Cba 1

Ref.
Ares(2020)7898040 - 23/12/2020
Title: Document Version:
D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 1.0
Project Number: Project Acronym: Project Title:
H2020- 773430 CROSSBOW CROSS BOrder management of variable renewable energies

and storage units enabling a transnational Wholesale
market.
Contractual Delivery Date: Actual Delivery Date: Deliverable Type*-Security*:
M38 (12/2020) M38 (12/2020) R-PU

*Type: R: Report; DEM: Demonstrator/Prototype; DEC: Website, videos; O: Other; E: Ethics requirement.
**Security Class: PU: Public; CO: Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission).
Responsible: Organisation: Contributing WP:
Andrej Gubina UL WP14
Authors (organisation):
Edin Lakić (UL), Jan Jeriha (UL), Andrej F. Gubina (UL), Catalin Chimirel (CRE), Dan Preotescu (CRE), Mihai Mladin (CRE),
Emiliano Marquesini (CRE), Mihai Paun (CRE), Mihai Sandulac (CRE), Cristian Colteanu (CRE), Lucas Pons Bayarri
(ETRA), Manuel Serrano Matoses (ETRA), Athanasios Botsis (ICCS), Dimitrios Papadaskalopoulos (ICCS), Jelena
Ponočko (UNIMAN), Alessandra Parisio (UNIMAN), Juan Morales Alvarado (UNIMAN), Carlos Cruzat Hermosilla
(UNIMAN), Mathaios Panteli (UNIMAN), Xiao Wang (UNIMAN), Jovica Milanović (UNIMAN), Petar Krstevski (UKIM),
Stefan Borozan (UKIM), Aleksandra Krkoleva Mateska (UKIM), Vesna Borozan (UKIM), Rubin Taleski (UKIM), Andraž
Andolšek (CGRID), Ivan Mandalinic (VARTA), Daniel Rayo Garcia (COBRA)
Abstract:
This deliverable defines the plan and methodology to be followed to evaluate and assess the impact of the project
results based on the data coming from the SP6 in each pilot cluster and scenario. This plan is based on the “Guidelines
for conducting cost-benefit analysis of Smart Grid projects”, co-authored by DG ENER and JRC.
Keywords:
TSO, Smart Grid, Network Operations, HLU, KPI, CBA, Impact assessment, methodology, Business Model, Demand
Response, Storage, renewables, regulation, ancillary services, market, flexibility
© CROSSBOW Consortium http://crossbowproject.eu/

CROSS BOrder management of variable renewable energies
and storage units enabling a transnational Wholesale market
Revision History
Revision Date Description Author (Organisation)
V0.1 20.04.2020 New Document, Table of Contents Edin Lakić (UL), Jan Jeriha (UL)
V0.2 04.07.2020 Updated Table of Contents + Introduction section Edin Lakić (UL)
added
V0.3 14.08.2020 Updated Table of Contents + added partners Edin Lakić (UL)
responsible for writing sections
V0.4 05.10.2020 Updated subsection 3.3 (product leaders), 4.1 All
and 4.2 (UL), 4.3 (UKIM and ICCS) and section 8 –
Annexes (product leaders)
V0.44 30.11.2020 Updated section 3 – CBA Methodology Catalin Chimirel, Dan Preotescu,
Mihai Sandulac, Emiliano
Marquesini, Mihai Paun, Cristian
Colteanu (CRE)
V0.52 07.12.2020 First final version Edin Lakič, Jan Jeriha, Andrej F.
Gubina (UL)
V0.53 14.12.2020 Review by ETRA, ICCS Lucas Pons Bayarri, Manuel
Serrano Matoses (ETRA)
Athanasios Botsis, Dimitrios
Papadaskalopoulos (ICCS)
V0.57 17.12.2020 Updated sections 2 – Methodological background Edin Lakić, Jan Jeriha, Andrej F.
and 8 – Annexes following the review Gubina (UL)
V0.61 18.12.2020 Updated section 3 – CBA Methodology following Dan Preotescu (CRE)
the review
V0.62 18.12.2020 Updated section 4.3 following the review Petar Krstevski (UKIM), Stefan
Borozan (UKIM), Aleksandra
Krkoleva Mateska (UKIM), Vesna
Borozan (UKIM), Rubin Taleski
(UKIM)
V0.65 21.12.2020 Updated section 3 - CBA Methodology following Edin Lakič, Jan Jeriha (UL)
the review
V1.0 22.12.2020 Final version for submission Edin Lakić, Jan Jeriha, Andrej F.
Gubina (UL)
D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 2

This project has received funding from the

European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme
under Grant Agreement № 773430.
More information available at https://crossbowproject.eu
Copyright Statement
The work described in this document has been conducted within the CROSSBOW project. This document
reflects only the CROSSBOW Consortium view and the European Union is not responsible for any use that
may be made of the information it contains.
This document and its content are the property of the CROSSBOW Consortium. All rights relevant to this
document are determined by the applicable laws. Access to this document does not grant any right or license
on the document or its contents. This document or its contents are not to be used or treated in any manner
inconsistent with the rights or interests of the CROSSBOW Consortium or the Partners detriment and are not
to be disclosed externally without prior written consent from the CROSSBOW Partners.
Each CROSSBOW Partner may use this document in conformity with the CROSSBOW Consortium Grant
Agreement provisions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
WP14 aims at evaluating the impact of the CROSSBOW products individually and the impact of each of the
HLUs, leading to an overall assessment of the success of the project. This deliverable defines the plan and
methodology to be followed in order to evaluate the impact of the project results based on the data coming
from SP6 in each pilot cluster and scenario according to the "Guidelines for conducting cost-benefit analysis
of Smart Grid projects", with some adjustments. It is divided into three core sections dealing with the impact
in different areas.
The first core section discusses the methodological context and what has already been done in the project.
The UCs and KPIs were defined in the SP1 Foundations, followed by SP2 – SP5 where we addressed the four
main areas of the project that concluded with the final development of the CROSSBOW product prototypes
and the integration and demonstration in SP6. After most of the work in these SPs has ended, the focus
shifted to SP7: Impact and Replication. When revising the KPIs for the impact assessment during the
development activities it was discovered that some KPIs were not suitable anymore due to the evolution of
the UC during the development activities. Additionally, we have mapped all of defined KPIs with achievement
indicators defined in DoA to evaluate the effect and progress of the project and describe the data collection
for impact evaluation and CBA analysis.
The next core section is CBA methodology and implementation planning through eight stages. The
methodology is tailored and customized towards the CROSSBOW project’s needs as we are conducting a
research innovation project with numerous outputs (both research and commercially wise) and consortium
partners are not just from the industry, therefore the analysis is more complex. In the context of this
deliverable, we completed the first two stages of the CBA analysis while setting the soil for the rest to go by
within the length of the project.
The last part of the deliverable disuses the impact assessment through the KPIs. In the first core section, the
KPIs are revised and mapped with achievement indicators, while here they are divided into three classes on
what they will measure – the techno-economic, socio-environmental and regulatory KPIs. Technical
Performance Domain is one of the main performance domains for calculating the efficacy of UC
implementation. Techno-economic KPIs measure the advantages of CROSSBOW products regarding the
effects on the successful increase of RES capacities, energy market prices and flexibility of the market. Social
domain visualizes the impact of technology, scheme or policy on social factors such as local wealth,
unemployment, satisfaction, or even more specific factors such as the impact on the use of public transport,
the health system, etc. Since we do not have final consumers (households representatives) directly involved
in our project and our products are mostly developed for TSOs, social impact will be measured by calculating
some newly defined social KPIs and additionally asking HLU leaders and product users to quantify the social
benefits through questionnaires. Regarding the environment impact we will try to calculate the change in
GHG emissions derived by the adoption of our products and services for each HLU. The regulatory impact of
the CROSSBOW products is described in the final subsection. Specifically, the effect on environment and
energy policy, as well as the circular economy, accompanied by a regulatory review of the KPIs.
Based on the impact assessment plan and the methodology described within this deliverable, a qualitative
and quantitative analysis will be carried out to draw conclusions on the performance of each product and
suitability for each HLU based on the baseline and ex-ante analysis. Most of the analysis is planned to be
finished in the last year of the project (M39-M48), but the partners have been gathering data and doing some
tests for some time, and these findings will be included in the deliverable D14.2.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 7
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT .................................................................................................................... 7
STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT ................................................................................................................................ 7
2 METHODOLOGICAL BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 9
CONNECTION TO THE PREVIOUS WORK DONE IN CROSSBOW ........................................................................................ 9
ANALYSIS OF CROSSBOW KPI PERFORMANCE DOMAINS ........................................................................................... 10
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 13
DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................................................................ 13
3 COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING .................................................15
MAIN STAGES OF CBA IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................. 15
STAGE 1: CROSSBOW CORE IMPACT TARGETS ......................................................................................................... 18
CROSSBOW technologies, elements and goals ........................................................................................... 19
STAGE 2: HLUS/PRODUCTS TO FUNCTIONALITIES MAPPING .......................................................................................... 21
Summary and target impacts ..................................................................................................................... 44
STAGE 3: FUNCTIONALITIES TO BENEFITS MAPPING ..................................................................................................... 44
STAGE 4: ESTABLISH THE BASELINE SCENARIOS ........................................................................................................... 44
STAGE 5: IDENTIFICATION AND QUANTIFICATION OF THE BENEFITS ................................................................................. 45
STAGE 6: IDENTIFICATION AND QUANTIFICATION OF THE COSTS ..................................................................................... 46
Capital Expenditures (CAPEX) analysis ........................................................................................................ 47
Operating Expenditures (OPEX) analysis ..................................................................................................... 47
STAGE 7: EVALUATION METRICS FOR COMPARING COST AND BENEFITS............................................................................ 47
Specific Input Data for the Financial and Economic Calculations ............................................................... 49
Macroeconomic Input Data for the Financial and Economic Calculations .................................................. 49
Sensitivity analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 50
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ........................................................................................................................ 50
4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND KPIS ........................................................................................................................52
TECHNO-ECONOMIC IMPACT AND KPIS..................................................................................................................... 52
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 52
CROSSBOW approach ................................................................................................................................. 52
Key Performance Indicators ........................................................................................................................ 53
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND KPIS ........................................................................................................ 54
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 54
Key Performance Indicators ........................................................................................................................ 57
REGULATORY IMPACT AND KPIS .............................................................................................................................. 61
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 61
Impact on Policies ....................................................................................................................................... 62
Regulatory impact of CROSSBOW KPIs ....................................................................................................... 66
5 CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................................................................68
6 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................69
7 ACRONYMS .......................................................................................................................................................71
8 ANNEXES ...........................................................................................................................................................73
LIST OF DATA NEEDED FOR IMPACT EVALUATION – KPIS CALCULATION ............................................................................ 73
LIST OF ALL KPIS WITH CORRESPONDING HLUS AND UCS............................................................................................. 75
CROSSBOW HLUS/PRODUCTS TO CBNMO AND SMART GRIDS FUNCTIONALITIES MAPPING ........................................... 84
TECHNICAL KPI .................................................................................................................................................... 87

ECONOMIC KPIS .................................................................................................................................................. 87

SOCIAL KPIS ........................................................................................................................................................ 91
ENVIRONMENTAL KPI ........................................................................................................................................... 93
INPUT DATA FOR CBA – QUESTIONNAIRE IN GOOGLE FORMAT ..................................................................................... 93
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: AREAS OF CROSSBOW IMPACT EVALUATION ................................................................................................................ 7
FIGURE 2: CROSSBOW SUB-PROJECTS AND WORK PACKAGES ....................................................................................................... 9
FIGURE 3: CBA STRUCTURE, SOURCE: [7] .................................................................................................................................. 17
FIGURE 4: CROSSBOW HLUS/PRODUCTS IMPACT TO CBNMO AND SMART GRIDS FUNCTIONALITIES ................................................. 44
FIGURE 5: IMPACT OF THE BUSINESS MODELS ON CSR AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ....................................................................... 51
FIGURE 6: INPUT DATA FOR CBA – PRODUCT INFORMATION .......................................................................................................... 95
FIGURE 7: INPUT DATA FOR CBA – COST DATA 1/2 ..................................................................................................................... 96
FIGURE 8: INPUT DATA FOR CBA – COST DATA 2/2 ..................................................................................................................... 97
FIGURE 9: INPUT DATA FOR CBA – BENEFIT DATA ....................................................................................................................... 98
FIGURE 10: INPUT DATA FOR CBA – PARTNER DETAILS................................................................................................................. 99
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: CROSSBOW OBJECTIVES AND AIS DEFINED IN THE DOA AND LINK TO HLUS AND KPIS......................................................... 13
TABLE 2: CROSSBOW CORE IMPACT TARGETS ........................................................................................................................... 19
TABLE 3: CROSSBOW TECHNOLOGIES, ASSETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE INVOLVED ............................................................................. 21
TABLE 4: HLU1 IMPACT TO CROSS-BORDER NETWORK AND MARKET OPERATIONS (CBNMO) AND SMART GRIDS ................................. 23
TABLE 5: HLU2 IMPACT TO CBNMO AND SMART GRIDS ............................................................................................................. 27
TABLE 10: HLU7 IMPACT TO CBNMO AND SMART GRIDS ........................................................................................................... 38
TABLE 13: CROSSBOW SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL KPIS ........................................................................................................ 59
TABLE 14: CONTRIBUTION OF THE CROSSBOW HLUS ................................................................................................................ 60
TABLE 15: IMPORTANCE OF CROSSBOW KPIS FOR REGULATORY AND STANDARDIZATION IMPACT ....................................................... 67
TABLE 16: DATA NEEDED FOR IMPACT EVALUATION – KPIS CALCULATION......................................................................................... 74
TABLE 17: LIST OF ALL KPIS WITH CORRESPONDING HLUS AND UCS ............................................................................................... 83
TABLE 18: CROSSBOW HLUS/PRODUCTS TO CBNMO AND SMART GRIDS FUNCTIONALITIES MAPPING EXCEL TABLE – PART 1/3 ........... 84
TABLE 21: INSTRUCTIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................................... 94

1 INTRODUCTION
Purpose and scope of the document
This document defines the plan and methodology that will be followed in the CROSSBOW project to evaluate
the impact of the project’s results based on the data coming from the SP6 in each pilot cluster and scenario.
Our holistic approach combines various elements (technical, economic, social, regulatory, etc.) in D14.1 and
D14.2 we will focus on analysing the outcomes of developed products and services together with results of
the test cases and experiments. We will use them to evaluate the associated impact on a number of fronts
as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Areas of CROSSBOW impact evaluation
As presented above, CROSSBOW will assess the impact of the project in the next pillars:
- The techno-economic impact pillar, which will be derived from the technical and economic KPIs and Cost
Benefit Analysis (CBA) by exploiting inputs from the foundations work done in SP1 as well as from the
product developed in SP2-SP5 and test cases and experiments in SP6.
- The social and environmental impact pillar, derived from transparent, well-defined and measurable KPIs
which will be calculated, monitored and assessed using both, input from project development and direct
involvement of stakeholders and HLU/product leaders.
- The regulatory impact pillar, that our efforts in contributing areas are considered.
The impact assessment will be quantitative or/and qualitative depending on the pillar.
Structure of the document

The contents of the document are divided into 4 main chapters:
- Chapter 2 briefly describes the methodological context in which the connection to previous project
work is presented, along with the analysis of the project KPIs, the brief introduction of CBA and the
collection of data
- Chapter 3 introduces the key stages of the CBA approach. The findings of the first two stages of the
CBA are presented and discussed.
- Chapter 4 presents the impact assessment where, in addition to the technological and economic
impacts and the KPIs, the social, environmental and regulatory impacts are also presented with a
plan for its evaluation in T14.2.

- Chapter 5 is dedicated to the conclusion where the short findings of the preceding sections are
provided.
The document has an extensive Annex section. All auxiliary and supplementary information/tables including
the list of all CROSSBOW KPIs, CROSSBOW assets to functionalities mapping and the first version of the CBA
questionnaire are added in the annexes.

2 METHODOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
Connection to the previous work done in CROSSBOW
CROSSBOW high-level use cases (HLUs) were derived from the following four strategic goals that represent
the key areas of the project [1]:
- Increasing the share of variable RES and interactions with the distribution grid, but enhancing the
power transmission technologies and management of large-scale RES generation,
- Large scale storage, relevant for the transmission network scale through different technologies and
management strategies,
- Integrate more flexible generation and DR mechanisms by further developing the ICT technologies
and enhance real-time awareness,
- Facilitate the participation of variable RES and other market participants, such as aggregators, by
developing new approaches to the wholesale market.
In the previous work done in the project, the use cases (UCs) were identified and connected to specific HLUs
to guide the processes of demonstration, integration, and deployment activities. In order to connect these
UCs with quantifiable results, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were introduced. KPIs enable us to measure
the effectiveness of the solutions implemented and proposed within CROSSBOW to achieve its strategic goals
[1], [2].
In Figure 2 we can observe the sequence of CROSSBOW sub-projects (SP) and work packages. The UCs and
KPIs were defined in the SP1 Foundations. It was followed by SP2 – SP5 where we addressed the four key
areas of the project that concluded with the final development of the CROSSBOW product prototypes and
the integration and demonstration that was the focus of the SP6. After most of the work in these SPs has
ended, the focus shifted to SP7: Impact and Replication.
Figure 2: CROSSBOW Sub-projects and Work Packages
The KPIs that were defined in the SP1 helped us clarify the project objectives in the early stages of the project
before the main development took place. When revising the KPIs for the impact assessment during the
development activities in this task T14.1: Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis planning, we

discovered that some KPIs were not suitable anymore due to the evolution of the UC during the development
activities. To overcome these challenges some modifications of the initial KPIs were required. Although still
with the aim of fulfilling the initial obligations related to the key areas, descriptions, and definitions of all KPIs
were checked and updated, where needed. As SP1 exclusively focused on technical and economic KPI, D14.1
provides for the first time a comprehensive list of social and environmental KPI. The revised and updated list
of additional KPIs is added in Table 17 in the Annex to this document. In addition to the UCs and KPIs, the
test cases (TCs) were defined and described in the D13.2: Preliminary Demonstration. The main purpose of
TCs is to map each UC via one or more experiments where the demonstration will be performed and the
required data for KPIs will be gathered [3].
The CROSSBOW KPIs can be divided into six categories [1]:
- B.1. Increased RES and DER hosting capacity: Increase the amount of RES/DER integration by
intelligent network investments, by using advanced power technologies and improved system
operation.
- B.2. Reduced energy curtailment of RES and DER: Reduce energy curtailment of RES/DER generation
due to operational problems and maximize the generation from RES with low marginal operation
cost.
- B.3. Power quality and quality supply: Maintain high quality of power supply to end-users by
advanced system development and operation tools, as well as high availability of assets via
maintenance strategies and planning tools.
- B.4. Extended asset lifetime: Operate closer to the asset limitations without endangering the system
reliability and increase the asset lifetime, reduce the cost of replacements and increase the efficiency
of the power system by reducing down-time.
- B.5. Increased flexibility from energy players: Maintain system security by integrating new non-
conventional flexibility services. Increase the number of flexibility sources to mitigate a single source
of failure.
- B.6. Improved competitiveness on the electricity market: Improve competitiveness and liquidity of
the wholesale and ancillary market, by providing affordable ancillary services to the grid, which
increase social welfare for the end-users.
CROSSBOW KPIs are mostly divided into categories B.1 – B.6, according to the methodology described in D2.2
[1]. KPIs that are not related to any of these six groups are classified as either Project KPIs or Specific KPIs
and are either relevant for the whole project or are only relevant to a specific HLU.
Analysis of CROSSBOW KPI Performance Domains

The examples of good practice, in terms of other recent European projects of similar scope, regarding the
impact assessment and CBA were investigated. The preparation of this document was mostly influenced by
the work done in projects inteGRIDy [2], WiseGRID [4], OSMOSE [5]. The EU projects mentioned earlier,
encompass a process of assessing the project’s impact through the KPIs in the last part of the project.
Solutions developed in CROSSBOW measured with KPIs, impact different domains. CROSSBOW KPIs can be
divided into the following four domains [2]:
- Technical domain – These KPIs refer to the impact on the power system and certain technical aspects
of products developed within CROSSBOW (i.e. the amount of curtailed energy or hydro-power plant
flexibility). KPIs that are a part of categories B.1 – B.5 are focused on a purely technical domain,
- Economic domain – These KPIs measure the economic impact for the main actors (i.e. increased
revenue or decreased costs for the TSOs). KPIs that belong to the category B.6 belong to the
economic domain,

- Environmental domain – These KPIs measure the impact on the environment (i.e. change in
greenhouse gas emissions). The only environmental CROSSBOW KPI belongs to the category Project
KPI because it is one of the project objectives,
- Social domain: These KPIs are one of the hardest to quantify because they address the social aspects
of the developed products such as user satisfaction, ease of use of developed projects. All social
CROSSBOW KPIs represent project objectives and are therefore classified as Project KPIs.
All of the performance domains mentioned above will be described in more detail in Chapter 4. A relationship
between the performance domains and the work done in CROSSBOW is highlighted. Where applicable,
special focus is given to the stakeholders’ possible point of view.
The key objectives and indicators selected by the consortium members to track progress towards the Energy
Union that will be evaluated during the project were already defined in the DoA: IM1 (Electricity
Interconnection Capacity), DE1 (GHG Emissions Reduction) and DE5 (Renewable Energy Share), but several
others will also be used to evaluate the impact and progress of the project. Each objective has at least one
achievement indicator (AI), which will be used to measure its successful achievement. Within this WP14 the
AIs were mapped with proposed KPIs and Table 1 was generated. The performance/achievement indicator is
specified in column AI, while high-level use cases and corresponding KPIs are listed in the next columns to
evaluate the progress of the project. KPIs are denoted only by numbers from 1 to 60 where number 1 is the
KPI_01 "Renewable Content Increase" and number 60 is the KPI_60 "Change in GHG emissions" from the list
of final KPIs in Table 17 in Annex. In certain situations, AIs will not be determined directly from the KPIs but
will be assessed indirectly i.e. through certain planned regulatory changes.
O1: Power Transmission management of large-scale generation in the context of an increased share of variable
renewables
CROSSBOW will propose the shared use of resources to foster variable renewable energies integration, enabling
higher penetration of clean energies whilst reducing network operational costs and improving economic benefits of
RES.
AI HLUs KPIs
Annual RES Capacity Limit (DE5) HLU2, HLU3 1, 3-5
Reduction of RES curtailment (DE5) HLU2, HLU3, HLU7 1-4
Reduction of CO2 emissions (DE1) All HLUs 60
Increase of storage participation to facilitate RES
HLU3, HLU4, HLU5, HLU7 1-5, 22-26, 28
penetration and cross border power exchange
%time Hybrid RES dispatchable units can be used HLU3, HLU4 22-24, 26, 28
O2. Interactions and mutual support of the transmission grid and the distribution grid
CROSSBOW will address different aspects related to the interaction of TSOs and DSOs, including markets, system
operations, network planning, ICT, data handling to facilitate the efficient and cost-effective collaboration of all re-
sources (generation, storage and demand) connected to transmission or distribution grids.
AI HLUs KPIs
Number of Services provided from DSO to TSO HLU4, HLU7 11, 13, 14, 19, 20
% controllable load subscribed to DSM accessible HLU6, HLU8 3, 47
by TSO
Framework for the interaction of TSOs with the HLU4, HLU7 Regulatory impact assessment
DSOs in T14.2
O3. Better control of cross-border balancing energy at interconnection points
CROSSBOW will work to enable cross-border better control and the development of consistent solutions at a regional
level. The mechanism for cross-border balancing exchanges contributes to the optimization of the use of the inter-
connection capacity after the adjustment of the commercial exchanges in the intraday market.
AI HLUs KPIs
TSOs interconnected HLU1, HLU9 17, 19
Energy exchanged for regulation HLU9 15, 27, 42, 45, 49, 50, 52-54
Average Transmission Capacity for balancing HLU9 15, 45

Cost Reduction for Regulation HLU1, HLU9 27, 40, 41, 50, 53
Average usage rate of cross-border transmission HLU9 45
capacity
O4. Large scale storage relevant to the transmission network
CROSSBOW will propose advanced storage control algorithms able to offer more flexibility to respond to the varia-
bility and uncertainty of operational conditions at various timeframes of the transmission network.
AI HLUs KPIs
% of storage capacity available for cross border
HLU3, HLU4, HLU5 22, 24
transactions
Number of Services provided by Storage HLU3, HLU4, HLU5 11, 13, 14, 19, 20
Amount of energy stored in a different country HLU3, HLU4, HLU5 1, 4
O5. Coordinated distributed storage relevant to the transmission network
CROSSBOW will propose solutions for increased cross border power transfers (congestion management) and voltage
and frequency regulation services in existing and future TN at a local and transnational level by relying on efficient
regional use of distributed energy storage technologies
AI HLUs KPIs
Percentage of distributed storage capacity used
HLU3, HLU4 3, 11
for system stability and energy quality
Percentage of storage energy used for regulation HLU4 11, 13, 14, 20
purposes
Number of Services provided by Storage HLU3, HLU4, HLU5 11, 13, 14, 19, 20
O6. Better Communication, ICT technologies and control tools
In CROSSBOW, ICT and technologies will be largely used to support the flexibility needed to cope with large scale
deployments of renewables, especially in combination with distributed storage. Moreover, the execution of ancil-
lary services will be monitored in real-time and quality of service (QoS) indicators will be implemented.
AI HLUs KPIs
Proposed framework for supporting data protec- D3.2 Privacy and data pro- Regulatory impact assessment
tion tection in a multi-actor envi- in T14.2
ronment analysis
Implementation of Regional Operational Centre HLU1 8, 10, 16-18, 19, 29-41, 43
Functionalities
Service Bus between TSO and DSO HLU1, HLU2, HLU3, HLU7 1, 9, 11, 13, 19, 21
% of substations equipped with remotely acces-
HLU1 10, 17, 18
sible monitoring and control for HV and MV
O7. Efficient transnational use of DSM
CROSSBOW will propose a techno-economic framework, algorithms and feasibility of using of DSM for improvement
of cross border power transfers and associated issues at the regional level.
AI HLUs KPIs
Amount of DSM available capacity HLU6 1, 3, 25
Developed framework and algorithms for effi-
cient use of DSM at national and transnational HLU6 1, 3-5, 11-14, 20, 25, 46
level
Reduced peak load by due to demand HLU6 20, 25, 46
O8. Transnational wholesale market
CROSSBOW will define a transnational wholesale market, proposing fair and sustainable remuneration for clean en-
ergies through new business models supporting the participation of new players –i.e. aggregators - and the reduction
of costs.
AI HLUs KPIs
Proposed Regulatory and legal framework D1.1 Legislation and Regula- Regulatory impact assessment
tory Framework in T14.2
Analysis of Relative Standards D3.3 Standards and Interop- CROSSBOW_D19.3_Contribu-
erable Data Models tion to Standardization
Amount of energy exchanged HLU9 15, 42
Wholesale market toolset HLU9 27, 45, 49, 51

O9. Transnational ancillary service market

CROSSBOW will propose a minimum set of harmonized requirements for balancing services and orchestrated multi-
nodal market platform to enhance the integration of RES and DR in the South-eastern European markets.
AI HLUs KPIs
Proposed Regulatory and legal framework D1.1 Legislation and Regulatory impact assessment in
Regulatory Frame- T14.2
work
Analysis of existing balancing markets D1.1 Legislation and Regulatory impact assessment in
Regulatory Frame- T14.2
work & D10.1 Na-
tional balancing and
wholesale electricity
markets structures
and principles
Ancillary market toolset HLU9 15, 27, 42, 45, 49, 50, 52-54
Table 1: CROSSBOW Objectives and AIs defined in the DoA and link to HLUs and KPIs
Cost-benefit analysis methodology

The impact assessment methodology provides the systematic framework for the Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)
following the European Commission (EC) recommendations [6]. It follows a methodology and
recommendations for Smart Grid CBA from the Joint Research Centre [7]. The methodology supplies the
systematic framework of the CBA of Smart Grid initiatives and consists of:
- Qualitative impact analysis: Non-monetary evaluation of non-measurable impacts. Externalities
such as benefits derived from broader social impacts like the security of supply, consumer
participation, contribution to policy goals etc.
- Economic analysis: Associated with a monetary evaluation which involves:
a. Definition of the boundary conditions that will shape the quantification of benefits taking the
environment under consideration.
b. Identification of benefits and costs, and
c. Sensitivity analysis.
- Financial and non-financial analysis: Evaluation comprised of a blend of the ones mentioned above,
that employs weights to combine the various impacts of the qualitative analysis following their
foreseen relevance.
The methodology is combined with the assessment framework for Smart Grid projects that proposes a set of
KPIs for evaluating the performance to Smart Grid networks [7]. The CBA methodology provides a framework
for the assessment of financial, environmental, reliability, safety and security benefits from the perspective
of all organizations representing different stakeholders (utilities, customers and society). Its objective can be
to identify easily understandable, specifically measurable and quantifiable benefits and is further described
in section 3.
Data collection
It is easy to define the KPI but collectng data is challenging. We must ensure that the KPIs consider the data
available for demos, specific TCs and experiments/simulations to be performed. Deliverable D12.1 – Analysis
of the demo clusters technical data and integration planning defines and compiles the findings of the first
task of WP12. This task describes the integration and deployment of CROSSBOW products. Based on the
previous analyses done in T2.2 CROSSBOW use cases, scenarios and KPIs identification and T2.3 CROSSBOW
demo clusters formal analysis, it offers an expanded and revised overview of the demonstrations to be

conducted under each HLU, as well as the specification of the systems, assets and activities required to start
running the demos.
Data collection of different variables from different pilots is needed as an input for the CROSSBOW impact
evaluation. For the majority of cases, the data collected can be represented as interval data consisting of a
value and a timestamp of measurement, but this is not always the case. Various methods of collection are
possible depending on the type of data, the data source and the available technologies. For example, some
input data (i.e. active and reactive power generation, voltage, load active and reactive power) are provided
from SCADA/MMS systems. For some experiments we are obtaining real-time data from a selected portfolio
of RES assets, for others, data from the ENTSO-E Transparency platform (i.e. historical energy and balancing
prices for different countries in an hourly resolution) or directly from TSOs (information about CZCs, mFRR
prices, trading volumes). Each of the experiments (TCs) which were defined and described in D13.2
CROSSBOW integrated ecosystem preliminary demonstration and will be further developed/adapted for final
demonstration in WP13, already describes the field data that must be collected for the measurement of
specific KPIs. The final list of most of the data needed for impact evaluation and all project KPIs are available
in the Annex – 8.1 & 8.2. Additional data will be collected for the CBA analysis (section 3) while some will be
acquired through questionnaires (Social KPIs in section 4.2). It is essential to organize and store data in
common formats that will make it easy for all consortium members to share and access. The Data
Management Plan (DMP) from WP17 clarifies the collection of research data before and after the project. It
includes data that will be collected (and was not yet collected), processed or generated during the project,
methodology and criteria that will be implemented, whether the data will be exchanged and how the data
will be curated and maintained, considering all data-related aspects of the project. While WP13 has already
collected data sets relevant to the preliminary experiments that will be used to evaluate the project in WP14,
these data sets have not yet been released in an open repository. It is important to point out that, due to the
sensitivity of some of the studies, not all the data will be released publicly and made available for inclusion
in the Open Data Research Pilot (ORDP).

3 COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING

The CBA can be used as an analytical tool that helps the project manager to assess the project’s impact on
welfare and the contribution to EU cohesion policy objectives, as it is the case with EU projects. In more
detail, the tool is used to compare the economic costs and benefits that can be attributed to a specific large-
scale project or a single independent innovation within a project. The goal of the CBA is to assess the
economic viability of the project from a socio-economic point of view.
Outcomes of Smart Grid projects often exceed the ones incurred solely by the organizations directly involved
in the projects. For that reason, JRC and EC developed guidelines for the methodology focused specifically
on the CBA for investment and Smart Grid projects. The EC has established the methodology for CBA by
publishing the Guidelines for Conducting a CBA of Smart Grid Projects in 2012 [7]. In 2014, the document was
updated with the recent developments in EU policies and best practices. The contents were expanded to
build on the lessons learned in project preparation during previous cohesion policy periods. The document
was titled: Guide to CBA of Investment Projects – Economic appraisal tool for Cohesion Policy 2014-2020 [8].
In the latter document, the methodology for CBA has been maintained, but several analyses by the sector
have been outlined (focused on transport, environment, energy, broadband, research& innovation). Costs
and benefits that are typical for a specific sector have been included in the sector-specific recommendations.
The goal of these guidelines is, to also include the societal impact of the projects on the entire Smart Grid
value chain and not only the economic impact directly obtainable and measurable for the actors carrying out
the project. The guidelines mention that the impacts of Smart Grid projects are often hard to evaluate in
monetary term and that it is essential to include the hard-to-measure societal benefits in order to accurately
evaluate the project [7], [8].
To compare the impacts on different costs and benefits, all of them have to be estimated and brought to the
common denominator. In the case of CBA as economic analysis, all impacts have to be evaluated in monetary
terms. The role of money plays a key part in the CBA to compare something unobservable (wellbeing) or hard
to observe (social impacts, contribution to policy goals) with costs and benefits that are easier to obtain or
estimate (expected revenue, operation costs…). Due to the nature of the Smart Grid project’s impacts such
as CROSSBOW, this is not always easy. The impact of the CROSSBOW project exceeds just the monetary
benefits for the partners directly involved. For each of the CROSSBOW’s HLUs and corresponding products,
a CBA will be made in the next step of the project. Partners will have to identify and quantify all costs and
benefits that can be attributed to specific CROSSBOW products. These estimates will serve as input data for
the analysis.
It has to be mentioned that the CBA is not the only tool used for the evaluation of the projects/products. A
very relevant complementary evaluation can be provided by calculating a set of KPIs. The KPIs calculation
requires going through the same first three stages of CBA and focuses on the progress towards well-defined
objectives from the beginning of the project. More details regarding the methodology used for KPIs
calculation and mapping activities performed for the CROSSBOW products are presented in Chapter 4 of this
document. In addition to the CBA which focuses on comparing the economic benefits and costs and identifies
if a project is profitable, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis could also be calculated. Its main goal is to calculate the
effectiveness of policies or projects to achieve a specific goal and is used to compare projects that aim at
achieving the same goal. It is useful to help identify the most efficient way of achieving a given outcome.
In the following subchapters, a brief description of the CBA methodology will be presented. Where
applicable, the examples of the associated input data required for the calculations and focused on the
implementation of this methodology in the CROSSBOW project will be presented.
Main stages of CBA implementation

According to the guidelines developed by EC [7], the CBA is structured in seven main stages, which must be
met in the indicated order. After all requirements in one stage are completed, the requirements in the next

stage can begin (some overlapping is acceptable and is to be expected, but generally, this is the evaluation
process). The main stages can be grouped into three major sections of the CBA. The three main sections are
presented in Figure 3 and the list below:
- Characterisation of the project (product in our case), including a description of the goals,
technologies used, assets used, functionalities provided, and others.
- Estimation of benefits, including identification of the potential beneficiaries, identification of the
potential benefits, monetisation of the benefits, and others.
- Comparing of the costs and benefits, including identification of the costs (CAPEX and OPEX),
evaluation of the costs, calculation of NPV, FIRR and EIRR, elaboration of the sensitivity analysis, and
conclusions.
In addition to the sections described above, the sensitivity analysis can be used as an additional risk
assessment step. The main reasons for performing such analysis is to identify the ‘critical’ variables of the
project. With the large number of input data involved in the calculations, the sensitivity analysis aims at
identifying the variables that have a large impact on the project’s financial or economic performance. Also,
the long duration of the analysis (usually 5 to 10 years) creates the potential for relevant changes in the
values utilized for the calculations [8].
The main stages of the CBA and the activities flow chart are presented in Figure 3 below.

Stage 1: Review and describe

technologies, elements and goals
of the products
Characterisation of
the products
Stage 2: Map assets on to

functionalities
Stage 3: Map functionalities on to

benefits
Stage 4: Establish the baseline Estimate benefits
Stage 5: Identify potential

beneficiaries and monetise
benefits
Stage 6: Identify and quantify costs

(CAPEX and OPEX)
Compare costs and

benefits
Stage 7: Compare costs and
benefits by calculating NPV, FIRR
and EIRR
Figure 3: CBA Structure, Source: [7]
The first three stages are common to KPIs calculation approach and the CBA. All stages will be described in
more detail in the consecutive subchapters, but for clarity purposes, they can be briefly summarized as the
following [7]:

- Stage 1: Review and describe technologies, elements and goals of the products – The first stage
aims to provide an overview of the main assets and goals of the project. The goals of the project can
be described through the technologies used and the functionalities developed by using the main
assets. This stage can be comprised of the review of developed products and functionalities that help
solve specific grid conditions that occur in the region, or by revising the project’s objectives and its
expected impact.
- Stage 2: Map assets on to functionalities – The assets and the goals of the products were defined in
stage 1. In the second stage, the assets are mapped with the functionalities developed to achieve the
main goals of the project. In CROSSBOW, this was done through an iterative approach with the HLU
leaders where each asset was connected to the relevant functionalities.
- Stage 3: Map functionalities on to benefits – The main goal of the mapping in Stage 3, is to connect
the functionalities with the potential benefits that they provide. Benefits are grouped into four main
benefit categories: economic, reliability, environmental and security. This stage of the CBA has not
been performed yet in CROSSBOW and will be the focal point in the next period. Similarly to Stage 2,
an iterative approach with the HLU leaders will be adopted where each functionality will be
considered to be mapped to a specific benefit.
- Stage 4: Establish the baseline – To measure the impact of the CROSSBOW project, the comparison
of the scenarios where the project occurred, and it did not take place are mandatory. The scenario
where the project had not occurred can be called a baseline scenario. It is necessary to identify the
beneficiaries of the CROSSBOW project and estimate their state without the R&I in the CROSSBOW
project.
- Stage 5: Identify potential beneficiaries and monetise benefits – Once the two scenarios (baseline
and project) have been identified, the benefits have to be identified, compiled and monetised. Data
of “normal” operation should be gathered before and after the project implementation.
- Stage 6: Identify and quantify costs (CAPEX and OPEX) – Similarly to stage 5, the costs that occur
due to the project implementation, investment and operation costs, have to be identified. The CBA
guide suggests that this stage is usually easier to perform due to easier cost monitoring and
estimation.
- Stage 7: Compare costs and benefits by calculating NPV, FIRR and EIRR – In the final stage of the
CBA, the estimated costs and benefits of the baseline scenario and the project scenario are
compared. The most common methods are either annual or cumulative comparisons of costs and
benefits coupled with the recalculation on the NPV.
Stage 1: CROSSBOW core impact targets

CROSSBOW as a TSO driven project is building and exploiting the preliminary technologies, solutions and
prototypes demonstrated in five H2020 projects – NOBEL GRID [9], FUTURE FLOW [10], WISE GRID [11],
GRIDSOL [12] and FLEXICIENCY [13]. The technological objectives and expected project impacts are presented
in detail in Table 2. The success measures are the achievement indicators that were identified in the project
proposal and are comprised of the technological project objectives and the Technological readiness levels
(TRL) of CROSSBOW products.

Technological objectives Success measure

Power Transmission • Reduction of RES curtailment
management of large-scale • Increase of storage participation to facilitate RES penetration and cross border
generation in the context of wholesale market (ID market, mFRR market)
the increased share of • % time Hybrid RES dispatchable units can be used
variable renewables
Interactions and mutual • Number of Services provided from DSO to TSO
support of the transmission • % controllable load subscribed to DSM accessible by TSO
grid and the distribution
grid
Better control of cross- • Better communication and coordination among TSOs
border balancing energy at • Improved data and information exchange between TSOs to increase reliability
interconnection points and efficiency in the transmission system.
• Increase the amount of energy exchanged for regulation
• Decreased Costs for cross-border regulation
Coordinated distributed • Percentage of distributed storage capacity used for system stability and energy
large-scale storage relevant quality
to the transmission network • Percentage of storage energy used for regulation purposes
• Number of services provided by storage
Better Communication, ICT • Implementation of Regional Operational Centre Functionalities
technologies and control • Ancillary services are monitored in real-time and quality of service (QoS)
tools indicators are implemented and monitored
• % of substations equipped with remotely accessible monitoring and control for
HV and MV
Efficient transnational use • Amount of available capacity for DSM, ID, balancing market, reduction of peak
of DSM, wholesale market load by due to demand
and ancillary service market • Better use of available capacities among countries
DSM at national and • Amount of energy exchanged between countries
transnational level • Lower prices at the wholesale level for the whole region
TRL of CROSSBOW The following shows the starting point of each of the different CROSSBOW products
products with the necessary and the expected final TRL at the end of the project:
replicability and scalability • HLU1 Regional Operation Centre Balancing Cockpit ROC-BC: from TRL5 to 7
of these tools. • HLU2 Cross-border RES management: from TRL4 to 8
• HLU3 Cross-border storage of RES production/output: from TRL5 to 7
• HLU4 Distributed storage for system stability and energy quality control:
from TRL4 to 8
• HLU5 Virtual Storage Plant: from TRL4 to 7
• HLU6 Transnational Demand Side Management: from TRL6 to 8
• HLU7 Hybrid RES Dispatchable Plants: from TRL5 to 7
• HLU8 Cooperative Ownership of Flexibility Assets: from TRL5 to 7
• HLU9 Transnational Ancillary and Wholesale Market: from TRL4 to 8
Table 2: CROSSBOW core impact targets
CROSSBOW technologies, elements and goals

The first step of the CBA analysis is review and description of the technologies, assets and goals of the project.
Deliverable D2.3 CROSSBOW demo clusters formal analysis describes the scope and identifies the products
and partners involved in each HLU presents details of the assets and infrastructure involved in the relevant
demonstrations and outlines a preliminary demonstration plan for each HLU. Since it is quite extensive, we
are only summarizing the main assets and infrastructure involved within each HLUs in Table 3.

HLU/Product Assets and Infrastructure Involved More information about technology

HLU1 Regional Security Coordination Center (SCC) premises IT assets in this architecture include:
Operation Centre include: • Firewalls ASA 5508-X
Balancing Cockpit ROC- • An operational room with five • Central Ethernet Switches Cisco
BC workstations (dedicated to operation Catalyst 2960-X 24
and development tasks) • Servers HP ProLiant DL380 G7
• Back office with three workstations • Fiber Channel (FC) Switches HPE
(exclusively dedicated to development 8/8 base (0) E-port Enabled SAN
tasks) • Storage NetApp FAS 2040
• Three management offices • Various workstation, laptops and
(corresponding to the director, the printers required for the operation
technical director and the secretary) of SCC
HLU2 Cross-border RES • Interconnection transmission lines (HV) • Computers, firewalls, servers,
management between Bosnia and Croatia, Bulgaria storage and virtualization clusters
and Romania • SCADA and WAMS Systems
• Production assets (hydropower plants, • Communication between the
wind power plants, PVs) in Bosnia, CROSSBOW products/tools and the
Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece and Romania assets (different technologies)
HLU3 Cross-border • Production assets (hydropower plants, • Computers, firewalls, servers,

storage of RES wind power plants, PVs) in Bosnia, storage and virtualization clusters
production/output Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece and Romania • Infrastructure for automatic
• HPPs in Bosnia, Bulgaria, Croatia, control of the HPPs
Greece • SCADA and WAMS systems
HLU4 Distributed • Storage assets – pumped hydropower • Infrastructure for automatic
storage for system plants (PHPPs) in Bosnia, Bulgaria, control of the PHPPs
stability and energy Greece and Serbia • SCADA systems
quality control • The possible use for demonstration • Two-way communication between
purposes of a small set of small batteries the CROSSBOW products/tools and
located on an island in Greece the assets
HLU5 Virtual Storage • Storage assets (PHPPs) in Bosnia, • Every substation is connected via a
Plant Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia private network. All required data
• Additionally, the storage assets (HPPs is transmitted using the ICCP
and PHPPS) in Croatia protocol.
• Residential battery storage systems • Various VSP-based scenarios can be
might be available for laboratory showcased in a simulated
testing. The installed capacity is 0.0025 environment, using appropriate
MW, there are no limits on the ramp network models and considering
rate and the energy storage capacity is the present state of the network, as
0.006 MWh. well as the mid-term planning
horizon.
HLU6 Transnational • DSM assets in Bosnia (NOSBIH), Bulgaria • Real-time monitoring of the grid
Demand Side (ESO), Croatia (HOPS), Greece (ADMIE), and DSM providers, triggers for
Management Serbia (EMS) DSM activation (critical grid
• TSO (dispatchers, SCADA department, situation and/or balancing), TSO
market administrator and measurement instructions and DSM providers’
operator) confirmation or rejection of these.
• Aggregator/DSO

HLU7 Hybrid RES • Implementation of the RES-DU product • VARTA provides information for Li-
Dispatchable Plants in the NTUA laboratory in Athens Ion batteries simulation
• Main assets related to PV, Wind and • Microgrid SCADA
battery technologies: • Intelligent Load Controllers
o Single-phase Microgrid, three-phase • Real-Time Digital Simulator (RTDS)
Microgrid, Power electronic devices,
Grid Simulator and SEL relays
HLU8 Cooperative • Market actor or group of actors (e.g. • cyberGRID’s Virtual Power Plant
Ownership of RES, C&I consumers, community, • Service Infrastructure of Flexibility
Flexibility Assets retailer, aggregator, balance group) aggregation ICT development tools
• Flexibility service provider (secure access services, Database,
• TSO to perform validation and send a meta-data, time-series, real-time
signal to the DR and DG assets metering data management, data
o Sončna zadruga (15 kW power as collector, Web-Service, etc.
wood chips feeder in Slovenia)
HLU9 Transnational • TSOs • Web-based platforms hosted on
Ancillary and • BRPs, storage units (STUs) and University of Ljubljana’s servers
Wholesale Market dispatchable units (DUs) • Computers, firewalls, servers,
storage and virtualization clusters
Table 3: CROSSBOW Technologies, Assets and Infrastructure involved
The project goals, products/HLUs are described in the following section, in which we map our HLUs to
functionalities to see what technological impact the products and services developed in CROSSBOW have on
Smart Grids or in our specific case on the Cross-border power grid and market operation.
Stage 2: HLUs/products to functionalities mapping

The technological impact of the implementation of CROSSBOW HLUs/products will be explored based on the
project’s objectives and methodology briefly described in section 3.1.
3.3.1.1 HLU1 - Regional operation centre
Regional Operation Centre (ROC) is responsible for coordinating the cost-efficient and secure operation of
the whole south-eastern Europe transmission network and enabling the shared use of resources. This ROC
constitutes one of the main products of the CROSSBOW project. The main benefits realised through the
advanced technical solutions, tools, and algorithms, developed within the ROC activities are the following:
- Advanced approaches to check the quality of individual and common grid models closer to real-time,
calculate the available capacity of interconnection corridors and estimate preliminary net positions.
- A fully probabilistic approach for regional short-term adequacy (STA) assessment in the SEE, which
includes the determination of the minimum transactions required between neighbouring TSOs to
solve inadequacy issues. Compared to the existing STA approach at ENTSO-E level, this approach
considers all sources of stochasticity on the generation (supply) side of the referent system which
guarantees not to overestimate the system adequacy level, as is the case of the currently
implemented STA approach. Furthermore, final adequacy transactions are defined based on an
optimization function that guarantees minimal cross-border flow in the defined region, with the
underlying objective of leaving as much capacity as possible for market-based energy and reserve
transactions.
- An algorithm capable of calculating (close to real-time) dynamic line ratings which promise to
significantly increase the exploitable capacity of cross-border and internal transmission lines,
compared to traditionally employed conservative static ratings. This will contribute to relieving
network congestion effects, operating the whole SEE system more flexibly, enhancing the utilisation
and subsequently the penetration of renewable generation, and reducing the overall operating costs
of the system.

- A cross-border reserve sizing and sharing approach, which achieves reduced an overall number of
required reserves and reduced reserve procurement costs in the SEE. This is because neighbouring
countries can exchange various reserve products, helping each other to deal with the increased
balancing requirements. Due to the natural diversity of generation and demand conditions in
different countries, associated with varying weather conditions, generation mix and demand
portfolios, the risks associated with demand-supply imbalances can be diversified, reducing
significantly the overall reserve requirements.
- An algorithm that schedules the generators and interconnections in the SEE to increase its resilience
when it is exposed to an extreme weather event.
The main objectives of the ROC are investigated and described in D2.2 CROSSBOW Use cases, scenarios and
KPIs identification, D2.3 CROSSBOW demo clusters formal analysis, and many other deliverables from WP12
- Integration and deployment of CROSSBOW ecosystem and WP13 - Large scale demonstration Activities of
the integrated CROSSBOW ecosystem where it is described how the ROC system is integrated and deployed
within the CROSSBOW ecosystem and which demonstration activities are integrated within the project. In
order to facilitate the realization of initial steps of the CBA, an effort is created identifying and justifying how
these are related to several of the proposed functionalities and services.
Services Description
Service B) Enhancing efficiency in day-to-day grid operation
Functionality
6 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 1.1, UC 1.4, UC 1.6, UC 1.7, UC 1.10, UC 1.11
control of power flows and Related TCs: TC 1.1, TC 1.4, TC 1.6_7, TC 1.10.1, TC 1.11.1, TC 1.11.2, TC 1.11.3
voltages
Connected products/HLUs: HLU1, HLU9, WAMAS
Short justification: This functionality optimises the operation of transmission assets
and improves the efficiency of the network through enhanced automation,
monitoring, protection and real-time operation. Faster fault
identification/resolution will help improve continuity of supply levels. Regional
Adequacy Assessment tool (UC 1.1), as well as Resilience improvement (UC 1.10),
helps the enhancement and continuity of supply levels on daily operation, even on
extreme weather events, Dynamic Line Rating (UC 1.4) facilitates the optimised
operation of transmission assets thus improving the efficiency of the network
through enhanced estimation of the OHL capacities offering real-time observability,
NTC&FB congestion identification methods (UC 1.6 & UC 1.7) will help improve
identification of power flows (FB method) and thus cross border trading, while
Over/under frequency protection schemes (UC 1.11) consist of an automated
monitoring and security tool which accelerates the problem identification and
resolution under real-time operation.
8 - Improve monitoring of net- Related UCs: UC 1.2, UC 1.3, UC 1.4, UC 1.5, UC 1.9
work assets Related TCs: TC 1.2, TC 1.3, TC 1.4, TC 1.5, TC 1.9
Short justification: Real-time quality check of common grid models (UC 1.2), the
enhanced method for preliminary net position estimation (UC 1.3), determination
of capacity calculation input data (UC 1.5) and Individual grid model quality
assessment (UC 1.9) serve as the foundation for the improved monitoring of
regional grid and network assets such as the cross-border interconnection corridors,
while Dynamic Line Rating (UC 1.4) facilitates the optimised operation of
transmission assets thus improving their efficiency through enhanced estimation of
the OHL capacities offering real-time observability.
Service C) Ensuring network security, system control and quality of supply

Functionality
12 - Operation schemes for Related UCs: UC 1.11
voltage/current control Related TCs: TC 1.11.1, TC 1.11.2, TC 1.11.3
Connected products/HLUs: HLU1, WAMAS
Short justification: Over/under frequency protection schemes consist of an
automated monitoring and security tool which accelerates the problem
identification and resolution under real-time operation.
14 – System security assess- Related UCs: UC 1.1, UC 1.10
ment and management of Related TCs: TC 1.1, TC 1.10
remedies
Connected products/HLUs: HLU1, HLU5, HLU7, HLU8
Short justification: Regional Adequacy Assessment tool helps improve continuity of
supply levels through the identification of adequacy index (ERIC) for the SEE region.
Service E) Improving market functioning and customer service
Functionality
20 – Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 1.8
nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 1.8
tricity market
Short justification: Cross-border exchange of reserves fosters the market coupling
among the countries of the SEE region in order to adopt new strategies for sharing
of reserves from a regional perspective.
Table 4: HLU1 Impact to Cross-Border Network and Market Operations (CBNMO) and Smart Grids
3.3.1.2 HLU2 - Cross-border RES management

CROSSBOW Regional Coordination Centre (RES-CC) platform covers five main functionalities for the
management of RES generation units cross-border:
1) provide real-time supervision and control,
2) manage incidents in real-time, speeding up their correction, either remotely or in coordination with
local services, and achieving higher availability rates for installations,
3) support electric power management, sending to the system's operators in the region and the ROC
the production forecasts,
4) interact with the operators and ROC, sending real-time data on each generation facility, which
enables the calculation of the electric power production that can be sent to the grid and maximize
the contribution of RES to the system, and
5) provide data recording, analysis to optimize the availability and efficiency of the installations,
substations and HV lines to guarantee the delivery of the generated energy.
The RES-CC is in charge of capturing and integrating data coming from different RES units, with different
interfaces and technologies, and present each operator the relevant data and services associated with the
units under its supervision. In this way, the product is designed to support both, national and regional
coordination, and is deployed as a cloud-based application.
In normal operation, two parties are mainly benefitted from the services developed:
- The TSOs, that will be able to use the RES-CC to monitor and supervise the RES units affecting its
country and are provided with functionalities to facilitate the safe integration of RES energy within
the national energy mix (curtailment management)
- The RES owners, that will be able to monitor and supervise its RES portfolio and are provided with
information and functionalities to maximize its benefits

Within the HLU2 ‘Cross-border RES management’ umbrella the services presented below are provided.
Service A) Enabling the network to integrate users with new requirements
Functionality
1 - Facilitate connections at all Related UCs: UC 2.1, UC 2.3
locations for any kind of de- Related TCs: TC 2.1.1, TC 2.1.2, TC 2.1.3, TC 2.1.4, TC 2.3
vices
Connected products/HLUs: RES-CC
Short justification: In UC3, new ways for integrating the data coming from RES-unit
are investigated, considering different technologies, protocols, actors, etc. In UC1
and their corresponding test cases, different ways to control the RES units are in-
vestigated, not only considering AGC (Automatic Generating Control), but also other
integration mechanisms that impose fewer restrictions to RES owner to be properly
integrated.
2 - Facilitate the use of the Related UCs: UC 2.8
grid for the users at all the Related TCs:
voltages/ locations
Short justification: In UC 2.8, integration of generation at the distribution level is
foster by the application of new generation forecast algorithms that help TSO to
better predict the behaviour of these assets and thus facilitating their integration.
3 - Use of network control sys- Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC 2.7
tems for network purposes Related TCs: TC 2.5.1, TC 2.5.2, TC 2.7.1, TC 2.7.2, TC 2.7.3
Short justification: RES-CC offers functionalities for the TSO to analyse the security
of the grid in two dimensions:
• At the planning stage, using the day-ahead congestion forecast
information. This analysis may trigger the modification of the RES
production schedule (redispatch).
• At the real-time stage, using the real-time power flows, frequency, energy
mix and short-term state estimation. This analysis may trigger the
activation of ancillary services, especially RES unit’s curtailment.
In UC7 the most appropriate set of remedial actions (redispatch) are investigated
towards solving the security problem whilst at the same time minimising the impact
on generation schedules
In UC5, the most appropriate set of ancillary services activation at real-time are
considered towards facing a given issue in real-time. Potential issues include not
only security problems but also, undesired energy mix, lack of inertia, high prices,
etc.
Functionality
5 Automated fault identifica- Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC 2.7
tion/grid reconfiguration, re- Related TCs: TC 2.5.1, TC 2.5.2, TC 2.7.1, TC 2.7.2, TC 2.7.3
ducing outage times
Short justification: In the automatic security analysis performed by RES-CC based on
DACF power flows, N-1 contingency analysis is also carried out. In case this analysis
identifies potential problems, a sensitivity analysis is performed considering the
available RES units and with all this information, the most appropriate set of

remedial actions towards solving the potential problem is identified and configured.
In case the contingency is later happening, the system will be ready to react in time
by applying the pre-calculated solution, thus enhancing the reaction time when
facing issues.
6 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 2.1, UC 2.3
control of power flows and Related TCs: TC 2.1.1, TC 2.1.2, TC 2.1.3, TC 2.1.4, TC 2.3
voltages
Short justification: TSO Power flow calculations will benefit from the integration of
real-time and near-forecasting information of RES energy production. Also in UC1,
new ways of RES control are investigated and could facilitate the control of the
power flows in the grid, considering RES generator an active actor in the process.
8 - Improve monitoring of net- Related UCs: UC 2.3
work assets Related TCs: TC 2.3
Short justification: TSO Power flow calculations will benefit from the integration of
real-time RES energy production data. CROSSBOW proposes through RES-CC a
gateway that simplifies the integration of data coming from RES units, alleviating
the need for the TSO to integrate heterogeneous technologies, protocols, and data
models.
10 - Frequent information ex- Related UCs: UC 2.3
change on actual active/reac- Related TCs: TC 2.3
tive generation/consumption
Short justification: This frequent information exchange on actual active/reactive
generation/consumption is one of the functionalities of RES-CC developed in UC3.
Functionality
11 - Allow grid users and ag- Related UCs: UC 2.2, UC 2.5, UC 2.6, UC2.8
gregators to participate in the Related TCs: TC 2.2, TC 2.5.1, TC 2.5.2, TC 2.6.1
ancillary services market
Short justification: Several use cases in HLU2 supports the ancillary services market
participation. First, the UC 2.2 and UC 2.8, related to production forecasting are
enablers of the market participation algorithms. Then UC 2.5 and UC 2.6 directly
investigate strategies for ancillary service market participation of RES assets. The
UC 2.6 goes beyond the typical RES assets AS market participation and investigates
a participation scheme where the available flexibility for AS market is maximized
(including the upward regulation energy), even at the cost of losing opportunities
of biding in the conventional energy markets.
12 - Operation schemes for Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC2.7
voltage/current control Related TCs: TC 2.5.1, TC 2.5.2, TC 2.7.1, TC 2.7.2, TC 2.7.3
Short justification: RES-CC offers functionalities for the TSO to analyse the security
of the grid, including voltage control. As part of UC 2.5 and 2.7, power flow
calculations are performed to obtain the appropriate reactive power set points and
deliver them to RES units.

13 - Intermittent sources of Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC2.7

generation to contribute to Related TCs: TC 2.5.1, TC 2.5.2, TC 2.7.1, TC 2.7.2, TC 2.7.3
system security
Short justification:
RES-CC offers functionalities for the TSO to analyse the security of the grid in two
dimensions:
• At the planning stage, using the day-ahead congestion forecast
information. This analysis may trigger the modification of the RES
production schedule (redispatch)
• At the real-time stage, using the real-time power flows, frequency, energy
mix and short-term state estimation. This analysis may trigger the
activation of ancillary services, especially RES unit’s curtailment.
In UC7 the most appropriate set of remedial actions (redispatch) are investigated
towards solving the security problem whilst at the same time minimising the impact
on generation schedules
In UC5, the most appropriate set of ancillary services activation at real-time are
considered towards facing a given issue in real-time. Potential issues include not
only security problems but also, undesired energy mix, lack of inertia, high prices,
etc.
Service D) Better planning of future network investment
Functionality
17 - Better models of Distrib- Related UCs: UC 2.2, UC2.8
uted Generation, storage, Related TCs: TC 2.2, TC 2.8
flexible loads, ancillary ser-
vices Connected products/HLUs: RES-CC
Short justification: UC 2.2 and UC 2.8 investigate in models for generation forecast
(at transmission and distribution side respectively), considering different
technologies and scenarios. The models are based on novel machine learning
techniques and build using only historical information from production, weather
conditions and grid status.
18 - Improved asset manage- Related UCs: UC 2.2, 2.4
ment and replacement strate- Related TCs: TC 2.2, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.3
gies
Short justification: UC 2.2 investigate on new forecasting strategies for TSO-level
production assets, and it also includes the periodic notification of these forecasts to
the TSO. RES-CC also features functionalities for managing the maintenance periods
of RES-CC, enabling seamless interaction between the TSO and the RES generators
to plan and schedule these periods in a way that does not negatively impact the
grid. These asset maintenance periods are also considered in the production
forecasting information transmitted to the TSO so that the TSO is always up-to-date
and aware of the upcoming production of all the RES assets integrated through RES-
CC.
Also, on UC2.4 new strategies are investigated to try to mitigate the impact of
curtailment and production redispatching by distributing it across the RES portfolio.
Functionality

20 - Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC 2.6

nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 2.5.1, TC 2.5.2, TC 2.6.1
tricity market
Connected products/HLUs: RES-CC, AM
Short justification: Electricity market participation is an enabler of different use
cases in RES-CC. It is a requirement for the later participation in ancillary markets,
that is investigated and tested in UC 2.5. and UC 2.6. RES-CC has developed
strategies to participate in the electricity market, and based on the results of this
market, the RES units participate in the ancillary services market.
Service F) Enabling and encouraging stronger and more direct involvement of consumers in their energy usage and
management
Functionality
32 - Improve information on Related UCs: UC 2.3
energy sources Related TCs: TC 2.3
Short justification: The frequent exchange of information about active/reactive and
generation/consumption energy among RES units and TSO is one of the
functionalities of RES-CC developed in UC3. This information complements the
energy mix information hold by the TSO.
Table 5: HLU2 Impact to CBNMO and Smart Grids
3.3.1.3 HLU3 - Cross-border storage of RES production/output

This high-level use case deals with the optimal management of RES and energy storage units intending to
identify new sources of income, increasing the revenues, and relieving the dependency from subsidies or
premium (out of the market) tariffs. Also, regional aspects are considered because the regional coupled
markets are considered in the energy exchanges. The main strategy for this is the collaboration of RES assets
with energy storage assets to exploit the synergies and provide benefits for both parts. The services provided
are described below.
Functionality
locations for any kind of de- Related TCs: TC 3.2.1, TC 3.3.1
vices
Connected products/HLUs: HLU2, HLU4, HLU9
Short justification: The aim of both UC3.2 & UC3.3 is the same, to alleviate the RES
integration problems (curtailment and redispatching needs) by using energy storage
assets. This also creates opportunities for better monetizing the RES and energy
storage units and alleviates the need for premium tariffs and subsidies for them,
thus facilitating and promoting the connectivity of new units.
Functionality
20 - Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 3.3
nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 3.3.1
tricity market
Short justification: Electricity market participation is an enabler of different use
cases in RES-CC and STO-CC. Specifically, in UC 3.3, the use of a bilateral energy
market for storage will be investigated, but it first requires the RES units to

participate in the electricity market. RES-CC has developed strategies to participate

in the electricity market, and actually, the (undesired) results of the electricity
market are the triggers of the UC 3.3 to activate the cross-border energy arbitrage
21 - Participation of virtual Related UCs: UC 3.3
power plants and aggregators Related TCs: TC 3.3.1
in the electricity market
Short justification: For the case of virtual power plants (VSP in CROSSBOW), RES-CC
will provide the same functionalities as for the conventional RES units, with the
difference that distributed generation forecasting algorithms will be used
3.3.1.4 HLU4 - Distributed storage for system stability and energy quality control
The CROSSBOW regional storage coordination centre (STO-CC), as one of the key project products, aims to
assess the coordination of centralised storage units at a national and regional level for improvement of the
stability of the system, enabling the provision of multiples services, such as improving penetration of
renewable energy sources (RES), the cross-border power transfer, frequency and voltage deviation occurred
within the networks. These functionalities are the core of the deployment and modelling of STO-CC, which
rely on the definition of the HLUCs defined for the large-scale storage solutions for the transmission network
(i.e. SP3).
Hence, the contribution of the STO-CC model considering the application of different HLUCs, is that it
provides an insight into the current coordination of centralised storage units’ practices at a national and
regional level. This allows consideration of the benefits of STO-CC applications, but most importantly it
permits quantifying the inclusion of the optimum operation of the transmission networks, by coordinating
the required actions to facilitate cross border storage of excess energy production that cannot be stored
locally.
Functionality
locations for any kind of de- Related TCs: TC 4.4.1, TC 4.5.1, TC 4.5.2, TC 4.5.3
vices
Connected products/HLUs: HLU5, HLU7
Short justification: Flexibility provided by DSM will facilitate/enable connection of
distributed RES, storage, etc.
Functionality
6 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 4.1
control of power flows and Related TCs: TC 4.1
voltages
Short justification: STO-CC can significantly reduce the RES curtailment within the
network. The Network analysis on the regional and national level in Bulgaria on a
96h level is showing that STO-CC can significantly reduce the impact of RES
penetration on a day-to-day basis.
change on actual active/reac- Related TCs: TC 4.4
Connected products/HLUs: /

Short justification: STO-CC is storing energy on RES Level (Bajina Basta) first. In the
second step, energy storage is possible on a regional level (Chaira). In third step
energy storage is also possible on a national level if local storage on a regional basis
is not possible in case of national storage the line congestion management (LCM) is
applied at the national level.
Functionality
11 - Allow grid users and ag- Related UCs: UC 4.1, UC 4.2, UC 4.3, UC 4.4
gregators to participate in the Related TCs: TC 4.1, TC 4.2, TC 4.3, TC 4.4
Short justification: For STO-CC the nationally and regional network demand/ supply
date and RES generation profiles are needed. Additionally, the market price for
ancillary services such as voltage and frequency are processed with STO-CC.
These aggregated data is enabling grid users & aggregators to participate in the
ancillary services market.
12 - Operation schemes for Related UCs: UC 4.2, UC 4.3
voltage/current control Related TCs: TC 4.2, TC 4.3
Connected products/HLUs: HLU9
Short justification: STO-CC contributes to improving the performance of the
voltages, reducing their amplitude and with it, the deviation from their voltage set
points.
Since the effect on the voltage deviation originally caused on the bus VALEKO21 by
both tripping lines is not significant, the contribution of STO-CC is little. Still, it helps
to reduce the undervoltage sooner than without STO-CC, especially at 400 kV.
Conversely, larger impact is produced on bus VMA_IZ11 once line 77 and 81 are
disconnected from the grid. This effect is also mitigated by STO-CC, where a more
prominent contribution performed by the storage system is achieved at 400 kV
zone.
Current control operating scheme is used frequency control, as described in UC02
STO-CC can be used for primary, secondary, and tertiary frequency regulation.
14 – System security assess- Related UCs: UC 4.1, UC 4.2, UC 4.3, UC 4.4
ment and management of Related TCs: TC 4.1, TC 4.2, TC 4.3, TC 4.4
remedies
Short justification: Network simulation clearly show that STO-CC is improving the
management of remedies within its 4 Use Cases:
UC1: STO-CC is connecting national and regional storage units for reducing the
amount of RES curtailment.
UC2: STO-CC can be used for primary, secondary, and tertiary frequency regulation
UC3: STO-CC helps to alleviate the effect on voltage deviations such as under-over
voltages occurrences when sudden load changes happen
UC4: STO CC can shift power loads on a local, regional and national level. The
advantage is that transmission lines operate more alleviate within the systems and
a superior level of network security can be achieved
16 - Solutions for demand re- Related UCs: UC 4.2, UC 4.4
sponse for system security in Related TCs: TC 4.2, TC 4.4
the required time


Short justification: The Grid Case Simulation Studies in Serbia & Bulgaria show that
STO-CC can be used for primary, secondary, and tertiary frequency regulation.
Therefore, the implementation of STO-CC is substantially improving the overall
frequency, resilience and security of the system.
Functionality
22 – Facilitate consumer par- Related UCs: UC 4.1, UC 4.2, UC 4.3, UC 4.4
ticipation in the electricity Related TCs: TC 4.1, TC 4.2, TC 4.3, TC 4.4
market
Short justification: As discussed in functionality C11 the STO-CC platform can
process electricity & market prices for ancillary services such as voltage and
frequency regulation. Therefore, consumer participation is principally possible.
3.3.1.5 HLU5 - Virtual Storage Plants

A Virtual Storage Plant (VSP) is a framework capable of integrating the characteristics and limitations of
distributed individual storage units – using the same or different storage technologies - while maximizing
their performance and reducing additional costs stemming from not-optimal usage. The concept of VSP will
be more and more relevant in the context of high penetration of renewable energy sources (RES) and the
increasing availability of storage technologies. Distributed storage technologies close to the end-users are
proved to provide more benefits over large-scale storage units. VSP aggregates multiple distributed storage
systems and can be regarded as a single responsive unit from the system operator’s perspective.
In the CROSSBOW framework, energy storage and demand-side response are identified as a flexible resource
that can potentially improve the cost-effectiveness and stability of the regional networks by cross-border
resource allocations. Different from a utility storage system (e.g. a PHS), distributed storage devices have
small capacities, but a large number of such devices are anticipated in the future power networks, e.g. the
backup energy storage systems in residential buildings, EVs, etc. Hence, the aggregated capacity of thousands
of such distributed energy storage is promising in providing various services to the power systems. The VSP
framework addresses the optimal coordination of these storage devices with desired scalability and
robustness. The VSP response (i.e. the aggregated response of individual storage devices) can be activated
to deliver the amount of power as requested by the TSOs in terms of manual frequency regulation or track
the automatic generation control (AGC) signal for secondary frequency regulation. Also, the cooperation
among several VSP aggregators can achieve automatic frequency regulation through multiple VSP assets,
which improve the power system frequency profile in addition to the existing frequency regulation
mechanism. On the other hand, considering the distributed storage units are mainly located in a
medium/low-voltage distribution network, they are exploited to solve the local voltage regulation in the
distribution network, regarding the over/under-voltage issues due to the output variations of renewables,
e.g. rooftop solar PV systems.
Functionality
3 - Use of network control sys- Related UCs: UC 5.2, 5.3, 5.4
tems for network purposes Related TCs: TC 5.2, TC 5.2, TC 5.4

Short justification: The VSP coordinates distributed storage devices to provide

ancillary services to the power networks. The control algorithms are based on the
distributed optimization over the cyber-physical system, in which the
communication network links each storage device with its neighbours and enhance
the power quality of the physical power networks.
Functionality
6 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 5.3, UC 5.4
control of power flows and Related TCs: TC 5.3, TC 5.4
voltages
Short justification: The VSP platform has a hierarchical architecture, in which
distributed storage devices located in the distribution network make up a VSP at
the lower layer, while multiple VSPs are further coordinated to provide system-level
services to the transmission network at the upper layer. Specifically, the control
algorithm of a VSP enables its distributed storage units to track a given power
reference at the aggregated level and provide voltage regulation in the local
distribution network in the meanwhile. Furthermore, the cooperation of multiple
VSPs among a multi-area network provides cost-effective storage usage by
operating the interconnected system as a whole, while the additional power flows
result from the cross-border storage coordination should be restricted to prevent
congestions on tie-lines.
change on actual active/reac- Related TCs: TC 5.1 (to be developed in the final demonstration)
Short justification: TSO-DSO framework envisages the close collaboration among
system operators to exchange measurements and forecasts in the interconnection
points, thus providing enhanced monitoring to facilitate the optimal coordination
of resources between the local and the central system, as well as identification of
possible threats which can endanger the safe operation of the power system.
Functionality
11 - Allow grid users and ag- Related UCs: UC 5.5
gregators to participate in the Related TCs: TC 5.5
Short justification: VSP Market Participation algorithm can offer significant benefit
to the system operator by providing resources through the market framework that
could strengthen the safe operation of the grid, through the provision of ancillary
services in local scale that can alleviate the intermittent behaviour of the distributed
RES penetration.
12 – Operation schemes for Related UCs: UC 5.3
voltage/current control Related TCs: TC 5.3
Short justification: This is similar to functionality 6 in service B. The voltage
regulation provides by VSP is mainly identified in the local distribution network
where the storage devices are located, although the VSP can be controlled to
provide a fixed reactive power at the aggregated level injecting into the
transmission level from the distribution network for voltage support. The voltage of

the distribution network is regulated during the storage dispatch contributing to the
aggregated active/reactive power.
Functionality
21 – Participation of virtual Related UCs: UC 5.5
power plants and aggregators Related TCs: TC 5.5
Short justification: VSP Market Participation algorithm fosters the VSPs to
participate in multiple market segments (day-ahead, intraday and balancing
market), by predicting the best possible outcome for the VSP/aggregator,
considering the simultaneous participation of the storage facility in different
segments of the electricity market. This is accomplished by charging/discharging
energy schedules and reserve provisions (FCR, FRR, RR) of energy storage.
3.3.1.6 HLU6 - Transnational Demand Side Management

One of the main aims of the DSM Integration Platform (DSM-IP) development is to alleviate identified
challenges of cross border power transfers in existing and future transmission networks at regional and global
level, relying on efficient transnational use of demand-side management (DSM). The concept of wide-scale
DSM is becoming increasingly important due to the high penetration of renewable energy sources (RES) and
the availability of controllable loads in the system. DSM-IP should therefore serve as an intermediary
between large concentrated controllable loads (DSM assets) and/or smaller distributed ones on one side,
and the transmission system operator (TSO) on the other.
In the CROSSBOW framework, energy storage and demand-side response are identified as flexible resources
that can potentially improve the cost-effectiveness and stability of the regional networks by cross-border
resource allocations. DSM-IP, in particular, will enable allocation of the most effective DSM assets with the
use of sensitivity analysis, to facilitate power transfers between countries and enable high penetration of RES
in the region. DSM assets currently include mainly large industrial users connected directly to the
transmission level, but could potentially include, with the appropriate monitoring and control infrastructure,
aggregated users at the distribution network level. This would eventually increase end-users’ involvement,
regardless of their individual size, in a more flexible operation of the transmission network.
Functionality
locations for any kind of de- Related TCs: TC 6.4.1, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
vices
Short justification: Flexibility provided by DSM will facilitate/enable connection of
distributed RES, storage, etc.
Functionality
6 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.6
control of power flows and Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
voltages

Short justification: By deploying ICTs for DSM, monitoring of power flows and
voltages is possible. DSM provides efficient and economic ways to control power
flows and voltages, avoids congestion and voltage collapse.
7 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 6.6
observability of grids down to Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
the low voltage levels
Short justification: By deploying ICT for DSM, monitoring is improved.
8 - Improve monitoring of net- Related UCs: UC 6.6
work assets Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
Short justification: TSO-DSO framework envisages the close collaboration among
system operators to exchange measurements and forecasts in the interconnection
points, thus providing enhanced monitoring to facilitate the optimal coordination
of resources between the local and the central system, as well as identification of
possible threats which can endanger the safe operation of the power system.
10 - Frequent information ex- Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
change on actual active/reac- Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
Functionality
11 - Allow grid users and ag- Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
gregators to participate in the Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
Short justification: DSM providers may actively participate in the following
activities: providing reserves for frequency control, network defence service and
congestion management service, i.e. ancillary services.
12 - Operation schemes for Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2
voltage/current control Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2
Short justification: DSM can be used for voltage control
16 - Solutions for demand re- Related UCs: UC 6.6
sponse for system security in Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
the required time
Short justification: DSM-IP involves TSOs being aware of the security of the
distribution system, and the DSO’s instructions for DSM in its network. Similarly, the
TSO should be informed of any DSO request for DSM services, which could have an
impact on the operation of the power system as a whole (i.e., security, energy
balancing and frequency control). Also, TSOs and DSOs should put in place measures
to ensure that the DSM action will not endanger the security of the distribution
system. TSO-DSO framework for the demo in Crete focuses on the close
collaboration between system operators to ensure the security of supply. Demand
response is applied in the form of smart curtailment of load or RES production to
ensure the safe operation of the grid.


Functionality
17 - Better models of Distrib- Related UCs: UC 6.4, UC 6.5
uted Generation, storage, Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
flexible loads, ancillary ser-
vices Connected products/HLUs: /
Short justification: Monitoring of DSM assets enhances modelling of flexible loads
and their contributions to ancillary services.
18 - Improved asset manage- Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
ment and replacement strate- Related TCs: TC 6.4.1, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
gies
Short justification: Usually, the objective of DSM is to encourage end-users to
reduce demand consumption during peak times or shift the energy use to off-peak
times such as night times to cater for system operational economics, network
investment deferral, and system reliability enhancement.
19 - Additional information Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
on grid quality and consump- Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
tion by metering for planning
Functionality
20 – Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 6.3, UC 6.5
nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
tricity market
Short justification: The DSM-IP aims at enhancing coordinated cross-border
participation of DSM assets, which may be used to alleviate different operational
issues, i.e., those related to frequency, voltage, line congestion, or increased
penetration of renewable generation, at a single or multiple TSO level.
21 – Participation of virtual Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
power plants and aggregators Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
Short justification: The TSO, which is responsible for balancing the grid, is one of the
main procurers of flexibility services. Another function of flexibility is to manage
congestion in the distribution network for which the DSO is the buyer of flexibility.
The third usage of flexibility is for portfolio optimization - the market players (e.g.
aggregators, suppliers, Balance Responsible Parties, etc.) can obtain flexibility
services to fulfil their energy obligations in a cost-efficient way. This is enhanced by
DSM-IP.
22 – Facilitate consumer par- Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
ticipation in the electricity Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
market
Short justification: DSM is an opportunity for consumers to improve their energy
usage and claim payback from the electricity market.
24 - Improvement to industry Related UCs: UC 6.1, UC 6.2, UC 6.3, UC 6.5, UC 6.6
systems (for settlement, sys- Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
tem balance, scheduling)

Short justification: Industrial systems are considered as the main providers of DSM
due to their high flexibility/controllability. DSM is also an opportunity for industrial
systems to improve their energy usage and claim payback from the electricity
market (e.g. appropriate tariffs).
25 - Support the adoption of Related UCs: UC 6.6
intelligent home/facilities au- Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
tomation and smart devices
Short justification: Intelligent home/facilities automation and smart devices are one
of the main sources of DSM, they provide enhanced communication and control
between system operators and grid users, more efficient use of electrical power and
system flexibility enhancement. Adoption of intelligent home/facilities automation
are motivated by the wider deployment of DSM.
26 – Improve customer level Related UCs: UC 6.6
reporting in the case of inter- Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
ruptions
Short justification: Most DSM programmes nowadays depend on efficient and high-
quality communications between system operators and grid users by, for example,
smart meters. Grid users could receive more information and obtain a better
understanding of their electricity usage pattern. Receiving advance notice of
planned interruptions is one of the main functions of smart communication tools
and it is also one of the fundamental factors to deploy DSM
management
Functionality
29 – Remote management of Related UCs: UC 6.6
meters and consumer subsys- Related TCs: TC 6.2.1, TC 6.2.2, TC 6.5.1, TC 6.5.2, TC 6.5.3
tems (e.g. storage equip-
ment) Connected products/HLUs: /
Short justification: Remote monitoring and control of consumer side meters and
subsystems is one of the best methods of deploying DSM. By participating DSM
strategy, consumers provide information and access for their flexible/controllable
appliances which enhance the remote management of meters and subsystems on
the consumer side.
30 – Consumption/injection Related UCs: UC 6.6
data and price signals by dif- Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
ferent means
Short justification: DSM providers are allowed to submit bids to the electricity
market to provide ancillary services.
31 – Improve energy usage in- Related UCs: UC 6.6
formation Related TCs: TC to be developed for a final demonstration
Short justification: DSM deployment enhances and improves communication and
information exchange between system operators and users. Since the DSM could
modify the users' energy consumption pattern, it motivates energy usage data
mining, storage, exchange and further analyses.

3.3.1.7 HLU7 - Hybrid RES Dispatchable Plants

RES-DU product is focused on supporting several functionalities that hybrid power plant can bring to the
power systems of different countries at the European level.
These functionalities are considered in the five UCs included in HLU7, as showed below:
- HLU7-UC01 Application of Hybrid Power Plants for Ancillary Services: focused on the proper
management of RES and Storage units for frequency control.
- HLU7-UC02 Revenues improvement from Hybrid power plants: focused on maximizing the Generator
revenues through the energy time-shifting mechanism.
- HLU7-UC03 Analysis of quality services provided by Hybrid power plants: oriented to demonstrate
the capabilities of the Hybrid power plant against a black-out event.
- HLU7-UC04 Analysis of a power supply according to the demand: focused on demonstrating the
Hybrid power plant flexibility, allowing to provide the required power for different demand power
profiles.
- HLU7-UC05 Hybrid power plant design according to System Operator requirements: oriented to
configure new hybrid power plants based on different restrictions and design conditions.
The impact of the HLU7 on the cross-border network and market operation is mostly associated with the
maximization of variable RES penetration in the power mix – in combination with non-variable RES and
storage technologies – guaranteeing grid security and stability. To facilitate the realization of the initial steps
of the CBA, an attempt is made to identify and justify how the products and UCs from HLU7 are related with
some of the proposed services and functionalities as described in the table below.
Functionality
5 – Automated fault identifi- Related UCs: UC 7.3
cation/grid reconfiguration, Related TCs: TC 7.3
reducing outage times
Short justification: RES-DU product can support grid stability after a black-out event
through synchronous generators from biogas, biogas and hydro pump storage
technologies. Besides, during the black-out event batteries can be charged from PV
and Wind technologies, reducing curtailment and providing an extra capacity to the
system, available for the system when non-synchronous generators are acceptable
in the power system.
8 – Improve monitoring of Related UCs: UC 7.1, UC7.2, UC7.4
network assets Related TCs: TC 7.1, TC7.2, TC7.4.1 and TC7.4.2
Short justification: RES-DU web viewer allows the continuous assets monitoring,
showing the current values of active power generation, as well as the forecasted
values for the rest of the day under consideration. Also, the capacity for providing
ancillary services can be analysed continuously.
10 – Frequent information ex- Related UCs: UC7.4
change on actual active/reac- Related TCs: TC7.4.2


Short justification: RES-DU web viewer shows the active power generated from all
the technologies included in the hybrid power plant. This information is
permanently accessible for RES-CC product in direct connection with WAMAS
product.
Functionality
13 – Intermittent sources of Related UCs: UC 7.3, UC 7.4
generation to contribute to Related TCs: TC 7.3, TC 7.4.1 and TC 7.4.2
system security
Short justification: RES-DU product can manage the proper combination of RES
sources (variable and non-variable) and storage technologies to provide a unique
response with higher levels of stability, flexibility and security.
14 – System security assess- Related UCs: UC 7.1, UC 7.3
ment and management of Related TCs: TC 7.1, TC 7.3
remedies
Short justification: RES-DU product can provide support against grid instabilities
through ancillary services for frequency regulation, and support after a blackout
event – considering the non-variable sources and storage technologies availability.
Functionality
18 – Improved asset manage- Related UCs: UC 7.5
ment and replacement strate- Related TCs: N/A
gies
Short justification: One of the RES-DU functionalities allows to configure new hybrid
power plants for a selected location, considering forecasted power demand, solar
and wind resources, and required levels of flexibility, dispatchability, firmness, etc.
Functionality
20 – Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 7.1, UC 7.2, UC7.4
nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 7.1, TC 7.2, TC 7.4.1 and TC 7.4.2
tricity market
Short justification: RES-DU product allows the participation of hybrid power plants
in wholesale and ancillary services markets considering the forecasted power
production based on weather and power demand forecasting inputs.
management
Functionality
32 – Improve information on Related UCs: UC 7.4
energy sources Related TCs: TC 7.4.1, TC 7.4.2
Short justification: RES-DU viewer can provide valuable information to the
consumers, showing the forecasted power production (and the technologies
involved in the generation mix each time step) in comparison with the expected
power demand.

3.3.1.8 HLU8 - Cooperative Ownership of Flexibility Assets

The scope of HLU8 goes to Cooperative Flexibility Platform (further in text: Cooperative) establishment. The
established Cooperative will enable flexibility providers (e.g. prosumers, consumers and distributed
generation) to organize themselves and independently from conventional electricity players, like retailers,
offer aggregated flexibilities at national balancing markets or other suitable electricity markets. This would
increase competition, improve liquidity and most likely drive prices down. This means TSO would get more
balancing offers to choose from (some might even be location-specific) and due to more competition, its
balancing costs would decrease.
An agreement between a market actor or group of actors (e.g. RES, C&I consumers, community, retailer,
aggregator, balance group, etc.) on establishing an energy/flexibility cooperative as an aggregation trading
platform to aggregate and monetize flexibilities on electricity markets can be achieved by Crossbow product
“Cooperative Flexibility Platform” (CFP). The Cooperative is set up to serve the interests of its members.
Cooperative is set up according to basic cooperative standards that demand democratic control and profit-
sharing scheme. Cooperative bylaws should be set up in a way to reach the standards and at the same time
follow the government legislation.
The Cooperative articles of incorporation and its subsequent bylaws should provide a fair-play environment
for all its members. In real life, we can expect many different cooperative models to emerge. However, since
the Cooperative will be a free and voluntary association, its members should have a possibility to exit, if the
cooperative does not anymore fulfil their business interests. The objective is to provide flexible capacity bids
that could be offered to different electricity balancing markets. Further, to send near real-time data from
Flexibility service provider to TSO to perform validation and receive back continues controlling signal (set-
point) and redistribute this signal to the DR and DG assets. When Flexibility service provider (VPP) activates
DR&DG units, it generates revenue. Part of this revenue needs to be redistributed to the flexibilities
owner/owners defined in the CFP.
Functionality
1 - Facilitate connections at all Related UCs: UC 8.6, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
locations for any kind of de- Connected products/HLUs: /
vices
Short justification: The energy assets – devices that support the particular
communication channels used within the CROSSBOW WP11, can support different
flexibility services.
3 - Use of network control sys- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
tems for network purposes
Short justification: The CFP tool allows energy assets that are the part of its portfolio
be used on different energy/balancing markets. This CFP functionality directly
impacts the power network by controlling the energy assets.
Functionality
5 - Automated fault identifica- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
tion/grid reconfiguration, re- Connected products/HLUs: HLU9
ducing outage times
Short justification: By participating in the energy/balancing markets the CFP tool
can automatically react to the power network faults based on the information
received by the TSO.

7 - Enhance monitoring and Related UCs: UC 8.6, UC 8.7, UC 8.8

observability of grids down to
Short justification: CFP tool enables real-time monitoring and historical analysis of
the low voltage levels the particular energy assets on different voltage levels.
8 - Improve monitoring of net- Related UCs: UC 8.6, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
work assets
the particular energy assets on different voltage levels.
9 - Identification of technical Related UCs: UC 8.6, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
and non-technical losses by Short justification: CFP tool enables real-time monitoring and historical analysis of
power flow analysis
the particular energy assets while operating with various of the data sent by the
energy assets. While monitoring the real-time data the CFP can identify when the
energy assets have issues and inform the asset owners about it.
10 - Frequent information ex- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
change on actual active/reac- Short justification: The CFP tool allows real-time monitoring and control of the
tive generation/consumption energy assets that are the part of its portfolio.
Functionality
11 - Allow grid users and ag- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
gregators to participate in the Connected products/HLUs: HLU9
Short justification: The CFP tool allows energy assets that are the part of its portfolio
be used on different energy/balancing markets. This CFP functionality directly
impacts the power network by controlling the energy assets.
13 – Intermittent sources of Related UCs: UC 8.7
generation to contribute to Connected products/HLUs: HLU9
system security
Short justification: The CFP tool allows the integration of different types of energy
assets that are the part of its portfolio to be used on different energy/balancing
markets. An example is the BESS which can significantly improve the security of the
market products by its nature of fast power responses. Once such energy asset is a
part of the portfolio it significantly improves the overall service and the quality of
the purchased energy products.
14 - System security assess- Related UCs: UC 8.7
ment and management of Connected products/HLUs: HLU9
remedies
Short justification: By the multi-market integration the CFP tool enables to purchase
additional flexibility due to lost/unplanned events. This significantly improves the
entire portfolio.
15 - Solutions for demand re- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
sponse for system security in Connected products/HLUs: HLU9
the required time
Short justification: The CFP tool allows various types of energy assets including
demand response, such as C&I etc. that are the part of its portfolio to be used on
different energy/balancing markets. Allowing different types of energy assets
increase the number of flexibility enabled energy assets thus increase the liquidity
of flexibility enabled device and finally the security of entire power network.
Functionality
17 - Better models of Distrib- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
uted Generation, storage, Short justification: CFP tool enables real-time monitoring and historical analysis of
the particular energy assets. Collecting a large amount of data on each energy asset

flexible loads, ancillary ser- providing flexibility increase the data used for better modelling and increase the
vices efficiency of the portfolio with more accurate power forecasting.
18 - Improved asset manage- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
ment and replacement strate- Short justification: CFP tool enables real-time monitoring and historical analysis of
gies
the particular energy assets. Collecting a large amount of data on each energy asset
providing flexibility provides in-depth knowledge of the energy assets and prevents
potential problems beforehand. An example: the BESS capacity decreases during
the time due to the physical deformation of the BESS parts.
19 - Additional information Related UCs: UC 8.6, UC 8.7, UC 8.8
on grid quality and consump-
tion by metering for planning
the particular energy assets. While collection large amount of energy asset data
through time CFP user/trader gets more understanding of the portfolio which
enables better planning and applying better trading strategies.
Functionality
20 – Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 8.8
tricity market
Short justification: The CFP tool allows various types of energy assets including
generation units such as PV, Wind, Diezel gen-sets, etc. that are the part of its
portfolio be used on different energy/balancing markets.
21 – Participation of virtual Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
power plants and aggregators Related TCs: TC 8.8
Short justification: The CFP tool as the enhanced VPP tool allows aggregation of
various types of energy. The VPP might aggregate energy assets that, by themself,
wouldn’t be able to participate in the energy/balancing market. The VPP tool, by
aggregation, increases the flexibility thus improving the efficiently of the entire
power network.
22 – Facilitate consumer par- Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
ticipation in the electricity Related TCs: TC 8.8
market
Short justification: The CFP tool allows integration of various types of energy assets
including consumers on a different level: demand response, such as C&I or even the
households. This energy assets are part of its portfolio and can be used on different
energy/balancing markets. Allowing different types of energy assets increase the
number of flexibility enabled energy assets thus increase the liquidity of flexibility
enabled device and finally the security of entire power network.
26 – Improve customer level Related UCs: UC 8.5, UC 8.6, UC 8.7
reporting in the case of inter- Related TCs: TC 8.8
ruptions
the particular energy assets while operating with various of the data sent by the
energy assets. While monitoring the real-time data the CFP can identify when the
energy assets have issues and inform the asset owners about it.

3.3.1.9 HLU9 - Transnational Ancillary and Wholesale Market

The HLU9 proposes a novel market design for ancillary services and wholesale electricity market trading
aligned with the latest grid code and market development to enhance the integration of RES and DR. In
accordance with that we have defined three UCs and developed two independent market platforms with
demonstrated innovative concepts, based on blockchain technology, microservices and APIs to demonstrate
the contractual and payment possibilities.
- HLU9-UC01 – System market platform for mFRR
The System market platform for Frequency Restoration Reserves with manual activation (mFRR platform)
represents Ancillary services market intended for the TSOs to procure balancing energy. The platform uses a
TSO – TSO model, where Balancing Service Providers (BSPs) can send their bids to the TSO and the TSOs
forward them to the platform. The mFRR platform should bolster non-discrimination between MPs
considering various technical needs and capabilities of generation sources, energy storage and demand
response solutions.
- HLU9-UC02 – Intraday energy market platform
The Intraday Energy Market (ID) platform represent a wholesale market conducted in an intraday continuous
mode. The ID platform is developed as a software demonstration and will not achieve the production-ready
status. The ID platform represents a wholesale electricity market, where market participants (MPs) can trade
based on closed contracts. The ID platform is offering MPs 24/7 trading with predefined energy products.
The ID platform enables cross-border trading among multiple countries and could increase the efficiency
compared to the single (only between two countries) cross-border intraday trading that is sometimes still
present in the countries of South-Eastern Europe (SEE). The platform enables MPs from one country to view
orders from another country. Similarly, orders can be matched between two MPs from different countries
present on the platform. The only constraint for cross-border trading is the available CZC.
- HLU9-UC03 – Measurement of energies within aFRP
HLU9-UC03 consist of new proposed solutions for the measurement of balancing energies within Frequency
Restoration Reserves with automatic activation (aFRR). aFRR is activated automatically and continuously in
both directions (upward and downward regulation). aFRR is a fast and automatic process with very short
activation time (between 30 seconds and 15 minutes) and remains active as long as it is needed. Currently,
the main solution for settlement is based on the “regulation order” issued to generators. Ac-cording Grid
Codes, the settlement can base also on the “real measurement of balancing energies”. This Use Case is
related to the measurement of energy activated for automatic frequency restoration for a specific unit that
is providing aFRR based also on the “real measurement of balancing energies” (with one-minute load profile
meters).
The HLU and platforms are described in detail in the deliverable CROSSBOW’s D10.2: Novel balancing and
wholesale electricity market design. The main objectives are described in D2.2 CROSSBOW Use cases,
scenarios and KPIs identification, D2.3 CROSSBOW demo clusters formal analysis, and many other
deliverables from WP12 - Integration and deployment of CROSSBOW ecosystem and WP13 - Large scale
demonstration Activities of the integrated CROSSBOW ecosystem where it is described how the HLU9 is
integrated and deployed within the CROSSBOW ecosystem and which demonstration activities are integrated
within the project.
The impact of the HLU9 on the cross-border network and market operation is mostly associated with the
regional connection on the Intraday Energy Market platform and System market platform for mFRR and
boosted competition due to the market participants from the region. To facilitate the realization of the initial
steps of the CBA, an attempt is made to identify and justify how our products and UCs from HLU9 are related
with some of the proposed services and functionalities as described in the table below.

Functionality
8 - Improve monitoring of net- Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.2
work assets Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.2
Short justification: Monitoring of the network assets is possible using the proper
measuring infrastructure and handling the correct information. ID and mFRR
platforms could collect the information about the available CZCs from TSOs which
are connected to the platform through APIs. TSOs could be connected with SCADA
and update the information about the network conditions regularly and send
necessary signals for activations.
Functionality
11 - Allow grid users and ag- Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.3
gregators to participate in the Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.3
Short justification: The mFRR platform bolsters non-discrimination between MPs
considering various technical needs and capabilities of generation sources, energy
storage and demand response solutions. The platform and corresponding services
are defined in a transparent and technologically neutral manner which ensure non-
discriminatory access to all MPs. Bids are merged onto a common merit order list
for activation by TSOs through a common activation optimisation function.
The proposed procedure for aFRR balancing energies measurement allows the
connection of more meters associated with small generators/storage that are
creating a virtual power plant. To access the balancing energy market, you should
also be part of the ancillary services market. This will allow even smaller grid users
to be part of the balancing process under aggregation mode.
13 – Intermittent sources of Related UCs: UC 9.1
generation to contribute to Related TCs: TC 9.1
system security
Short justification: The mFRR platform can enhance the participation of intermittent
sources combined with energy storage due to the short Full Activation Times
required to participate on the platform that suite these sources. Virtual Power
Plants could also participate in this market and offer their services to enhance
system security and generate profit.
Functionality
20 – Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.2
nected generators in the elec- Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.2
tricity market
Short justification: The participation of connected generators as well as any power
plant could be enhanced due to the transnational market which would increase
liquidity on the market. Power plants in regions with lower prices could be activated
more often.
21 – Participation of virtual Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.2, UC 9.3
power plants and aggregators Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.2, TC 9.3


Short justification: The participation of Virtual Power Plants and any aggregators in
the electricity market could increase liquidity on the market. By enabling the
enhanced participation of flexibility assets with lower marginal prices the social
welfare in the region could increase, and the Cross-Zonal capacities could be better
allocated. Virtual Power Plants in regions with lower prices could be activated more
often.
The proposed procedure for aFRR balancing energies measurement allows the
connection of more meters associated with small generators/storage that are
creating a virtual power plant. The case will be demonstrated under Stage 4 –
Aggregation, of UC 9.3 (TC 9.3). This will allow even smaller grid users to be part of
the balancing process under aggregation mode.
22 – Facilitate consumer par- Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.2
ticipation in the electricity Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.2
market
Short justification: With updated legislative framework to assess the conditions are
in place for energy consumers to participate actively in energy markets through
aggregators and actively offering their flexibility on the ID market as well as offering
services to the TSO. In any case, their role would be indirect, but through
aggregators, they could be involved in the market. Consumers would become
Energy Market Actors and able to provide for the energy industry and network the
necessary services.
24 – Improvement to industry Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.2, UC 9.3
systems (for settlement, sys- Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.2. TC 9.3
tem balance, scheduling)
Short justification: Due to the harmonized set of rules for all market participants in
the region, more advanced rules should be put in place and countries with less
developed energy markets and systems for settlement, scheduling, system balance
would have to adapt to participate.
The proposed method for aFRR balancing energies measurement brings significant
improvement of the accuracy of the measurement process and consequently will
improve the settlement results within the energy balancing process. See TC 9.3
results with errors of current methods (SCADA) compared to the proposed method
(one-minute load profiles).
management
Functionality
30 - Consumption/injection Related UCs: UC 9.2
data and price signals by dif- Related TCs: TC 9.2
ferent means
Short justification: Due to the participation of aggregators on the market and the
possibility of them also combining the demand response units. With this, we get
maximum benefits for society from the cross-border competition and provide the
right signals and incentives to drive the right investments, while fully integrating
increasing shares of renewable energies.
32 - Improve information on Related UCs: UC 9.1, UC 9.2
energy sources Related TCs: TC 9.1, TC 9.2


Short justification: Due to the harmonized set of rules for all market participants in
the region, more advanced rules should be put in place and countries with less
developed energy markets and systems for settlement, scheduling, system balance
would have to adapt to participate.
Summary and target impacts

Based on the information collected and analysed in the previous subsection, the project has compiled the
table presented in the 8.3. The assets of CROSSBOW HLU are assigned to specific functionalities of the
CBNMO and Smart Grid according to the methodology in [7]. Our initial analysis showed that HLU6 -
Transnational Demand Side Management, HLU8 - Cooperative Ownership from Flexibility Assets and HLU2 -
Transnational RES management tools identified the most functionalities. However, all tools have a significant
impact, which varies according to their scope. During the evaluation phase of the project, we will also review
the techno-economic, social and environmental KPIs which are described in more detail in section 4.
HLU1 Regional Operation Centre Balancing Cockpit ROC-BC
HLU2 Cross-border RES management
HLU3 Cross-border storage of RES production/output

HLU4 Distributed storage for system stability and energy quality
control
HLU5 Virtual Storage Plant
HLU6 Transnational Demand Side Management
HLU7 Hybrid RES Dispatchable Plants
HLU8 Cooperative Ownership of Flexiblity Assets
HLU9 Transnational Ancillary and Wholesale Market
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Total impact
Figure 4: CROSSBOW HLUs/products impact to CBNMO and Smart Grids functionalities
Stage 3: Functionalities to benefits mapping

The main objective of Stage 2, is to map the functionalities that were identified in the previous stage to the
benefits that they provide. The CBA guidelines suggest that the starting point in the use of 22 benefits
suggested by the EPRI methodology and related to Smart Grids, [7]. At this point in the CROSSBOW project,
the first 2 stages were completed and the rest is still ongoing.
Stage 4: Establish the baseline scenarios

In the first three stages of the CBA, the project’s assets are mapped to functionalities and to the benefits that
they provide. The next important stage includes establishing a baseline scenario, that will be later-on used
to compare the impact of the project with the do-nothing scenario. The goal of this stage is to identify the
“control state” that reflects the state without the development and the impacts imposed by the products in

the CROSSBOW project or in other words, the state if the project had not taken place. This could also be the
starting point for conducting a CBA because it is independent of the first three stages. Special attention
should be given to the establishment of the baseline, as it is critical to the CBA and could be the tipping point
of economic viability. The baseline will be used, when comparing the difference between the costs and
benefits associated with the Business as Usual (BaU) scenario and the scenario where the project occurs [7].
To accurately estimate the BaU, it is necessary to identify all potential end-users of the project, because the
project can impact every one of them differently. In this stage, we can detect some overlapping with the next
stage: Identification of benefits. Considering the products included in the CROSSBOW project the following
potential end-users were identified: TSOs, DSOs, aggregators and suppliers. Consequently, in the further
stages of the CROSSBOW project, the information regarding the BaU for these users will be collected. It is
reasonable that business models are made for both scenarios and the actors involved in the project. The
associated business model is expected to have a relevant impact on the BaU, after the implementation of the
project.
HLUs and corresponding products developed in the CROSSBOW project have a similarly high-level business
model: a software platform that needs to be installed in an operational centre and also needs to be
connected with a number of points in the power network, equipped with new sensors or using existing ones.
Of course, there are differences between products, but the structure of the business plan is similar.
Considering the above-mentioned business model of the products developed in CROSSBOW, based on the
experience of the authors, it is most appropriate to use marginal or incremental costs and benefits associated
with their implementation.
For the development of the baseline in CROSSBOW the historical data (e.g. consumption level, electricity
generated by RES, balancing market volumes, electricity prices, and others) will be used, relevant for the
power systems where the products have been installed and tested, as follows (see deliverable D13.2 –
CROSSBOW integrated ecosystem preliminary demonstration). To be relevant and provide accurate
information, the historical data must be collected for relatively normal and stable conditions of operation.
Using information from periods with large outages or other major disturbances with significant impact on
the electricity markets in the region must be avoided. Considering a large number of parameters (discount
rate, electricity prices, RES based electricity generation, and others) whose value must be assessed and
forecasted, in some cases, a sensitivity analysis is required, in order to complement the CBA results, for a
sounded conclusion. In line with the recommendation from [7], the calculations and analyses will be
conducted considering all products as fully finalized (testing versions or similar will not be considered in CBA).
Stage 5: Identification and quantification of the benefits

The benefits of a project represent the change between the baseline and the impact of the project. For the
comparison of costs and benefits, the project first needs to identify and gather the data required to transform
various benefits to the common denominator, money. For the CBA the benefits may be grouped into two
main categories: financial and economic. The guidelines suggest, that for each benefit identified in Stage 3,
where we map functionalities to benefits, a baseline is established. To adequately compare the data, it the
scenarios of before and after the project implementation should be considered. The quantified benefits
represent the difference between the BaU scenario and the scenario where the project solutions are
implemented. Some benefits are easier to bring to transform into monetary term and others require more
effort to monetise [7].
In this subchapter, examples of financial and economic benefits to be considered for the CROSSBOW products
are presented. The monetization of the benefits for each product will be further performed in the next period
of the project. It has to be mentioned that some of the benefits may be used in both evaluations (financial
and economic): e.g. sales increase, while others are specific for one or another of the categories.
Financial benefits can be described as a category of benefits that has a direct and positive financial impact
for the key stakeholders directly involved in the use of the product. The quantification of these benefits and

the results of the CBA are very strong arguments for the acquisition of the product (software platform in our
case). Only the cash inflows and outflows are considered in the financial analysis and the positive financial
impact can be an increase of the income or a reduction of the costs. In this category the following benefits
may be included:
- Sales increase of a product or a service – income increase type
- Reduction of costs for maintenance – savings type
- Reduction of costs for the operation of the Balancing Market – savings type
- Reduction of costs for salaries – savings type
- Reduction of costs for losses – savings type
- Reduction of penalties for SAIFI, SAIDI and CAIDI indicators – savings type
- Increase of the monetary bonuses related to successful investments – income increase type
Economic benefits can be described as a category of the much-diversified spectrum of benefits because it
includes not only the benefits registered by the key stakeholders involved in the product but the benefits
registered by the entire economy. For example, suppose the utilisation of a product has as one of the results
the reduction of the CO2 emissions. In this situation, the company using the product may not register any
direct benefits but the economy as a whole is benefiting significantly. As compared with the Financial Benefits
one may easily see that Economic Benefits are sometimes much more challenging to monetise. In this
category the following benefits may be included:
- Reduction of the CO2 emissions
- Increase in customer satisfaction
- Increase in the quality of supply
- Reduction of curtailments for electricity generators powered by RES
- Increase of the installed power in electricity generators powered by RES.
Stage 6: Identification and quantification of the costs

Similarly to the previous stage, the costs of a project represent the change between the baseline scenario
and the costs that occur due to the project implementation. The guidelines suggest that the process of
quantifying the costs of the project is simpler than the one of quantifying the benefits. Nevertheless, all
possible costs have to be carefully considered as this is a vital part of the CBA.
The costs can be either estimated based on the investments or estimated based on the prices obtained from
the marketplace [7]. One may identify two types of costs: investments costs (Capital Expenditures – CAPEX)
and operation & maintenance costs (Operational Expenditures – OPEX). Both must be considered in CBA, to
accurately assess the project’s economic viability. In the case of the electricity network operators (TSOs and
DSOs), the regulatory framework has a different approach for each of the above-mentioned expenditures.
While the increase of CAPEX is incentivised by bonuses, the OPEX value seeks to stay constant or decrease.
Also, currently in all EU member states, the acquisition of a software platform is not included in CAPEX but
OPEX. Details, like the one just described, need to be carefully analysed for a meaningful categorization of
costs and the comparison later-on. The costs need to be accurately estimated by using the amortization of
costs over time, depreciation, but taxes should not be included in the CBA. The differentiation between these
two costs is important because CAPEX is paid only once (as an investment) and should be amortized
accordingly. On the other hand, OPEX should be included in every year of the horizon of CBA.
To collect the relevant information regarding the costs associated with the products developed in
CROSSBOW, the initial version of the questionnaire is presented in Annex 8.8. The information collected by

the means of this questionnaire will be processed and used in the following stages of the CROSSBOW project
for performing CBA.
Capital Expenditures (CAPEX) analysis

Capital Expenditures (CAPEX) are often defined as the funds used by an organization to acquire, upgrade and
maintain physical assets in business’ operations. The expenditures are considered as an investment by a
company to undertake new projects or produce products that provide various services and functionalities,
[14], [15].
In the case of CROSSBOW products, the following costs can be included in CAPEX:
- The building, upgrading or extending an existing power grid equipment,
- Acquiring the necessary hardware assets: servers (physical units) and upgrades of control centres,
- Installation of the sensors in the several points of the power network,
- Setup telecommunication channels with the sensors and other parties involved in the activity.
In case one or more of the acquisitions mentioned above are useful for more than one product (e.g. one
server may be used for the installation of several software platforms and/or programs, developed in
CROSSBOW or not), the product developer will assess, as accurately as possible, the percentage of the
investment that will be allocated to the respective product. The assessment will be based on the percentage
of the total asset capacity used by the product in a determined period (e.g. one year).
Operating Expenditures (OPEX) analysis

Operating Expenditures (OPEX) are often defined as the costs that originate from the organisation’s day-to-
day operations. In other words, these operating expenses are the costs that are required for a normal
operation and are essential when analysing the organisation’s operational performance. The efficiency of an
organisation’s activities can also be derived from these expenses [14], [15].
In the case of CROSSBOW products, the following costs are included in OPEX:
- Maintenance and operation costs of buildings where the product is installed and operated – in case
there is a building owned by the product owner or rent of the buildings – in case the building is
rented,
- Maintenance and operation costs of assets, including the periodical fee to be paid in case of capacity
allocation on clouds,
- Licence and installation of the software platform,
- Licences update fees,
- Salaries of the staff operating the products,
- Taxes.
Usually, the costs included in OPEX may be easily associated with the products which generate them.
However, there are cases when a clear-cut separation between the costs associated with different products
is not possible (e.g. same staff is operating multiple software platforms, therefore the cost with the salaries
must be divided accordingly). In these cases, the approach will be to assess the percentage of the costs to be
allocated to each product, based on the percentage of time (computed in relation with the analysed period)
used in operating the respective product, or other similar approaches.
Stage 7: Evaluation metrics for comparing cost and benefits

Once the costs and benefits of a product have been estimated, it is necessary to compare them to evaluate
the cost-effectiveness. In line with recommendations in [7], the comparison is performed by computing two

indicators: Net Present Value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR). In CROSSBOW, IRR was already
calculated (to some extent) in the D19.2, where all HLU leaders were required to provide detailed cash flows
and estimations for the first 15 years of the product operation. The results and calculations from D19.2 will
be considered when comparing and evaluating the results from CBA.
The NPV calculation consists in computing the sum of net present values of annual cash flows of the product
implementation and operation, for a long-term duration (ten years or more).
The formula for calculation of NPV is the following:
𝑛 𝑅𝑡
𝑁𝑃𝑉 = ∑ 𝑡
(1)
𝑡=0 (1 + 𝑖)
where
t – the year when the cash flow is computed.
n – number of years included in the period analysed.
Rt – the cash flow for the year t, determined as the algebraical difference between benefits and costs
(benefits – costs) for the respective year.
i – discount rate.
A product is considered economically viable if the value of NPV is positive at the end of the analysed period.
The annual cash flow will be determined with the following formula:
𝑅𝑡 = 𝐵𝑡 – 𝐶𝑡 (2)
where
Bt – the benefits determined by the project implementation, associated with the year “t”,
Ct – the costs determined by the project implementation, associated with the year “t”.
The values of the annual benefits are calculated by summing up the annual monetized values of each benefit
category mentioned in chapter 3.6, in this document. Of course, the values will be different for financial and
economic evaluation. Similarly, as with the benefits, the costs will be calculated by summing the annual
monetized values of each cost mentioned in the paragraphs concerning CAPEX (3.7.1) and OPEX (3.7.2).
The IRR is an indicator (metric) used to determine the annual average ROI. The relationship used for
calculating this indicator is related to NPV, and it is indicated below.
𝑛 𝑅𝑡
0 = 𝑁𝑃𝑉 − 𝐶0 = ∑ 𝑡
− 𝐶0 (3)
𝑡=0 (1 + 𝐼𝑅𝑅)
where
t – the year when the cash flow is computed,
n – number of years included in the period analysed,
Rt – the cash flow for the year “t”, determined as the algebraical difference between benefits and costs
(benefits – costs) for the respective year,

C0 – total initial investment cost.

Higher values of IRR indicate a more economically viable investment and usually the investment that is more
desirable to initiate. The IRR indicator can be used to compare various types of projects and can be used to
rank multiple prospective investments or projects on a similar basis [16].
IRR may be used for the evaluation of the profitability both from financial and economic perspectives. The
relationship (2) applies in both cases, but the cash-flow is calculated differently. In case of Financial Internal
Rate of Return (FIRR), only the financial benefits will be considered, while in case of Economic Internal Rate
of Return (EIRR), only the economic benefits will be considered. In both cases, the calculated value will be
checked against a previously stated profitability margin. If the results are above the margin, the
investment/product is profitable, otherwise, it is not. The profitability margins are stated by the companies
for the financial evaluations, and by the state authorities for the economic evaluations. The accurate
calculation of the annual cash flow (Rt) requires the estimation of monetary costs and benefits, not only for
one year but for a long-term period (ten years or more). The discount rate is the tool for equalizing the value
of money from different years. A small discount rate sets future values close to present ones, while a large
discount rate incrementally devalues present values of future cash flows, usually indicating the desire for a
shorter duration of the investment recovery. Normally, the value of the discount rate is established at the
national level, especially for companies with fully regulated activity like the TSOs and DSOs.
The duration of the analysis is recommended to be mid or long term, to reduce the potential impact of the
situations outside of the normal conditions [8]. In case of the CROSSBOW, considering that products are
mainly software platforms (the depreciation rate for this type of products is much higher than for an
investment like an OHL or a substation), the CBA will be performed for ten years.
Specific Input Data for the Financial and Economic Calculations

The calculation of the annual cash flows, required by the utilization of the relationship [8], make necessary
the collection of a set of specific input data.
The first step in this data collection process is to identify the potential users/clients of the product. For each
of these potential users it is necessary to evaluate the costs and incomes for the baseline (see chapter 3.6 in
this document). The cash-flow used for the calculation of the NPV, FIRR, and EIRR will be determined as the
difference between the financial values resulted after the implementation of the investment/product, and
the values associated with the baseline. Of course, for a proper evaluation, it is necessary to monetise the
economic impact.
Considering the specifics of CROSSBOW products, one may reasonably consider that the potential
users/clients will be the companies that operate in the power sector, including electricity market. In these
conditions, the set of information must include the following:
- Financial Evaluations: electricity price, cost of losses, penalties for curtailments, the level of
the average salary, penalties/bonuses for reliability indicators (SAIFI, SAIDI, CAIDI),
maintenance costs, operational costs, and others.
- Economic Evaluations: fees for CO2 emissions, the value of the unsupplied energy, the value
of increasing the installed power in electricity generators powered by RES, and others.
Macroeconomic Input Data for the Financial and Economic Calculations

Supplementary to the information mentioned in the previous paragraph, which are specific for the power
sector and electricity market (considered as a primary target for implementation of the CROSSBOW
products), the calculation of the NPV, FIRR and EIRR require a set of inputs determined at the level of the
national economy, or at a regional level.
The values of the IRRs (financial and economic) that are making the difference between profitable and not
profitable must be decided prior to the evaluation. For the financial evaluation, these values are determined

by each company, based on internal strategies and long-term development approach. In case of the
economic evaluations, the checking value is determined based on the overall economic conditions, and long-
term strategies of the state or in our case EU.
Inflation level is a parameter that must be assessed as accurately as possible because the evaluations are
performed considering long durations and it might have a relevant impact on the results.
Evolution of the politics regarding CO2 emissions. “EU Emission Trading Scheme carbon prices in the
Commission reference scenario up to 2050 as a minimum lower bond is recommended, assuming
implementation of existing legislation, but not decarbonisation” [8].
A discount rate is a very important parameter that must be stated by the companies (in case of the financial
evaluations) and by the state authorities (in case of the economic evaluations). Particularly, in the case of the
CROSSBOW products, the regulatory authorities at the national level, are in charge of these statements.
Sensitivity analysis
The sensitivity analysis is often performed complementary to the financial and economic evaluations, such
as CBA. The analysis identifies possible uncertainties and risks that might be included in a CBA and can be
classified as risk assessment step. The main reasons for performing such analysis is to identify the ‘critical’
variables of the project. An analysis is performed, to identify how much would a variable have to vary, for
the investment to fall below the minimum acceptable level of profitability or economic viability. Also, the
long duration of the analysis (usually 5 to 10 years) creates the potential for relevant changes in the values
utilized for the calculations [8].
Variables are considered as critical if its variation for ±1 % of the original value affects the value of the NPV
by more than 1 %. Such variables should be deterministically independent. If variables are correlated,
distortions in the results could occur, including double counting. The CBA model should be reviewed to
specifically target the isolation of independent variables and to eliminate the interdependencies [8].
The first step is the proper selection of the parameters that will be analysed. The impact of the different input
data very often may be of opposite direction, thus cancelling each other out. The trend for the following
parameters might be further considered in the CROSSBOW project:
- Discount rate
- Inflation
- Electricity price
- Ancillary services prices
- Electricity demand
- Installed power using RES, and others.
The final list of parameters used for sensitivity analysis will be determined based on the data and information
collected by using the initial questionnaire presented in 8.8 and based on the data and information used for
defining the baseline conditions.
Corporate Social Responsibility

The context of cross border management of variable renewable energy and implicitly the new energy system
design will result in societal, economic and environmental consequences which need to be thoroughly
measured and assessed.
The energy transition, an increasingly dynamic reality, raises challenges and has multiple implications: the
integration of variable renewable energy by maintaining the stability and safety of energy systems, the
integration of new technologies, new business opportunities supported by the emergence of new actors and
roles, etc. This context of the energy transition with all its implications needs to be supported by an

appropriate regulatory framework. Between the regulatory framework and how new business models and
their associated behaviours are outlined, as well as between the latter and the impact of corporate social
responsibility (CSR), some profound cause-effect implications and synergies must be realistically and
correctly managed, by enabling society to participate in the energy transition in a bottom-up market model.
Figure 5: Impact of the business models on CSR and Regulatory framework
The new CROSSBOW products and solutions also fit into the upcoming context of the substantial new design
for energy systems, which shift away from market shares and institutional influence towards new actors and
behaviours in the specific market. The changes involved will have a specific impact on the environment and
society. The energy transition that has two main engines that determine and maintain it, digitalization and
increasing the share of renewable energy. Although the perception of both "engines" is that we are talking
about positive sources of change, it is not clear whether CSR impact is always positive. Therefore, when we
are referring to future designs of the energy systems, including the infrastructure components of such
systems, the environmental aspects need to be properly identified, simulated and assessed.
The European Commission defines CSR as “the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society. As
in other similar situations, applicable to many other energy research projects, the CROSSBOW value chain
has multi-layered impacts on society, as it concerns several heterogeneous actors (e.g. TSOs, DSOs, energy
producers, software/algorithm developers and technology providers, manufacturers of monitoring devices,
aggregators, as well as European-level and national-level regulators and standardization bodies).
Besides those general impacts to be expected, each of the individual value chain actors bears different types
of responsibility in the social, environmental and economic subsystems in which they operate. It ultimately
aims to enhance TSOs’ operational decision-making quality and thus improving reliability and continuity of
electricity supply as well as the integration of intermittent renewable energy sources and the definition of a
transnational wholesale market, having a broad perspective of the impact of CSR.
The technical specifications of innovative technologies and products associated will aim to provide more
stable and secure transmission grids in the context of distributed renewable sources, focused on four
different aspects: smart integration and improved transmission networks with high penetration of RES,
energy storage systems, demand response and transnational wholesale and ancillary markets.
Beyond the identification of intrinsic and market-related needs of the CROSSBOW products and their CBA
assessment, withing the D14.2 we will consider the CSR impact analysis for each of these products, using the
three layers methodology, highlighting the specific impact and the connections between them: economic,
environmental and social layer. This methodology will allow a holistic approach to the context of each
product, from the CSR perspective.

4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND KPIs

As mentioned in section 2.1 the KPIs described in the SP1 helped us to explain the objectives of the project
in the early stages of the project before the main development took place. The KPI evaluation done within
this WP shows that some KPIs were no longer appropriate due to the evolution of the UC during development
activities. Some modifications of the initial KPIs were required to resolve these challenges. But still, to fulfil
the initial obligations related to key areas, explanations and meanings of all KPIs have been reviewed and
revised where appropriate. As SP1 focuses primarily on technological and economic KPIs, D14.1 offers for the
first time a detailed list of social and environmental KPIs. The final list of project KPIs was updated by adding
some social and environmental KPIs in Table 17. In total, the number of KPIs increased from 46 defined in
WP2 (all of them were technical or economic) to 60. Additionally, we have checked which data HLU leaders
need to collect for evaluation of the KPIs and included it to Table 16. This table does not include information
about specific data which might be needed for calculations - the exact description of data required is
described and available in the description of TCs in WP13. Formulas for calculating KPIs are available in [1]
for already defined KPIs within WP2, and for the new defined KPIs, they are added in the Annex sections 8.4-
8.7.
Techno-economic impact and KPIs

Introduction
Technical Performance Domain is one of the main, if not the main performance domain to measure the
effectiveness of the UC implementation. KPIs in the technical domain identify and quantify the advantages
of CROSSBOW’s products. Due to the size and diversity of CROSSBOW’s products, the effect on the effective
increase of RES capacities, energy market prices and flexibility sources in the market will be measured, among
others. To calculate the various KPIs, different types of data are needed, ranging from power system
characteristics (e.g. frequency deviation, voltage deviation and Area Control Error) to historic data of energy
production to compare with the scenarios of implementing the CROSSBOW products - List of data needed
for impact evaluation – KPIs calculation.
The evaluation of any project can rarely go without economic performance evaluation. The economic
analyses can have contrasting outcome if they are performed for different stakeholders. In CROSSBOW, the
attention is given to the reduction of costs in terms of balancing energy and balancing capacity sharing, as
well as profit optimization when implementing CROSSBOW solutions either for the large-scale generation or
for prosumers that are aggregated through an aggregator.
CROSSBOW approach
The main technical goals that we are trying to achieve within our project are described in Table 2. To go into
more detail, the KPIs measure an effective increase of the generation from RES in the system after the
implementation of CROSSBOW products, that does not compromise the secure operation and the constraints
of the power system. Moreover, we will try to minimise the curtailment of the increased capacity of RES in
the grid. To achieve that, optimal combination with storage technologies will have to be achieved, to
guarantee a higher percentage of RES in the grid. The amount of curtailed energy of RES and large-scale
generation will be measured as one of the KPIs, to check that the higher priority energy that is injected in the
grid by RES does not affect the large-scale generation that also offers quick response and necessary ancillary
services.
Due to the increasing RES penetration in the power system, simulations will be carried out to demonstrate
the merit order effect of RES on the electricity market prices. We will also measure the increase in secure
transmission capacity of OHL as a result of dynamic line rating instead of static thermal rating and as a result
of the use of flexibility solutions (large scale storage) to the transmission network. If applied to the cross-
border level, these changes might increase the available cross-zonal capacities between countries and aid

towards reducing the price difference in some countries and eventually even towards market coupling. If
comparing the scenarios of BaU and operation of CROSSBOW’s products, KPIs will be added by the
simulations that will be based on historic data (e.g. comparing the balancing costs before and after the cross-
border wholesale and balancing energy market in the region).
BaU scenarios will also be compared with the outcome of CROSSBOW Research & Innovation (R&I) when
measuring the KPI for effective frequency mitigation over longer time periods. The focus of this specific KPI
will be, to check whether the use of appropriate flexibility sources relevant to the transmission network
(including the CROSSBOW products DSM, VSP or storage) meaningfully affect the Area Control Error (ACE)
on a transnational scale.
In terms of the economic impact of CROSSBOW solutions to the energy market - the transnational wholesale
and balancing energy market could drastically change the liquidity (due to the market coupling of the
intraday), as it occurred in various examples of good practice in the EU in recent years. By increasing the
liquidity, the competition on the market would increase, which could lead to price signals that better reflect
the situation in the power grid. If having a common energy market affects the sharing of balancing energy,
effects of sharing balancing capacity can also reduce costs. A specific KPI will measure the possible cost
savings that sharing of balancing capacity among interconnected countries could bring. The principles of
cross-border energy and capacity sharing were investigated in CROSSBOW D10.1 National balancing and
wholesale electricity markets structure and principles, where existing cooperation among the TSOs of SHB
block (Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina) and SMM block (Montenegro, Serbia and North
Macedonia) in terms of sharing the balancing capacity are already present.
The reduction of balancing energy costs will be measured by comparing the scenarios of BaU and possible
full implementation of CROSSBOW prototypes. In terms of the transnational balancing energy market for the
balancing product mFRR, the effects of common (transnational) merit order list and its effects on the social
welfare will be checked. Due to the increased competition and the characteristics of the CROSSBOW
solution’s implemented algorithm, the lowest possible cross-border marginal price is selected that satisfies
the parameters of balancing energy bids, demands and cross-zonal capacities, present on the market at a
specific time. As a result, the TSO as a directly influenced stakeholder and end-consumers as an indirectly
influenced stakeholder would both profit from the decreased costs while ensuring the same balancing energy
demands. The BSPs as directly involved stakeholders would profit from the level playing field and the
increased opportunities that participation in a transactional energy market platform offers.
Apart from the market-oriented KPIs, there is a KPI that is intended to measure the effectiveness of advanced
scheduling strategies that, optimize profit, developed in CROSSBOW. The profits of CROSSBOW R&I will be
compared to the BaU scenarios to determine if economic benefits are viable. The analyses will be made for
profit optimization of CROSSBOW solutions, such as Hybrid RES-DU and VSP, as well as the optimization of
energy traded by an aggregator that would coordinate the prosumers. In that way, various stakeholders’
perspective could be addressed.
The connection between economic KPIs and business models of different stakeholders can be made. In the
D1.2 Emerging Business Models and Energy Market Models, at the beginning of the project, business models
from the product leader’s perspective were made. In WP15, perspectives of additional stakeholders will be
checked for the HLUs that could further define the attractiveness of CROSSBOW products and new,
innovative business models.
Key Performance Indicators

The technical and economic assessments of CROSSBOW project will go hand-in-hand with CBA. Among the
46 KPIs defined in WP2, we plan to calculate all KPIs, except for KPI_44 Technical Transmission Losses,
because it is not relevant for our developed products and services. Besides, product leaders in HLU8 and
HLU9 have defined some new KPIs mainly within the economic domain and also one in the technical domain.
Their descriptions are available in annex section 8.4 Technical KPI and 8.5 Economic KPIs.

Social and environmental impact and KPIs

Introduction
Modern society is dependent on electricity and, as a result, any change in the technologies associated with
electricity is likely to bring about certain social changes. In traditional energy systems, consumers are mainly
passive consumers while under the Smart Grid paradigm, consumers as prosumers can play a more active
role in the new energy system. A well-designed, well-managed, grid interconnection can bring significant
social benefits to the nations that it serves. Similarly, if configured or operated in a way that ignores
significant social needs or potential impacts, a grid interconnection may have significant social costs or
liabilities for one or more stakeholder group. The interest of each stakeholder to the assessment of the social
domain is different. From the TSOs perspective, the social approach is necessary to define the quality
standards of the services provided, as comfort and satisfaction are seriously considered. Market Operators
(especially the benefit scale) depend on social comfort and satisfaction with the services provided, as it plays
a decisive role in determining the marketing strategy to prevail over the competition. Consumers on other
hand can be motivated to change their energy behaviour through various social convergence techniques,
especially when direct monetary benefits are generated. Furthermore, it enables them to understand and
feel comfortable with the energy infrastructure at home (RES, batteries, smart meters, etc.) and to improve
their energy habits. The regulators are interested in the social approach through the filter of the general
evaluation of their general policy, which must be acceptable to the highest possible proportion of the
population.
CROSSBOW as a TSO driven project where HLUs and developed solutions promote cross-border management
of transmission networks, integration of renewable energy and storage units, in addition to reducing network
operating costs and improving the economic benefits of RES and storage units, also question some social and
environmental aspects. The renewable energy sector and corresponding Smart Grid is very promising in
terms of economic growth and job creation: in 2018 there were around 11 million jobs in the renewable
energy industry worldwide, while in the EU the renewable energy industry employs more than 1.1 million
people and, according to the impact assessment of EC, could employ up to 3 million people by 2030 [17],
[18]. Another focus of our project in the assessment of social impacts is energy poverty. By reducing energy
supply costs, we aim to reduce energy poverty, which is a global challenge affecting one in five people on
earth, not only in developing countries but also in the EU, where 11% of the population is affected [19]. The
scale of the problem is due to rising energy prices, low income, and poor energy efficiency of houses, and it
is particularly widespread in Southern Europe which is a target area for CROSSBOW solutions. With
developed solutions (HLU1, HLU4, HLU8, HLU9) we promote a more flexible market, open to the highest RES
market penetration and self-consumption schemes, which not only leads to lower prices but also allows
market participants to participate in the market more transparently and directly.
CROSSBOW addresses the challenges of climate change and the environment by promoting a higher
penetration rate of RES where one of our main impacts is to increase the use of renewable energy, demand
response, new storage solutions and correspondingly reduce emissions into the atmosphere. Emissions of air
pollutants from fossil fuel combustion have negative health effects and can aggravate respiratory symptoms
such as shortness of breath, coughing, reduced lung function, premature death in people with pre-existing
conditions, heart attacks and worsening asthma [20]. While the introduction of cleaner energy sources may
be a greater challenge from a technical point of view (control of large RES production units, demand-side
management, monitoring and control of storage units, real-time data exchange between TSOs, DSOs, RESs
and storage devices, etc.), it offers instead a significant reduction in air pollutants [21]. HLUs and
corresponding UCs and TCs developed within the CROSSBOW project are trying to reduce the GHG emissions
and have a positive impact on the environment. For each HLU we will try to calculate the change in GHG
emissions derived by the adoption of our products and services.

CROSSBOW approach
Within the CROSSBOW project, social, cultural, and ethical aspects of Smart Grids were tackled in WP1 –
under the task T1.3 Social and ethical aspects. Within the task, among others, social aspects of Smart Grids
with an emphasis on energy storage management, renewable energy exploitation, consumer engagement
and consumer modelling has been explored. Our qualitative research examined the views of all members of
the Smart Grid value chain concerning the electric power system's efficiency, reliability, quality, and safety.
The obtained responses from questionnaires distributed by CROSSBOW's partners to all members of the
Smart Grid value chain in SEE region indicate that there are country-specific social, cultural, and ethical
concerns in planning and executing both small and large-scale electric power systems. CROSSBOW partners
with already developed operating units of RES seemed to be familiar with the prospects of Smart Grid and
the requirements for two-way communication. Our analysis suggests that stakeholder empowerment
remains a critical factor for understanding technologies of Smart Grid and reducing investment uncertainty
for utilities, TSOs, DSOs, regulators, and other key decision-makers in the study area. In other words,
CROSSBOW's partners in SEE have to improve local stakeholders' understanding of Smart Grid technologies
and required Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools and procedures.
It was pointed out that the issues of privacy, security, equity and energy poverty must be examined with the
participation of all members of the value chain before the technologies of Smart Grid are introduced in the
electricity market of SEE, as has been observed in many other EU countries. These important privacy and
data protection issues were also examined in WP3 and WP8, where cybersecurity communication methods
were described and reviewed. D3.2 Privacy and data protection in a multi-actor environment presents the
necessary measures, methods and means of protection to be taken during the development of the project
products and their HLUCs demonstration phases, and D8.4 Cyber Security communication procedures and
impact of disruption events presents the functionalities of the products of CROSSBOW concerning
cybersecurity, focusing on the wide-area monitoring and awareness system and the novelties introduced by
the implemented blockchain technologies in the ancillary market product.
Within the T1.2 Business models also environmental issues were presented. The project follows the Paris
agreement targets [22], try to increase social responsibility and sustainability, optimes visual impact and land-
use and reduce permission times for new infrastructure. A clear and consistent vision for the smart grid has
not been adopted by legislators or regulators. There was much talk about individual technologies such as
renewable energy or specific energy issues (e.g. environmental impact), but little about the overall vision for
a modernized grid - a vision that integrates the appropriate technologies, solves grid-related problems and
delivers the desired benefits to stakeholders and society.
The social and environmental aspects of energy projects are not so popular and KPIs were not often used in
previous similar studies, although some studies and platforms have focused on these aspects. In general, the
social domain visualizes the impact of technology, scheme or policy on social factors such as local wealth,
unemployment, satisfaction, or even more specific factors such as the impact on the use of public transport,
the health system, etc. Social impacts are usually difficult to quantify but should be considered, as
CROSSBOW solutions will indirectly have a strong environmental and social focus. In general, the
implementation of projects which involves new technologies of Smart Grids benefits society as a whole,
which implies positive social impacts on citizens, even though they may not perceive the benefits as directly
applicable to themselves. Following that we have detected the areas where CROSSBOW will have an impact:
- Creating durable jobs
o New Smart Grid related jobs will arise related to RES, battery storage, technology, such as
engineering services, market operations services, IT services, consultancy services, etc.
o With the global energy transition towards a 100% renewable power system, jobs are lost in the
old, centralized energy production. In contrast, valuable local jobs can be created as a direct and
indirect effect of the implementation of new services promoting RES, battery storage,
cooperation between market operators, new energy market services, etc.

- Positive impact on business and innovation opportunities

o The ecosystem of CROSSBOW tools, where some of the products and HLUs are connected and
can communicate with each other, allows new ways of combining functionalities to explore new
business opportunities. Some of the developed services have a great potential for replication due
to the strong emphasis on information exchange and knowledge transfer, which leads to rapid
dissemination of the tools in the SEE region and beyond.
- Reduction of energy poverty
o As already mentioned in the introduction section the energy poverty is a big issue in Europe and
especially in the SEE region where the majority of the population are struggling to pay the
electricity which is then subsidised by the government and have lack of access to modern energy
services. Tools and services developed in HLU8 and particularly HLU9 ensure more open and fair
energy market conditions, reduce the prices on the wholesale level and costs for the ancillary
services of system operators which vicariously results in lower prices for final customers.
- Reliability and predictability of the energy system
o The deployment of services in HLU1 (ROC) better support cooperation between TSOs and
neighbouring countries, while all other HLUs ensure the use of the most environmentally friendly
energy sources at the lowest possible price. Following that great connection and overview, it is
easier to monitor the whole system and predicts discrepancies between production and
consumption and possible outages. This can lead to many positive social and environmental
impacts due to better interconnection among countries such as [23]:
o Social impacts – potential benefits include better power quality, more reliable electricity
supply and a wider availability of electricity for consumers, income from electricity
exports when spent on social development objectives, and the experience and incentive
to network for additional cooperative activities between countries (e.g. joint investment
in the grid, new technology products, power generation units, etc.).
o Environment impacts - reduction or prevention of locally, regionally or globally
significant emissions of air pollutants, reduced water pollution, reduced solid and
hazardous waste, reduced impact on land use, reduced impact on biodiversity and
wildlife, and reduced impact on human health through their effects on electricity
generation and/or use of other fuels in one or more of the countries participating in the
project.
- Reducing the gender gap and promoting females
o The energy sector remains one of the least gender-diverse sectors and closing this gender gap
will be crucial as females are the driving force behind innovative and inclusive solutions. A
transition to clean energy requires innovative solutions and business models and greater
involvement of a diverse talent pool. Many of the CROSSBOW solutions were designed,
developed, and tested by females, and through the project, we are promoting the involvement
of women in the energy sector through active involvement in conferences, international
professional organization dedicated to promoting women engineering IEEE Women in
Engineering (WIE), etc.
- Health of citizens
o The emission of air pollutant particles, which are produced during the combustion of fossil fuels,
has negative effects on health. The introduction and promotion of cleaner energy sources with
the use of our developed products and services will lead to a reduction of air pollutants, which
will have a positive impact on the health of citizens.
- Environment
o Better use of interconnections between countries, higher market penetration of renewable
energy, responding to demand by storage will therefore reduce the production of mainly coal-
fired power plants in the region SEE and accordingly reduce GHG emissions into the atmosphere,
which will have a direct positive impact on the environment.

Additionally, we have identified some additional indirect impacts which are hard to quantify but should be
mentioned.
- National security
o With the introduction of our products and services, higher penetration of local renewable energy
production is achieved. This leads directly to reduced dependence on imported fossil fuels,
contributes to local autonomy and provides a safer and more stable environment for citizens.
- Privacy and security
o Privacy and security is a really important aspect of society.
Following the above analysis, the project has compiled a set of KPIs that evaluate the project in terms of its
social and environmental impact, which are presented in the next section.
Key Performance Indicators

Social performance domain is often one of the hardest to measure and quantify. It addresses the perception
of stakeholders that are directly affected by the project or that can directly affect the project. More often
than not, it connects the social acceptance of technologies adopted, developed and demonstrations tested.
Social and environmental KPIs are usually non-monetary assessments of the impact of a project, and social
impact analysis is, therefore, part of qualitative analysis. A popular approach used in the literature to
represent social KPIs is the Likert scale [24], as it is a useful method for quantifying a qualitative value. We
have defined one environmental and five social KPIs which are described in Table 13. All KPIs are defined for
HLU users and stakeholders since final customers are not directly involved in the project. Majority of the
answers will be obtained through a social questionnaire which will be prepared in M39-M40 together with
CBA analysis questionnaire and will be distributed among users and stakeholders. The list of social and
environmental KPIs with their full description is available in Annex 8.6 Social KPIs and 8.7 Environmental KPI.

Key performance indicator Success measure

SOCIAL
Employment Creation of new jobs:
• Suppliers of technologies in Smart Grids, energy
storage, IT
• Research and development – researchers, scien-
tists, project managers
• Network operators (TSOs, DSOs), energy market
participants – power producers, suppliers, etc.
• Service providers (aggregators, system integrators,
etc.)
The deployment and further development of CROSSBOW
products and services will lead to further employment op-
portunities.
Jobs-New-Skills • End-field technicians and grid operators to be
trained in the management and operation of devel-
oped CROSSBOW tools - network operation, distrib-
uted energy resources, energy storage, energy mar-
ket, demand-side management.
Number of women managing CROSSBOW Gender balance promotion - the number of women manag-
tools/products ing the tools/products of CROSSBOW should be equal to the
number of men.
• The objective is to achieve (at least) 50% of women
involved in managing CROSSBOW tools/products
during the demonstrations
• The implementation of CROSSBOW HLUs/products
and services should lead to higher gender balance
in the energy sector.
Ease of use of developed products/services Developed products are well designed and easy to use.
• Outstanding usability can dramatically reduce the
number of resources needed to support your cus-
tomers. When a customer can use your product,
service or application without any problems, the
need for customer support is reduced, which in
turn saves time and money.
• Easy-to-use products help users to quickly adapt to
it and they will be motivated to use it.
User satisfaction All successful product development actions provide the new
value for its customers and users. Users satisfaction con-
firms that product development was successful and that the
product will be widely used.
• Overall user satisfaction regarding HLUs and prod-
ucts.
ENVIRONMENTAL
Change in GHG emissions Reduction of GHG emissions.
• Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced through in-
creasing the penetration of renewable production,
use of storage, demand response and energy
sources in other countries.
• Products/services developed and implemented lead
to the decrease of GHG emissions.

Table 13: CROSSBOW Social and Environmental KPIs

Since we do not have final consumers (households representatives) directly involved in our project and our
products are mostly developed for TSOs, we will try to measure social impact also by asking HLU leaders to
quantify the social benefits per HLU following the approach used in H2020 project WISEGRID [11] using the
table below.

Services HLU1 HLU2 HLU3 HLU4 HLU5 HLU6 HLU7 HLU8 HLU9
Social aspects
Jobs
Energy services
Business and innovation
opportunities
Energy poverty
Reliability and predictability of
the energy system
Health of citizens
Economic activity
Safety
Environment (GHG emissions
reduction)
Social investment and
coherence
Time invested
Privacy and security
Gender balance promotion
Table 14: Contribution of the CROSSBOW HLUs
*Top row, each column one HLU/Product to a positive or negative impact on the social impact (left column, each row a social impact). The scale of the score: -3 to +3.
0 = no effect compared to the BAU scenario.

Regulatory impact and KPIs

Introduction
The rising levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions have prompted most governments worldwide
to act towards mitigating the threatening effects of climate change. The EU is responding to this issue through
common decarbonisation goals, as well as Member State individual action plans and initiatives. Besides, there
are growing energy security concerns over the dependency on fossil fuels, leading the EU to explore
alternatives. Consequently, these efforts to address environmental and security concerns are driving
fundamental changes in energy systems.
In power systems, the status quo is challenged on both generation and demand sides, as well as network
planning and operation. Recent innovations and the changing technological mix cause many emerging
challenges that could lead to significant cost increases and issues in system operation under the current BaU
approach. Therefore, there is an urgent need for technological and market solutions in response to the power
systems evolution.
This chapter expands on the issues outlined above and details how products developed within CROSSBOW
directly addresses them and their resulting regulatory impact. Specifically, the impact on climate and energy
policies, as well as circular economy are explained, followed by an analysis of KPIs related to regulation.
CROSSBOW approach
The regional scope of CROSSBOW, determined by the 8 TSOs in SEE where the developed products and
concepts are validated, presents a unique example of an extension of regulatory frameworks. It consists of
countries that are member states of the EU and Contracting Parties of the Energy Community. It is generally
considered a developing region, where countries are in different stages of structural reforms of their energy
sectors. Therefore, different regulatory and market frameworks must be considered in CROSSBOW’s
approach.
D1.1 Legislation and Regulatory Framework summarizes the current state and planned developments of
legislation in the countries of the observed region. Specifically, it gives an overview of the level of
implementation of required regulations, transposition of directives, implementation of network codes and
harmonization of technical and legal requirements aiming to facilitate cross-border trade. The analysis is
performed on a country-by-country basis, effectively comparing the situation in the region.
Furthermore, the project observes data protection requirements following the General Data Protection
Regulation, including the Data Protection Impact Assessment. D3.2 Privacy and data protection in a multi-
actor environment analyses in detail the current rules on privacy and data protection in CROSSBOW
participating countries, which includes primary and secondary legislation exclusive to each country. It
examines the use of personal data within the products developed in CROSSBOW and it analyses smart grid
security, data models, standards, and interoperability issues that could represent potential barriers in the
project.
WP3 of the project is dedicated to developing an interoperable, secure, and flexible architecture that
considers highly advanced active transmission networks with high penetration of renewables and distributed
and concentrated flexibility assets. Additionally, the architecture facilitates complex markets for energy,
balancing and ancillary services. In this context, standardization is an important factor in guaranteeing the
security and integrity of the infrastructure. D3.3 Standards and Interoperable Data Models specifically
presents the standards and data models of the CROSSBOW Architecture. It uses the CEN-CENELEC-ETSI Smart
Grid Architecture Model Framework that allows presenting the functional description of the provided system
and its specification in terms of components, data standards, and communication protocols in a consistent
and systematic approach.

The concepts and products developed in CROSSBOW have a ‘cross-border’ focus in terms of their application.
As argued above, the region of South-East Europe is unique and encompasses countries with different
regulatory frameworks. Therefore, the harmonization of legislation, rules, and various technical and legal
requirements is a crucial aspect for facilitating cross-border trade, efficiency and flexibility through the
shared use of resources. This is emphasized throughout the project and often addressed as part of the
evaluation of regulatory perspectives of individual products. Also, wider stakeholder engagement is
necessary to achieve the cross-border regulatory impact, for example through active cooperation with the
CROSSBOW User Group (C-UG).
For this reason, a workshop on regulatory and market issues was initially organised at the beginning of the
project with C-UG members relevant to regulatory issues, specifically National Regulatory Authorities and
the Energy Community Secretariat. The meetings held in Vienna in May 2018 had the objective to introduce
stakeholders to the CROSSBOW scope, its legislative implications, business impacts, and social and ethical
aspects. The feedback from C-UG members received through the means of a questionnaire, reaffirmed the
fact that CROSSBOW tackles important issues relevant to regulatory bodies and the Energy Community, as
well as revealed the particular interest in the proposed products and future conclusions of the project. Details
of the workshop and the corresponding questionnaire are reported in Deliverable 1.1 - Annexes 1 and 2.
To ensure the active involvement of stakeholders, a second workshop will be organised as a platform to
present the developed products and key findings. In terms of regulatory impact, the focus will be placed on
market enablers and barriers for product implementation, which have been identified in the research and
development phase, as well as regulatory impact of CROSSBOW KPIs. The feedback from C-UG members
would be a highly valuable addition to the (calculated) KPIs, especially because in most cases it is challenging
to measure the impact of the products on regulatory issues, and it will be considered in shaping the business
strategy and exploitation activities.
Impact on Policies
4.3.3.1 Climate and Energy
European energy systems are currently undergoing fundamental changes, mainly driven by the continuously
increasing levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases emission in the atmosphere and the associated
environmental and climate change concerns. Numerous governments have taken significant initiatives in
response to such concerns and the European Commission (EC) has set a target to achieve 20% and 40%
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and 2030, respectively, concerning the 1990 baseline levels
[25], [26]. Apart from the issue of climate change, growing energy security concerns emerge over the
dependency of European energy systems on fossil fuels exhibiting a continuously reducing availability and a
subsequent increase of their prices.
In the context of addressing the above environmental and energy security concerns, European energy
systems are facing the challenge of decarbonisation. At the generation side, this decarbonisation is already
under way through the wide deployment of renewable and other low-carbon generation sources. EC has put
forward a legally binding target for renewable energy sources to cover 20% of the total energy consumption
in the European Union by 2020 [25], extended to a further target of 27% by 2030 [26]. However, the majority
of these sources - especially wind and solar generation which constitute the dominant renewable energy
technologies in Europe [27], [28] - are inherently characterized by high variability and limited predictability
and controllability. Their power output is not only extremely variable but is also zero during periods of a low
wind speed or no sunshine. Furthermore, increased shares of renewables (i.e. inverter-based power
generation) in the capacity mix reduce the system inertia which is provided by the stored kinetic energy of
the rotating mass of the power generators’ turbines. With this reduction in system inertia, any imbalance
between supply and demand will change system frequency more rapidly than today, challenging the stability
of the system. Furthermore, nuclear generation - which constitutes a significant part of the generation mix

in some European countries - is highly inflexible, implying that it cannot contribute to the balancing burden
of the system.
At the demand side, significant decarbonisation of the heat and transport sectors is expected beyond 2030.
Traditional technologies for the satisfaction of heating and transportation consumers’ requirements (gas/oil
fired technologies for heating and internal combustion engines for transportation) are based on the intense
consumption of fossil fuels and a significant portion of the total greenhouse emissions [29]. In combination
with the ongoing and future decarbonisation of electricity generation systems, strong motives arise for the
electrification of these technologies. Recent technological developments in the automotive and heating
sectors have techno-economically enabled this transition with the production and efficient operation of
electric vehicles (EV) [30] and electric heat pumps (EHP) [31] respectively. Nevertheless, due to the natural
energy intensity of heating and transportation loads, the environmental and energy security potential of this
transition is accompanied by the introduction of a considerable amount of new demand in electrical power
systems. Going further, the electrification of heat and transport sectors will lead to disproportionately larger
demand peaks than the increase in the total electrical energy consumption, due to the temporal patterns of
users’ heating and driving requirements.
In order to understand the challenges, this decarbonisation of energy generation and demand creates for
electrical power systems; we need to keep in mind certain operation and planning properties of current
systems. At the short-term operation timescale, given that demand side is currently largely treated as an
inflexible, uncontrollable load, the required flexibility for balancing the system and offering the required
ancillary services is provided solely by conventional dispatchable generators (mainly gas generators).
In a future with increased penetration of renewable and nuclear generation, these conventional generation
units will be producing much less energy, as absorption of the low-cost and CO2-free production of
renewable and nuclear generators will be prioritised in the merit order. However, given that renewable
generation is variable and intermittent and nuclear generation is highly inflexible, the conventional
generators need to remain synchronised in the system and operate part-loaded as a back-up energy source
(e.g. operating in periods of a low wind speed or low sunshine) and flexibility provider (since renewable and
nuclear generators not only have very limited capabilities to provide system balancing services, but they are
also making system balancing more challenging). This under-utilisation of conventional generation assets
implies that the cost efficiency of their operation will reduce. Furthermore, their cost efficiency will be
aggravated by the increase of their start-up and shut-down cycles, driven by the system variability and power
ramping requirements.
Furthermore, a sufficient level of the frequency response is needed to deal with a sudden loss of supply to
the system (e.g. as a result of a failure of a large generator/interconnector or a rapid change in demand or
renewable generation) in order to keep the system frequency within its statutory limits. To date, the
frequency response service can only be provided by synchronised conventional plants which need to operate
part-loaded and produce at least at the minimum stable generation level. This reduces the ability of the
system to absorb electricity production from renewables or other low-carbon technologies. This means that
due to balancing challenges, renewable generation assets with high capital costs are also under-utilised and
thus may not achieve their CO2 emissions reduction potential.
Moreover, the large-scale connection of renewable generation to transmission and distribution grids creates
certain network challenges, such as thermal congestion, increased voltage levels and increased short-circuit
currents, which threaten the security of these grids. The most critical network challenges are increased short-
circuit currents in urban areas and voltage rise effects in rural areas.
At the long-term planning timescale, given that demand side is again treated as an inflexible load, the current
paradigm lies in predicting this demand and building sufficient generation and network capacity (given
certain security margins) to cover it. The disproportional increase in demand peaks with respect to the
increase in overall energy consumption, induced by the envisaged electrification of heat and transport
sectors, means that a significant amount of new generation and network capacity needs to be built in the

coming years, and this capacity will be significantly under-utilised as it will be used only to cover the increased
demand peaks.
Given the above factors, under the current BaU operation and planning paradigm, the utilization of
generation and network assets will be significantly reduced, while the total system costs will be dramatically
increased, especially beyond 2030 where the electrification of heat and transport will require capital-
intensive investments.
The set of innovative solutions and products developed within the CROSSBOW project enable intelligent,
cross-border coordination of variable renewable generation and various flexibility resources (including
energy storage and demand-side management) which is very promising in reversing the trend of asset
utilization reduction and enabling a more cost-effective transition to the European low-carbon energy future.
As previously discussed, one of the most critical policy challenges in decarbonized European energy systems
lies in the massive increase of reserve requirements and the stress on system security, driven by the
increasing integration of variable renewable generation. As part of the ROC product, CROSSBOW has
demonstrated that the overall amount of required reserves and the associated reserve procurement cost in
the SEE region can be significantly reduced if a cross-border reserve sizing and sharing approach (employing
the region’s interconnections) is adopted. This is because neighbouring countries can exchange various
reserve products, helping each other to deal with the increased balancing requirements. Due to the natural
diversity of generation and demand conditions in different countries, associated with varying weather
conditions, generation mix and demand portfolios, the risks associated with demand-supply imbalances can
be diversified, significantly reducing the overall reserve requirements. In other words, it is of great value for
TSOs to share reserves through cross-border interconnections to reduce the size of balancing costs.
Furthermore, also as part of the ROC product, CROSSBOW has demonstrated that a similar cross-border
management approach is beneficial in preserving the overall adequacy of the SEE system. During periods
where one of the countries faces an (in)adequacy issue, potentially associated with the high output of
renewable generation and low commitment of conventional generation, a neighbouring country can
contribute capacity to resolve it, with the developed approach ensuring that the relevant transactions are
kept at a minimum level to allow the maximum possible exploitation of interconnection capacity for market-
based energy and reserve exchanges.
Furthermore, as part of the RES-CC product, CROSSBOW has demonstrated that another avenue in reducing
the balancing requirements driven by the increasing integration of variable renewable generation in the SEE
region, lies in enabling such renewable generators to participate themselves in the secondary reserves
market, and thus enabling them to be part of the solution and not only part of the problem of balancing
procurement. This development is envisaged to align the market arrangements in the SEE region with the
respective arrangements in certain western European countries (e.g. Spain, Germany, Denmark, UK).
Furthermore, it will provide an additional source of income for renewable generation plants that could make
them less dependent on subsidies or regulated tariffs that will eventually disappear. As however previously
discussed, curtailment of renewable generation will be unavoidable during certain time periods (depending
of course on the level of available flexible generation, energy storage and demand-side management). In this
context, the RES-CC product has also developed smart curtailment strategies ensuring minimum overall
curtailment and fair allocation of the overall required curtailment to different generators according to market
principles.
Beyond the increasing balancing requirements, network congestion issues constitute another important
element of the decarbonisation policy agenda previously discussed. As part of the ROC product, CROSSBOW
has proposed advanced approaches to check the quality of individual and common grid models close to real-
time and identify congestion effects through flow-based and NTC-based algorithms. Going further, the same
product brings forward dynamic line rating principles which promise to significantly increase the exploitable
capacity of cross-border and internal transmission lines, compared to traditionally employed conservative
static ratings. This will contribute to relieving network congestion effects, operating the whole SEE system

more flexibly, enhancing the utilisation and subsequently the penetration of renewable generation, and
reducing the overall operating costs of the system.
Going further, one of the most important policy directions towards addressing the balancing and network
challenges of decarbonisation and enabling a more cost-effective transition to the European low-carbon
energy future lies in the integration of new sources of flexibility in the operation of the system, including
primarily energy storage and demand-side management. Suitable coordination of such flexibility sources has
the potential to support system balancing in a future with increased penetration of renewable generation
and therefore to reduce the curtailment of renewable generation and the efficiency losses of conventional
generation, as well as limit peak demand levels and therefore avoid capital intensive investments in under-
utilized generation and network assets.
CROSSBOW has proposed advanced products to realise this potential, namely STO-CC (focusing on
centralised storage units at a national and regional level), VSP (focusing on distributed storage units), and
DSM-IP (focusing on demand-side management). These products enable the delivery of different valuable
services by energy storage and demand-side management resources, including enhancing the utilisation of
variable renewable generation (reducing its curtailment), providing frequency regulation and voltage
regulation, and relieving network congestion effects. Furthermore, as part of the VSP product, CROSSBOW
has developed an algorithm co-optimising the strategies of energy storage players in different segments of
the electricity market simultaneously, and the obtained results demonstrate that the resulting profits are
massively higher than less advanced (silo) market strategies focusing on the provision of individual services.
4.3.3.2 Circular Economy
In a circular economy, the value of products and materials is maintained for as long as possible. Waste and
resource use are minimised, and when a product reaches the end of its lifetime, it is used again to create
further value. This can bring major economic benefits, contributing to innovation, growth, and job creation.
The European Commission’s Circular Economy Action Plan from 2015 [32] emphasises the need to maximise
the synergies between energy, waste, and water, such that it provides a boost to secondary markets for raw
materials and enhances water reuse. The Action Plan covers four segments: production, consumption, waste
management, and from waste to resources. It can be argued that CROSSBOW products contribute to the
development of the circular economy in the first three segments, that is through sustainable electricity
generation, efficient consumption, and losses reduction.
Regarding generation, the Action Plan emphasizes the efficient use of renewable resources and reduced
waste generation in the production processes of goods. The solutions developed within the CROSSBOW
project contribute to the increased usage of RES and increased efficiency of electricity generation by cross-
border coordination. The electricity is further on used in the production processes of other goods, thus taking
a significant place in the circular economy chain.
Consumption is another important segment in the circular economy. The Action Plan [32] stresses that the
choices made by millions of consumers can either support or hamper the circular economy. These choices
are shaped by the information to which consumers have access, the range and prices of existing products,
and the regulatory framework. Through its DSM-IP product, CROSSBOW provides an advanced solution for
cross-border integration of DSM, thus facilitating the process of making electricity consumption more
flexible. Besides, the VSP product enables aggregation and more efficient usage of small storage units
installed at households or companies.
Finally, the synergies between various CROSSBOW products, especially under the coordination of ROC-BC,
RES-CC and STO-CC, could lead to more efficient power system operation, thus limiting losses in generation,
transmission, and energy storage.

Regulatory impact of CROSSBOW KPIs

The role of the KPIs is to quantify the performance of the products developed by the CROSSBOW project.
Some of the KPIs show the impact towards achieving the main goals of energy policies. For example, some
of the KPIs can present the contribution of the Project solutions to increased RES penetration, reduction of
greenhouse gasses emission, increased competition in the markets, increased efficiency of the power system
etc. These KPI results can be considered as strong arguments to justify the need for revision of the current
regulatory frameworks and define the path for future energy policy.
The CROSSBOW KPIs are categorized in six groups:
- B.1. Increased RES and DER hosting capacity,
- B.2. Reduced energy curtailment of RES and DER,
- B.3. Power quality and quality supply,
- B.4. Extended asset lifetime,
- B.5. Increased flexibility from energy players,
- B.6. Improved competitiveness on the electricity market.
There are also KPIs that are not related to any of these groups classified as Project KPIs and Specific KPIs.
In this chapter, the importance of each of the above-listed groups of KPIs related to regulatory and
standardization impact is given in Table 15. The calculated KPIs for increased RES and DER hosting capacity
and reduced curtailment of these resources provide strong arguments to encourage the design of a new
regulatory framework for enhancing cross-border coordination of these resources. The KPIs for quality of
supply and security of supply could justify the proposed new functionalities of the RSCs and impose changes
in legislation where these functionalities are defined. Furthermore, the KPIs for extended asset lifetime and
increased flexibility could stimulate the creation of regulation that will incentivise optimised aggregation of
small storage units and other sources of flexibility for achieving more efficient operation of the power system.
Finally, the KPIs for improved competitiveness in the market could prove the importance of regional market
integration and help in designing regulation for future electricity markets.
Group of KPIs Importance to regulatory and standardization impact
B.1. Increased RES and DER This group of impact indicators is important to justify the means to increase RES
hosting capacity generation in power systems. CROSSBOW proposes solutions to increase RES
B.2. Reduced energy curtail- penetration by cross-border RES coordination, usage of hybrid power plants,
ment of RES and DER increased usage of energy storage systems, demand flexibility and its cross-border
coordination.
These impact indicators are important for regulatory issues related to eliminating
barriers to entry and support of usage of storage, demand flexibility and its cross-
border coordination and aggregation.
B.3. Power quality and quality CROSSBOW solutions contribute to the security in the power system operation by
supply information exchange between TSOs to increase reliability and efficiency in the
transmission system. The project extends the functionalities of the Regional
Security Centres (RSCs). Therefore, this group of KPIs can indicate the needs for
changes in regulation that defines the role and functionalities of the RSCs and
possibly other regional bodies for coordination of transmission system operation
on a regional level.
These KPIs also evaluate the solutions for efficient cross-border congestion
management by coordination of storage, demand flexibility and RES generation.
Therefore, they are significant indicators for impact on regulations in this area.
This group of KPIs also covers the quality of frequency regulation and can provide
experiences for the standards of this process.
B.4. Extended asset lifetime This group of KPIs evaluates the extended lifetime of assets. By congestion
alleviation and optimal usage of interconnections and storage units, the lifetime

of these assets is extended. This aspect is important in the circular economy

regulations.
B.5. Increased flexibility from Increased flexibility is important for the more efficient and secure operation of
energy players the power system, as well as increased RES generation. Therefore, the indicators
for the contribution of CROSSBOW products to increased flexibility can shape the
regulations for achieving higher RES penetration.
B.6. Improved competitiveness The improved competitiveness in the market and the development of the Internal
on the electricity market European Energy market is one of the most important priorities of the EU energy
policy.
CROSSBOW AM Toolset provides a platform for the operation of regional
wholesale and ancillary services market.
The KPIs from this group will quantify the contribution of this and other
CROSSBOW products to the improved competitiveness in the market.
The results will be important for the regulations defining the design of future
electricity markets.
Table 15: Importance of CROSSBOW KPIs for regulatory and standardization impact

5 CONCLUSION
The deliverable D14.1 laid the foundation for the impact assessment of the CROSSBOW project. In this case,
it introduces the methodology to be used, the scope of the plan when it will be implemented, and the
expected results. In addition, the first step of the methodology is introduced, including the definition of KPIs
and the first two stages of the cost-benefit analysis concluded and planning for the remaining ones. The work
in WP14 will continue to focus on collecting and analysing necessary inputs and data from test cases and
experiments. During the project, if necessary, the KPI indicated in the current document will be regularly
monitored, evaluated and improved to keep up with the current market conditions and developments in the
smart grid field.
The defined methodology in this report will be used in the next task of WP14 (T14.2) where the overall
evaluation of demo clusters (test cases) will be done including the technical validation of the CROSSBOW
products and also the evaluation of the socio-economic impact of the project solutions and business models.
Impact assessment intermediate results calculated in WP14 will be used, together with the preliminary
version of the existing and emerging business models analysed in SP1, as an input for new and strategic
business models to create and share benefits, in a fair way, for all the actors of the energy market and Smart
Grid value chain.

6 REFERENCES
[1] CROSSBOW project consortium, “D2.2 CROSSBOW Use cases, scenarios and KPIs identification,” 2018.
[2] inteGRIDy project consortium, “D 1.4 - inteGRIDy Global Evaluation Metrics and KPIs,,” 2017.
[3] CROSSBOW project consortium, “D13.2: Preliminary Demonstration,” 2020.
[4] WiseGRID project consortium, “D16.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis planning,” 2018.
[5] OSMOSE project consortium, “Use cases and KPIs refinement and Demonstration Tests design,” 2020.
[6] European Commission, “Commission Recommendation on preparations for the rollout of smart
metering,” Brussels, 2012.
[7] V. Giordano, I. Onyeji, G. Fulli, M. Sánchez Jiménez and C. Filiou, “Guidelines for conducting cost-benefit
analysis of Smart Grid projects,” European Commission, Brussels, 2012.
[8] D. Sartori, G. Catalano, M. Genoco, C. Pancotti, E. Sirtori, S. Vignetti and C. Bo, “Guide to cost-benefit
analysis of investment projects. Economic appraisal tool for cohesion policy 2014-2020,” 2014.
[9] “Nobel Grid,” 2015-2018. [Online]. Available: https://nobelgrid.eu/. [Accessed 1 10 2020].
[10] “FutureFlow,” 2016-2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.futureflow.eu/. [Accessed 1 10 2020].
[11] “WISE GRID,” 2016-2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.wisegrid.eu/. [Accessed 1 10 2020].
[12] “GRIDSOL,” 2016-2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.gridsolproject.eu/. [Accessed 1 10 2020].
[13] “FLEXICIENCY,” 2015-2019. [Online]. Available: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646482. [Accessed
1 10 2020].
[14] INVESTOPEDIA, “Business Essentials - Cost-Benefit Analysis,” 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cost-benefitanalysis.asp.
[15] Corporate Finance Institute, “Online Educational Institute for Economic Studies,” 2020. [Online].
Available: https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/.
[16] G. De Rus, Introduction to cost-benefit analysis: looking for reasonable shortcuts, Edward Elgar
Publishing, 2010.
[17] EurObserv’ER , “THE STATE OF RENEWABLE ENERGIES IN EUROPE,” 2019.
[18] Council of the European Union , “Long-term EU budget 2021-2027,” 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/the-eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget-2021-2027/#.
[19] Politico, “POLITICO - Energy is a basic human right,” [Online]. Available:
https://www.politico.eu/sponsored-content/energy-is-a-basic-human-right/.
[20] J. M. Balbus, J. B. Greenblatt, C. Ramya and K. L. Ebi, “A wedge-based approach to estimating health co-
benefits of climate change mitigation activities in the United States,” Climatic change, vol. 127, no. 2,
pp. 199-210, 2014.
[21] European Environment Agency, “Renewables successfully driving down carbon emissions in Europe,”
EC, Copenhagen, 2017.
[22] United Nations Climate Change, “The Paris Agreement,” 2016. [Online]. Available:

https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement.
[23] United Nations - Department of Economic and Social Affairs: Division for Sustainable Development,
“Multi Dimensional Issues in International Electric Power Grid Interconnections,” United Nations, New
York, 2006.
[24] I. H. Bernstein, “Likert Scale Analysis, Encyclopedia of Social Measurement,” 2005.
[25] European Commission, “2020 Climate & Energy Package,” [Online]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2020_en.
[26] European Commission, “2030 Climate & Energy Package,” [Online]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2030_en.
[27] European Environment Agency, “Overview of electricity production and use in Europe,” 2016. [Online].
Available: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/overview-of-the-electricity-
production-2/assessment-4.
[28] European Commission, “National renewable energy action plans 2020,” [Online]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/renewable-energy/national-action-plans .
[29] EUROSTAT, “Greenhouse gas emmission statistics,” [Online]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/.
[30] European Commission, “Clean transport, Urban transport - Electric vehicles,” [Online]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/urban/vehicles/road/electric_en.
[31] European Commission, “Heating and cooling,” 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-efficiency/heating-and-cooling_en.
[32] European Commission, “Closing the loop - An EU action plan for the Circular Economy,” 2015. [Online].
Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614.
[33] “OSMOSE - Optimal System-Mix Of flexibility Solutions for European electricity,” 2018-2022. [Online].
Available: https://www.osmose-h2020.eu/.
[34] “InteGridy,” 2017-2020. [Online]. Available: https://integrid-h2020.eu/.

7 ACRONYMS
Acronyms List
AI Achievement Indicator
AM CROSSBOW Wholesale and Ancillary market toolset
BaU Business as Usual
CAPEX Capital Expenditures
CAPEX Capital Expenditures
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis
CBNMO Cross-border Network and Market Operations
CFP Cooperative Flexibility Platform
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility
C-UG CROSSBOW User Group
DR Demand Response (units)
DSM Demand Side Management
DSM-IP CROSSBOW Demand Side Management – Integration
Platform
EC European Commission
EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
EU European Union
FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return
GHG Greenhouse gasses
HLU High-Level Use Case
IRR Internal Rate of Return
KPI Key Performance Indicator
MMS Market Management Systems
NPV Net Present Value
OHL Overhead power line
OPEX Operational Expenses
OPEX Operational Expenditures
ORDP Open Data Research Pilot
PERT Project evaluation and review technique
R&D Research and Development
RES Renewable Energy Sources
RES-CC CROSSBOW Regional Coordination Centre
RES-DU CROSSBOW Hybrid RES Dispatchable Unit

ROC CROSSBOW Regional Operation Centre

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SEE South-Eastern Europe
STA Short-term adequacy
STO-CC CROSSBOW Regional Storage Coordination Centre
TC Test Case
TSO Transmission System Operator
UC Use Case
VSP CROSSBOW Virtual Storage Plant

8 ANNEXES
List of data needed for impact evaluation – KPIs calculation
HLU HLU HLU HLU HLU HLU HLU HLU HLU
Data needed for calculation of KPIs
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Power generation - real time data x x x x x x x
Power generation - forecast x x x x x x x x
Power demand - real time data x x x x x x
Power demand - forecast x x x x x x x x
RES generation - real time data x x x x x x
RES generation - forecast x x x x x
Storage generation - real time data x x x x x
Storage generation - forecast x x x x
Cross-Border capacities - forecast x x x x x x
Cross-Border capacities -real time data (live updated) x x x x x
Generation ramp-up capability x x x

Voltage, active and reactive power measurements of regional
x x x x
high voltage network
Interconnection capacity x x x x x
Reactive capabilities of generation plants x
Outdoor temperature - forecast x x x
Outdoor temperature - actual (real time data) x
Weather forecast (sun radiation, rain, wind) x x x x
Weather real-time data (sun radiation, rain, wind) x x x x
Real time data about the sun, rain x
Wholesale electricity prices (Day-ahead, Intraday) x x x x x x x
Balancing prices (FRR, mFRR, aFRR) x x x x x x
ID orders x x
mFRR orders x x x x
DSM availability - forecast x x
DSM availability - real time data x
ID prices x
ID transactions/volumes x x
AFRR orders x x x x
Price for Storage Usage x
Storage Capacities, power ratings, efficiencies x x
Real-time frequency of an area x x x

Real-time voltage at the storage buses x
Capacities of the cross-border tie lines x x x
IGM x x
Critical Branch/Critical Outage list x
Total non-dispatchable production Forecast x
Generation Shift Key list (GSK file) x x
CGM x x
Day-ahead dispatch of generators x x x
Day-ahead dispatch of interconnections x x
FRR bid sizes x
Wholesale Electricity Power Volume x
Power generation - historical data D+1 x
Forced outage rates of conventional generation units x
Installed generation capacity per type and unit x
Wind and solar capacity factors x
Forced outage rates of interconnectors x
Active outages of generation units and interconnectors x
List of available RAs x x

Voltage, active and reactive power measurements of regional
x x
high voltage network
Table 16: Data needed for impact evaluation – KPIs calculation

List of all KPIs with corresponding HLUs and UCs
KPI Rele-
KPI ID Classification KPI Name KPI Type Related UC(s) HLU1 HLU2 HLU3 HLU4 HLU5 HLU6 HLU7 HLU8 HLU9
vance
HLU2-UC04, HLU2-
B.1 In- UC05, HLU3-UC02,
creased HLU3-UC03, HLU4-
Renewable
RES and UC01, HLU6-UC04,
KPI_01 Technical Content In- Direct x x x x x
DER host- HLU7-UC01, HLU7-
crement
ing capac- UC02, HLU7-UC04,
ity HLU7-UC05, HLU7-
UC06
B.2 Re-
Hybrid
duced en- HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
power
ergy cur- UC03, HLU7-UC01,
KPI_02 Technical plant Cur- Direct x x
tailment of HLU7-UC02, HLU7-
tailment
RES and UC04, HLU7-UC05
Ratio
DER
HLU2-UC02, HLU2-
UC04, HLU2-UC05,
B.2 Re- HLU2-UC07, HLU3-
duced en- UC02, HLU3-UC03,
Amount of
ergy cur- HLU4-UC01, HLU5-
KPI_03 Technical curtailed Direct x x x x x x
tailment of UC01, HLU5-UC04,
energy
RES and HLU6-UC01, HLU7-
DER UC01, HLU7-UC02,
HLU7-UC03, HLU7-
UC04
Time in B.2 Re- HLU2-UC04, HLU2-
Curtail- duced en- UC05, HLU2-UC07,
KPI_04 Technical Direct x x x x
ment state ergy cur- HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
of the tailment of UC03, HLU5-UC01,

production RES and HLU5-UC04, HLU6-

units DER UC04
B.2 Re- HLU2-UC04, HLU2-

Energy
duced en- UC05, HLU2-UC07,
losses per
ergy cur- HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
KPI_05 Technical production Direct x x x x
tailment of UC03, HLU5-UC01,
unit due to
RES and HLU5-UC04, HLU6-
curtailment
DER UC04
B.2 Re-
Measure-
duced en-
ment of
ergy cur-
KPI_06 Technical the Merit Indirect HLU2-UC05 x
tailment of
order ef-
RES and
fect (MOE)
DER
Accuracy of
B.2 Re-
the produc-
duced en-
tion fore-
ergy cur-
KPI_07 Technical cast calcu- Direct HLU2-UC02 x
tailment of
lated 1
RES and
hour in ad-
DER
vance
Accuracy of
B.2 Re-
the produc-
duced en- HLU1-UC03, HLU2-
tion fore-
ergy cur- UC02, HLU7-UC01,
KPI_08 Technical cast calcu- Direct x x x
tailment of HLU7-UC02, HLU7-
lated 24
RES and UC03, HLU7-UC04
hours in
DER
advance
B.2 Re-
Distributed duced en-
RES Fore- ergy cur-
KPI_09 Technical Direct HLU2-UC08 x
cast Ade- tailment of
quacy RES and
DER
B.3 Power
Load shed-
quality
KPI_10 Technical ding mini- Direct HLU1-UC10 x
and qual-
mization
ity supply

B.3 Power
Voltage de- quality HLU4-UC03, HLU5-
KPI_11 Technical Direct x x x
viation and qual- UC01, HLU6-UC06
ity supply
Area con-
B.3 Power
trol error
quality HLU5-UC02, HLU6-
KPI_12 Technical over a Direct x x
and qual- UC03
longer time
ity supply
period
Frequency
deviation
B.3 Power
from nomi-
KPI_13 Technical nal value Direct x x x
and qual- UC02, HLU6-UC03
over a
ity supply
short time
period
Variation in
power
B.3 Power
transfers
KPI_14 Technical over critical Direct x x x
and qual- UC04, HLU6-UC05
transmis-
ity supply
sion corri-
dors
Measure-
ment Accu- B.3 Power
racy for quality
aFRP (bal- and qual-
ancing) en- ity supply
ergies
Efficiency
of identifi-
cation of
B.3 Power
cross-bor-
quality
KPI_16 Technical der conges- Direct HLU1-UC06 x
and qual-
tion by
ity supply
FLOW-
based algo-
rithm

Efficiency
of identifi-
cation of B.3 Power
cross-bor- quality
der conges- and qual-
tion by ity supply
NTC-based
algorithm
Transmis-
B.3 Power
sion capac-
quality
KPI_18 Technical ity increase Direct HLU1-UC04 x
and qual-
by dynamic
ity supply
line rating
B.4 Ex-
Intercon-
tended as- HLU1-UC10; HLU4-
KPI_19 Technical nections Direct x x
set life- UC01
usage
time
B.4 Ex-
Congestion tended as- HLU4-UC01, HLU5-
KPI_20 Technical Direct x x x
alleviation set life- UC01, HLU6-UC07
time
B.5 In-
Increased
creased HLU7-UC01, HLU7-
system
flexibility UC02, HLU7-UC04,
KPI_21 Technical flexibility Indirect x
from en- HLU7-UC05, HLU7-
for energy
ergy play- UC06
players
ers
B.5 In-
Hybrid creased HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
power flexibility UC03, HLU7-UC01,
KPI_22 Technical Indirect x x
plant flexi- from en- HLU7-UC02, HLU7-
bility ergy play- UC04, HLU7-UC05
ers
B.5 In-
Hybrid creased HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
power flexibility UC03, HLU7-UC01,
KPI_23 Technical Direct x x
plant dis- from en- HLU7-UC02, HLU7-
patchability ergy play- UC04, HLU7-UC05
ers

B.5 In-
HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
Hybrid creased
UC03, HLU7-UC01,
power flexibility
KPI_24 Technical Direct HLU7-UC02, HLU7- x x
plant firm- from en-
UC03, HLU7-UC04,
ness ergy play-
HLU7-UC05
ers
B.5 In-
Amount of creased
reduced or flexibility
shifted from en-
load ergy play-
ers
B.6 Im-
Hybrid proved
power competi-
HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
KPI_26 Economic plant Bene- tiveness of Direct x x
UC03, HLU7-UC05
fit Cost Ra- the elec-
tio (BCR) tricity
market
B.6 Im-
proved
Balancing competi-
KPI_27 Economic cost reduc- tiveness of Indirect HLU9-UC02 x
tion the elec-
tricity
market
B.6 Im-
proved
Profit in- competi- HLU3-UC02, HLU3-
KPI_28 Economic crease/op- tiveness of Indirect UC03, HLU5-UC05, x x x
timisation the elec- HLU7-UC01
tricity
market
Probabilis-
tic system Project
adequacy KPIs
index

Active Project
HLU1-UC02, HLU1-
KPI_30 Technical power de- KPIs Direct x
UC05
viation
Absolute Project
net posi- KPIs
tion fore-
cast error
Feasibility Project
range time KPIs
DLR fore- Project
KPI_33 Technical cast devia- KPIs Direct HLU1-UC04 x
tion
Average Project
KPI_34 Technical ampacity KPIs Direct HLU1-UC04 x
increase
Average Project
KPI_35 Technical ampacity KPIs Direct HLU1-UC04 x
decrease
Reliability Project
KPI_36 Technical margin KPIs Direct HLU1-UC05 x
change
IGMA (Indi- Project
vidual Grid KPIs
Model ac-
curacy)
Individual Project
Grid Model KPIs
KPI_38 Technical Number of Direct HLU1-UC09 x
Nodes out
of limit
Annual Project
number of KPIs
WAMS acti-
vated re-
medial ac-
tions

Reduction Project
in cost of KPIs
reserves by
KPI_40 Economic applying Direct HLU1-UC08 x
regional re-
serve
scheduling
Frequency Project
Restoration KPIs
Reserve de-
crease
Under-fre- Project
quency Re- KPIs
serve ade-
quacy
OFRA Project
(over-fre- KPIs
HLU1-UC11, HLU1-
KPI_43 Technical quency re- Direct x
UC12
serve ade-
quacy)
Transmis- Project HLU9-UC01, HLU9-
KPI_44 Technical Indirect
sion Losses KPIs UC02
Average Project
Available KPIs
HLU9-UC01, HLU9-
KPI_45 Technical Import/Ex- Indirect x
UC02
port Capac-
ity (AATC)
Energy cost Project HLU5-UC05, HLU6-
KPI_46 Economic Indirect x x
reduction KPIs UC01
Coopera-
HLU8-UC01, HLU8-
tive busi-
Specific UC02, HLU8-UC03,
KPI_47 Economic ness model Indirect x
KPIs HLU8-UC05, HLU8-
- cost re-
UC06, HLU8-UC08
duction
BESS return
of invest- Specific
KPI_48 Economic Indirect HLU8-UC08 x
ment drops KPIs
by multi

market in-
tegrations
Herfindahl-
Specific HLU9-UC01, HLU9-
KPI_49 Economic Hirschman Indirect x
KPIs UC02
Index (HHI)
Savings (so-
cial wel-
HLU5-UC02, HLU5-
fare) com- Specific
KPI_50 Economic Indirect UC03, HLU5-UC04, x x
pared to KPIs
HLU9-UC01
the base-
line model
Intraday
market Specific
KPI_51 Economic Indirect HLU9-UC02 x
trading vol- KPIs
ume
Number of
successful
Specific
KPI_52 Economic activations Indirect HLU9-UC01 x
KPIs
requested
by TSO
Reduction
Specific
KPI_53 Economic of the cost Indirect HLU9-UC01 x
KPIs
for mFRR
HLU user
Specific
KPI_54 Technical orders de- Indirect HLU9-UC01 x
KPIs
livery ratio
User satis- Project
KPI_55 Social Indirect All HLUs x x x x x x x x x
faction KPIs
Ease of use
of devel-
Project
KPI_56 Social oped prod- Indirect All HLUs x x x x x x x x x
KPIs
ucts/ser-
vices
Employ- Project
ment KPIs

Jobs-New- Project
Skills KPIs
Number of
women
Project
KPI_59 Social managing Indirect All HLUs x x x x x x x x x
KPIs
CROSSBOW
tools
Change in
Project
KPI_60 Environmental GHG emis- Indirect All HLUs x x x x x x x x x
KPIs
sions
Table 17: List of all KPIs with corresponding HLUs and UCs
*KPIs from 1-46 were defined in WP2
*KPIs from 47-60 were defined within this deliverable
*KPI44 which was defined in WP2 will not be calculated since it is not relevant for developed HLUs/products/services

CROSSBOW HLUs/products to CBNMO and Smart Grids Functionalities Mapping
Services A) Enabling the network to integrate users with new requirements B) Enhancing efficiency in day-to-day grid operation
Guarantee the integration of distributed energy resources (both large- Optimise the operation of transmission assets and improve the efficiency of the network
Outcome and small-scale stochastic renewable generation, heat pumps, electric through enhanced automation, monitoring, protection and real-time operation. Faster fault
vehicles and storage) connected to the distribution network identification / resolution will help improve continuity of supply levels.
Identifica-
Enhance
tion of
Updated net- Enhance monitoring Frequent infor-
Facilitate the Automated fault technical
Facilitate connec- Use of network work perfor- monitoring and observ- Improve mation exchange
use of the grid identification/grid and non-
tions at all locations control sys- mance data on and control ability of monitoring on actual ac-
Functionalities for the users at reconfiguration, technical
for any kind of de- tems for net- continuity of of power grids down of network tive/reactive
all the voltages/ reducing outage losses by
vices work purposes supply and flows and to the low assets generation/con-
locations times power
voltage quality voltages voltage lev- sumption
flow anal-
els
ysis
Nu. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
HLU1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
HLU2 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1
HLU3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HLU4 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
HLU5 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
HLU6 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1
HLU7 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
HLU8 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1
HLU9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Table 18: CROSSBOW HLUs/products to CBNMO and Smart Grids Functionalities Mapping excel table – Part 1/3

Services C) Ensuring network security, system control and quality of supply D) Better planning of future network investment
Collection and use of data to enable more accurate

Foster system security through an intelligent and more effective control of distributed energy resources, ancil- modelling of networks, especially at LV level, also con-
Outcome lary backup reserves and other ancillary services. Maximise the capability of the network to manage intermit- sidering new grid users, in order to optimise infra-
tent generation, without adversely affecting quality of supply parameters. structure requirements and so reduce their environ-
mental impact. Introduction of new
Additional in-
Allow grid users Intermittent System secu- Better models of Improved asset formation on
Operation Solutions for de-
and aggrega- sources of gen- rity assess- Monitoring of Distributed Genera- management grid quality
schemes for mand response for
Functionalities tors to partici- eration to con- ment and safety, particularly tion, storage, flexi- and replace- and consump-
voltage/cur- system security in
pate in ancillary tribute to sys- management in public areas ble loads, ancillary ment strate- tion by meter-
rent control the required time
services market tem security of remedies services gies ing for plan-
ning
Nu. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
HLU1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
HLU2 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
HLU3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HLU4 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
HLU5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HLU6 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
HLU7 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0
HLU8 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1
HLU9 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

F) Enabling and encouraging stronger and more direct involve-

Services E) Improving market functioning and customer service
ment of consumers in their energy usage and management
Foster greater consumption awareness, taking advantage of

Increase the performance and reliability of current market processes through im-
smart metering systems and improved customer information in
Outcome proved data and data flows between market participants, and so enhance customer
order to allow consumers to modify their behaviour according to
experience
price and load signals and related information.
Remote
Partici- Im- Availa-
Facili- Support Provide man-
Partici- pation of prove- Improve bility of
tate Open the adop- grid us- Suffi- age-
pation virtual ment to cus- Im- individ- Total im-
con- platform tion of in- ers with cient ment of
of con- power industry tomer Consump- Improve prove ual con- pact of
sumer (grid intelligent individ- fre- meters
nected plants systems level re- tion/injection energy infor- tinuity CROSSBOW
partici- frastruc- home/fa- ual ad- quency and
Functionalities genera- and ag- (for set- porting data and price usage mation of sup- HLUs/prod-
pation ture) for cilities vance of me- con-
tors in grega- tlement, in the signals by dif- infor- on en- ply and ucts to
in the EV re- automa- notice of ter sumer
the elec- tors in system case of ferent means mation ergy voltage functionali-
electric- charge tion and planned read- subsys-
tricity the elec- balance, inter- sources quality ties
ity mar- purposes smart de- interrup- ings tems
market tricity schedul- ruptions indica-
ket vices tions (e.g.
market ing) tors
storage)
Nu. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
HLU1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
HLU2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 14
HLU3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
HLU4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
HLU5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
HLU6 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 9
HLU7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
HLU8 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
HLU9 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 6

Technical KPI
KPI_54 HLU user orders delivery ratio
Strategic Objective • To check how well the systems/platforms/products work.
Project Objective • To confirm that our systems/platforms/ communications are well
connected and implemented.
Description Percentage of successfully placed orders by user/MP in the system.
Formula 𝑶𝒊
𝑶𝑫𝑹(%) = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝑶𝒑
𝑂𝐷𝑅 is the notification delivery ratio in %.

𝑂𝑖 is the number of orders inserted by MPs/TSOs in the considered period.
𝑂𝑝 is the number of orders placed and shown in the system.
The observation period is one day.
Unit of measurement %
Related UC(s) HLU09-01, HLU09-02
Project relevance Indirect
GENERAL COMMENTS
We expect that this number will be close to 100% and in case that it is lower that means that there were some
technical issues in the systems (APIs now working, connection drops, the system not responsive, etc.).
Economic KPIs
KPI_47 Cooperative business model - cost reduction
Strategic Objective • Reducing the balancing service cost
Project Objective • Validating if the cooperative busines model has potential
Description The cooperative business model indicates that middleman (retailer) is not needed
to successfully participate on the e.g. balancing market. The KPI would calculate
if cost really drops compared with the traditional balancing services.
Base case: a utility serves as retailer, balance responsible party (BRP) and trader
of flexibility. The participants of the consortium are considered as individuals and
are bound to the utility, which takes a margin for all business activities.
Cooperative case: The cooperative appears as one joint contractor against the
retailer and BRP. This strategy improves the negotiation power for the retail
energy price, the individual imbalances of the cooperative members can be
netted. The cooperative can trade on the balancing market independently from
the retailer.
Formula Comparison of total costs for supply, including retail energy, imbalance costs and
flexibility trading, for the two aforementioned cases.
The investigated scenario will be based on a pool of 10 participants of different
types, with generic profiles.
Unit of measurement EUR per year

Related UC(s) HLU8-UC01

GENERAL COMMENTS
It is expected that the costs in the cooperative case will be lower compared to the current base case.
KPI_48 BESS return of investment drops by multi-market integrations

Strategic Objective • Improving quality of balancing services by BESS introduction
Project Objective • Impact of the BESS’s return of investment by multi market integration
Description The current BESS prices are still high, and the amortization period is long. The KPI
validates if the integration of BESS to multiple markets such as Intraday, CFR,
mFRR, aFRR would allow BESS to be paid off faster.
Formula Base case: The trading strategy uses the flexibility of the BESS to earn revenues
on one preferred market (probably aFRR).
Multi-market integration case: The BESS is traded on multiple markets (FCR, aFRR,
mFRR, ID) with a dynamic assignment of its flexibility to the market with the
highest revenue expectation, compared on daily basis.
The investments costs of the BESS and the operational costs (w/e payments for
charging energy) are assumed to be independent of the trading strategy.
The revenues from BESS operation will be influenced by the trading strategy.
Investment costs, operational costs and trading revenues will be used to calculate
the internal rate of return (IRR) of the investment project for the two use cases.
Finally, the KPI will compare the internal rate of return (IRR) of the BESS
investment in the “base case” and in the “market integration case”.
Country of investigation: We will select one country with well-established and
transparent balancing markets, preferably with established FCR market.
Unit of measurement Internal rate of return (IRR) in %
• for the first 10 years
• for the entire lifetime of the BESS
Related UC(s) HLU8-UC08
GENERAL COMMENTS
Revenues from the operation of BESS vary significantly as they are used in different markets and/or for
different system services.
KPI_49 Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI)

Strategic Objective • An open market with many market participants.
Project Objective • Reducing market concentration and market power of individual market
participants.
Description Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is a commonly accepted measure of market
concentration.
Formula 𝑯𝑯𝑰 = 𝒔𝟐𝟏 + 𝒔𝟐𝟐 + 𝒔𝟐𝟑 +. . . . +𝒔𝟐𝒏

where sn is the market share of firm i. To determine the market share of an

individual market participant, we take the volume of concluded transactions of an
individual market participant, which is then compared with the total volume of
concluded transactions in a certain market. In general:
1000 < HHI – market concentration is low

1000 < HHI < 1800 – market concentration is medium-high
HHI > 1800 – market concentration is high
In practice, HHI is very often used for the 3 largest market participants. We strive
to keep HHI as low as possible. In the case of high HHI values, the presence of
market power is suspected.
Unit of measurement #Number
Related UC(s) HLU09-01, HLU09-02
GENERAL COMMENTS
An open market with fair rules for all market participants will lead to low HHI.
KPI_50 Savings (social welfare) compared to the baseline model

Strategic Objective • Increased social welfare as one of the benefits of the transnational platform
Project Objective • The cost of procuring balancing energy (mFRR) decreases in the SEE region
Description Amount saved due to the Activation Optimization Function and cross-border
marginal price.
Formula 𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝒔𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒘𝒆𝒍𝒇𝒂𝒓𝒆 = 𝑺𝑾𝑩𝒊𝒅𝟏 + 𝑺𝑾𝑩𝒊𝒅𝟐 + 𝑺𝑾𝑫𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒅𝟏 + 𝑺𝑾𝑫𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒅𝟐
𝑺𝑾𝒊 = 𝑽𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 ∗ (𝑷𝒎𝒂𝒙 𝒓𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕 − 𝑷𝑪𝑩𝑴𝑷)
𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝒔𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒘𝒆𝒍𝒇𝒂𝒓𝒆 is the amount saved for procuring the balancing energy
in an interval
𝑺𝑾𝒊 is the social welfare of a specific bid/demand
𝑽𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 is the Volume (Energy) of the activated bid/demand in MWh
𝑷𝒎𝒂𝒙 𝒓𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕 is the maximum price of the requested activation in €/MWh
𝑷𝒄𝒓𝒐𝒔𝒔−𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒆𝒓 𝒎𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒑𝒓𝒊𝒄𝒆) is the cross-border marginal price (price of the
accepted activation) set by the algorithm in €/MWh
The social welfare is calculated for every interval of the Activation Optimization
Function (every 15 minutes)
Unit of measurement EUR, could also be the % of saved EUR
Related UC(s) HLU09-01
GENERAL COMMENTS
The KPI will be calculated with the help of the historic data. Baseline scenario will be compared to the
(estimated) fully functional mFRR market in the SEE countries.
KPI_51 Intraday market trading volume

Strategic Objective • Market coupling in the SEE region

Project Objective • Estimation of the increase in the amount of energy that could come from
coupling countries in the region on the intraday market
Description Increase in trading volume is closely connected with the liquidity of the market
Formula Comparing the increase of volume traded on Power Exchanges before and after
market coupling to make an estimation based on the volumes currently present
on the intraday markets in the region (if they exist).
Unit of measurement MWh
GENERAL COMMENTS
This KPI will be calculated with the help of recent market coupling projects in the regions (good practice) and
the comparison with the CROSSBOW region will be made.
KPI_52 Number of successful activations requested by TSO

Strategic Objective • Ensure that as many requests from the transmission system operator as
possible are activated.
Project Objective • With common mFRR market TSOs can activate units for requested services
in other countries with lower prices.
Description This KPI evaluates the ratio between requested and activated mFRR for local and
cross-border trading
Formula ∑𝑻 𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒄𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒇𝒖𝒍 𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔
𝑺𝒖𝒄𝒄𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒇𝒖𝒍 𝑨𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑻𝑺𝑶 = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎
∑𝑻 𝒓𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔
∑𝑇 𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 is the total number of activated products upon

request from TSO during the observation period T.
∑𝑇 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 is the total number of requests from TSO during the
observation period T.
GENERAL COMMENTS
The number should increase due to the common market and additional cross-border opportunities.
KPI_53 Reduction of the cost for mFRR

Strategic Objective • To reduce the costs of mFRR for TSOs.
Project Objective • Simulate what would be the overall costs for mFRR in case of common
mFRR market.
Description This KPI compares the cost of mFRR before and after common mFRR market
(mFRR trading platform)

Formula 𝑪𝑶𝑺𝑻𝒎𝑭𝑹𝑹 𝒂𝒇𝒕 − 𝑪𝑶𝑺𝑻𝒎𝑭𝑹𝑹 𝒃𝒆𝒇

∆𝑪𝑶𝑺𝑻𝒎𝑭𝑹𝑹 = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝑪𝑶𝑺𝑻𝒎𝑭𝑹𝑹 𝒃𝒆𝒇
𝐶𝑂𝑆𝑇𝑚𝐹𝑅𝑅 𝑏𝑒𝑓 is the estimated total cost of mFRR for TSO before the common
mFRR market.
𝐶𝑂𝑆𝑇𝑚𝐹𝑅𝑅 𝑎𝑓𝑡 is the estimated total cost of mFRR for TSO with the common mFRR
market.
The observation period is usually one month but can be calculated also for a year.
GENERAL COMMENTS
The cost of mFRR is expected to be reduced after the implementation of mFRR common market. A negative
value of ∆COST_mFRR is expected.
Social KPIs
KPI_55 User satisfaction

Strategic Objective • To develop products that work well.
Project Objective • Users are satisfied with the developed products.
Description Overall user satisfaction regarding HLUs and products.
Formula Questionnaire
Unit of measurement On a scale from high user satisfaction to users not being satisfied
Related UC(s) All HLUs
GENERAL COMMENTS
User satisfaction with product/service is essential for any business.
KPI_56 Ease of use of developed products/services

Strategic Objective • To develop products that are easy to use.
Project Objective • Users find that products/services are easy to use.
Description Developed products/services are easy to use.
Formula Questionnaire/Feedback from users
Unit of measurement On a scale from easy use to complicated use

GENERAL COMMENTS
The ease of use of the developed product/service is important for any business.
KPI_57 Employment
Strategic Objective • Creation of new jobs.
Project Objective • Create an opportunity for new jobs in the sector.
Description Could the implementation of the CROSSBOW HLUs and products lead to job
creation/losses throughout the whole value chain?
Formula New jobs created by CROSSBOW HLUs/products solutions (questionnaire,
interviews)
Unit of measurement # of jobs created/lost
GENERAL COMMENTS
The implementation of CROSSBOW HLU / products and services should lead to new jobs created.
KPI_58 Jobs-New-Skills
Strategic Objective • Creation of qualified jobs.
Project Objective • Create an opportunity for qualified jobs in the sector.
# of end-field technicians and grid operators to be trained in the management
Description
and operation of CROSSBOW tools
Unit of measurement Qualitative
GENERAL COMMENTS
The implementation of CROSSBOW HLU / products and services should lead to high quality and specialised
new jobs created.
KPI _59 Number of women managing CROSSBOW tools/products

Strategic Objective • Gender balance promotion.
Project Objective • The number of women managing the tools/products of CROSSBOW
should be equal to the number of men.
The objective is to achieve (at least) a 50% of women involved in managing
Description
CROSSBOW tools/products during the demonstrations
Unit of measurement Qualitative
GENERAL COMMENTS

The implementation of CROSSBOW HLU / products and services should lead to higher gender balance in the
energy sector.
Environmental KPI
KPI_60 Change in GHG emissions
Strategic Objective • To reduce the GHG emissions.
Project Objective • Products/services implemented should lead to the decrease of GHG emissions.
Description Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by means of increasing the penetration of
renewable production, use of storage and energy sources in other countries.
Formula
𝑮𝑯𝑮 = ∑ 𝑪𝑬𝑪𝒕 × 𝑳𝒕
𝒕
𝐶𝐸𝐶𝑡 is the Carbon Emission Coefficient during each time interval t of the period under
study. It reflects the carbon emissions (in t CO2/kWh) associated to the specific
generation sources used at each time. An approximation can be obtained by analysing
the energy mix of each test case or country as a whole using the information from
transparency platform.
Unit of measurement t COe2 /year, kg CO2-eq/kWh. Timeframe: one day/month/ year

GENERAL COMMENTS
The time interval could be one year but the choice of period for calculation is left upon HLU leaders.
Input Data for CBA – Questionnaire in Google Format

Input Data for CBA - Google Form (questions available below)
Input Data for Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) – first version

Please complete the following questionnaire, following in detail the Instructions and Guidelines provided
below. Thank you for your complete and timely contribution.
For any questions or assistance needed please contact CBA leader.
*Required
Email address: ________________

No. Questionnaire Information to be filed in

position
1 Product name Insert the name of the product in line with the Grant Agreement of CROSSBOW
2 Product Insert a brief description of the product specifying the most important features
description (software platform, open source, etc.)
3 Product Insert the minimal requirements for a proper operation of the product. The following
requirements topics must be addressed: software installation requirements, sensors number, types
and capabilities, data transmission requirements, and others.
4 Product functions Insert the functions and/or services the product can provide.
5 Product leader Nominate the product CROSSBOW leader in line with the Grant Agreement of
CROSSBOW
6 License for usage Indicate the price of the license the potential client must pay for using the software.
Also, indicate the periodicity of the payment: only once, an annual fee, a month fee, etc.
7 Deployment cost Indicate the cost of deployment of the product
8 Installation cost Indicate the cost of installation including the cost of the sensors necessary to be installed
for a proper operation of the product
9 Maintenance cost Indicate the necessary costs for maintenance of the product mentioning the periodicity,
the spare parts (if the case) and wages
10 Operation cost Indicate the necessary costs for operation of the product mentioning the periodicity.
11 Direct costs Direct labor involved in manufacturing, inventory raw materials, manufacturing
expenses, etc. will be found in all cost categories (from 7 to 10)
12 Indirect costs Might include electricity, overhead costs from management, rent, utilities, etc. will be
found in all cost categories (from 7 to 10)
13 Intangible costs Such as impact on customers, employees or delivery times, opportunity costs, costs of
potential risks such as regulatory risks, competition, and environmental impacts etc.
14 Financial (tangible) Revenue and sales increase from increased production or new product
benefits
15 Intangible benefits Such as improved employee safety and morale as well as customer satisfaction due to
enhanced product offerings or faster delivery, competitive advantage or market share
gained because of the decision
Table 21: Instructions and Guidelines for Questionnaire

Figure 6: Input data for CBA – Product information

Figure 7: Input data for CBA – Cost Data 1/2

Figure 8: Input data for CBA – Cost Data 2/2

Figure 9: Input data for CBA – Benefit Data

Figure 10: Input data for CBA – Partner Details

Cba 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cba 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ref.

Title: Document Version:

Project Number: Project Acronym: Project Title:

H2020- 773430 CROSSBOW CROSS BOrder management of variable renewable energies

Contractual Delivery Date: Actual Delivery Date: Deliverable Type*-Security*:

M38 (12/2020) M38 (12/2020) R-PU

Responsible: Organisation: Contributing WP:

Andrej Gubina UL WP14

© CROSSBOW Consortium http://crossbowproject.eu/

Revision Date Description Author (Organisation)

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 2

This project has received funding from the

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 3

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 4

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 5

ECONOMIC KPIS .................................................................................................................................................. 87

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 6

Figure 1: Areas of CROSSBOW impact evaluation

Structure of the document

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 7

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 8

Figure 2: CROSSBOW Sub-projects and Work Packages

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 9

Analysis of CROSSBOW KPI Performance Domains

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 10

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 11

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 12

O9. Transnational ancillary service market

Cost-benefit analysis methodology

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 13

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 14

3 COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING

Main stages of CBA implementation

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 15

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 16

Stage 1: Review and describe

Stage 2: Map assets on to

Stage 3: Map functionalities on to

Stage 4: Establish the baseline Estimate benefits

Stage 5: Identify potential

Stage 6: Identify and quantify costs

Compare costs and

Figure 3: CBA Structure, Source: [7]

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 17

Stage 1: CROSSBOW core impact targets

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 18

Technological objectives Success measure

CROSSBOW technologies, elements and goals

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 19

HLU/Product Assets and Infrastructure Involved More information about technology

HLU3 Cross-border • Production assets (hydropower plants, • Computers, firewalls, servers,

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 20

Stage 2: HLUs/products to functionalities mapping

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 21

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 22

3.3.1.2 HLU2 - Cross-border RES management

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 23

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 24

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 25

13 - Intermittent sources of Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC2.7

D14.1 Impact assessment and Cost benefit analysis (CBA) planning 26

20 - Participation of con- Related UCs: UC 2.5, UC 2.6

Table 5: HLU2 Impact to CBNMO and Smart Grids

Contractual Delivery Date: Actual Delivery Date: Deliverable Type-Security: