improved service to their customers. One manifestation of this
improved service, they told us, was the resilience of the grid
under severe weather conditions:
[ScottishPower] gave some charts to try and compare
the '98 event, which was a similar scale of weather as far as
the Met Office was concerned. [...] On the level of faults, and
on the response time and the customers affected—on all those
measures, they have improved against the '98 measures. That was
through investment, through network automation, through putting
other specifications in, and also through increased specifications
around the clearance of trees where we think some of the worst
weather appears.[9]
SSE added:
One of the things [SSE is] seeing, with the level
of investment that we are putting in, is that wind speeds are
having to be higher before we start seeing the excessive damage.
The other thing that we are seeing is that we cleared these events
up much quicker than we ever did.[10]
15. Written evidence from Ofgem seemed to support
this picture of an improving standard of service. Their statistics
showed that, on two key measures of quality of service, Scotland's
distribution network operators had improved over the last decade.
Table 2. Performance With and Without Storms (April
2002 to March 2011)[11]
| DNO
| Without Storms
| Including Storms
|
| GB | 22% reduction in power cuts
17% reduction in duration
| 21% reduction in power cuts
16 % reduction in duration
|
| SP Distribution (Scottish Power)
| 25% reduction in power cuts
23% reduction in duration
| 29% reduction in power cuts
28% reduction in duration
|
| Scottish Hydro Electric Power Distribution (SSE)
| 29% reduction in power cuts
25% reduction in duration
| 23% reduction in power cuts
7% reduction in duration
|
Source: Ofgem
16. However, that picture was in stark contrast to
the experience of customers, particularly residents and organisations
on the West Coast and the Islands. Alastair Redman told us:
Over the last 18 months, after many years of good
electricity supply, the area was subject to many power cuts and
power surges. These ranged from many small multiple cuts in a
day to very lengthy ones lasting over 24 hours, [...] a significant
number of these cuts were not weather related.[12]
He went on:
[SSE] stopped maintaining the lines back in 1998
to save money. The thing that is annoying is that the front-line
workers, although I could not name them, will tell you that they
are reactionary things. If it breaks they will fix it, but since
1998 they have not maintained it. Surprise, surprise, the chickens
are coming home to roost. Year on year it has got consecutively
worse. Try running a car for 15 years without maintenance; of
course it is going to break down all the time. It is the exact
same analogy and it is not acceptable.[13]
17. We also heard from residents of many communities,
including Loch Fyne at Newton, Clachan, the Rosneath Peninsula
and Salsburgh and Shotts, who described a poor and declining quality
of electricity supply.
18. In the case of Islay, which was probably the
worst case we heard about, SSE conceded that "that the fault
performance over the last 18 months [...] was not acceptable"
and said they were "disappointed about what our customers
on Islay suffered and sincerely apologise for that".[14]
Having previously delayed promised investments to the infrastructure
supplying electricity to Islay, SSE assured us that by late summer
2012, "Islay would have benefited from four major projects
which in total have cost in the region of £11 million".[15]
19. We regard
SSE's recent performance on Islay as unacceptable. We are, however,
pleased that, after a sustained period of poor service, SSE is
now providing the necessary investment in Islay's electricity
infrastructure. SSE should keep us informed of its progress in
completing the four major investment projects it has planned.
Monitoring at a finer level
20. As noted above, one of the most striking features
of the evidence taken by the Committee was the discrepancy between
the generally good and improving quality of service reported by
the TNOs and DNOs and the perception of their customers in particular
locations that the service was in fact substandard and declining.[16]
21. Ofgem monitors the performance of TNOs and DNOs
and, while noting that SSE had missed its target for the number
of supply interruptions in 2010-11, did not contradict the assertions
made by SSE and Scottish Power on their overall performance. However,
Ofgem only monitors the performance of DNOs at the regional level
(Scotland being split into two regions, with SSE serving one and
Scottish Power serving the other).[17]
There is therefore a risk that a generally good standard of service
across a region could mask small pockets of particularly poor
performance. Indeed, in the case of Islay, where both the DNO
and the community were in agreement that the service had fallen
well short of what should be expected, Ofgem was apparently completely
unaware of any problem:
Chair: To give an example, we heard Scottish and
Southern apologising earlier for failings on Islay. Was the state
of that network ever reported to you?
Rachel Fletcher: No, to my knowledge we had not received
any concerns or complaints from customers on that part of the
network until just after the storms.[18]
22. The current system of regulation failed Islay.
Monitoring and publicising performance at a sub-regional level
might go some way to closing the gap between the reported performance
of networks operators and the experience of some of their customers.
The current disparity only serves to create confusion and mistrust.
23. We recommend
that Ofgem monitor and regulate network performance on a more
detailed geographic scale, particularly for areas which are known
to have experienced poor service or are exempt from some of the
usual performance safeguards such as the Guaranteed Service Standards.
These performance measures should as far as possible be made available
to the public in an easily accessible and understandable form.
24. We are pleased that, following their evidence
to us, Ofgem has already agreed to 'explore' if it is possible
for DNOs to provide a more detailed sub-regional picture of network
performance levels. We hope that it will confirm progress on this
in response to our recommendation.
Reinforcement
25. On the subject of strengthening network resilience,
Jeremy Sainsbury, Chairman of Scottish Renewables told us:
Renewables are usually located in areas that are
away from population, whereas the normal central grid has been
built and developed over a very centralised network around population,
which means that the investment that is being done for renewables
should assist the grid in being a firmer and better supply for
consumers in the future as a result of that renewable investment.
26. Rachel Fletcher, Acting Senior Partner of Ofgem
said:
I have seen a scheme in Wales where transmission
reinforcement and extension are actually being used to improve
the quality of supply to distribution-connected customers. So
there certainly is scope for that to happen, where the distribution
companies and the transmission companies actually put their heads
together and take a joined-up approach.
27. The increased generation of renewable energy
at sea, on islands and in remote parts of the mainland will mean
more transmission lines in these areas. Currently, many of these
areas are served only by a single and vulnerable electricity line.
Islay, for example, is reliant on a 123km overhead line which
is susceptible to interruptions. These interruptions could be
considerably reduced if the electricity generated in the seas
around Islay could be distributed to customers on the Island.
A subsea transmission line has been proposed to run from Kintyre
peninsula to Hunterston in Ayrshire, running close to the Isle
of Bute. If a distribution line to serve Bute could be linked
to this transmission line, then there would be no need to supply
Bute from the existing long overhead lines.
28. Ofgem should
report to the Committee of how well transmission and distribution
network operators are working together to ensure that when new
transmission lines are constructed, distribution lines are linked
at points to bypass the existing vulnerable lines to take electricity
to the communities which suffered the most during recent storms.
It should also advise the Committee on what steps it is taking
to strengthen cooperation in this area.
7 Q 104 Back
8
Ev 59 Back
9
Q 105 [Scottish Power] Back
10
Q 104 [SSE] Back
11
Ev 78 Back
12
Ev 40 Back
13
Q 14 Back
14
Q 112 Back
15
Ev 88 Back
16
Ev 40, 46, 47, 80, 83 Back
17
Q 221,222 Back
18
Q 231 Back
| 
