In July, we reconvened the Steering Group for Open Energy. The Steering Group comprises a wide range of industry leaders and subject matter experts spanning the commercial, regulatory and government landscapes. The Steering Group plays a critical role in Open Energy’s development, providing a sector perspective that ensures that Open Energy is designed for and with the energy industry.
Date: 22 July 2025 11:00-12:30 BST
Location: In person and online
Co-Chairs: Sara Vaughan & Gavin Starks
Secretariat: IB1
Meeting Aims
- Highlight an issue which risks slowing down the progress to data sharing and the amount of value it could bring
- Alignment on approach and definitions
- Alignment on market architecture proposal
Summary:
Definitions, roles and responsibilities in the market around data sharing
- It was noted that:
- Inconsistent use of key terms such as “Schemes” and “Trust Frameworks,” have contributed to causing wider confusion across the industry, hindering decision-making and alignment.
- Future data sharing frameworks are likely to involve multiple, independently governed trust frameworks, making coordination and interoperability essential.
- The forthcoming DEZNZ and Ofgem flexibility roadmap and response on Data Schemes are expected to acknowledge sector-wide fragmentation and coordination challenges, and may provide further clarity on roles, responsibilities, and implementation expectations.
- It was discussed that, while some participants identified the absence of a central coordinating orchestrator as contributing to delays and duplicative costs, others questioned whether such a role is essential, proposing that clearer implementation responsibilities and project-level accountability might be sufficient. However, concerns were still raised around the “grey areas” of overlap or lack of clarity.
- It was noted that:
- Coordination is particularly important in the context of any move towards cross-sector as opposed to within sector alignment.
- There is some apprehension around cross-sector coordination, which could be mitigated by exploring different pilot projects to see where the value drivers, risks and potential funding sources are, ensuring that practical problems are addressed.
- It was noted that:
- It was agreed that:
- Open Energy should explore initiating and/or support sector-wide dialogue to unify terminology and framework design.
The value question: market architecture proposal
- It was noted that
- Existing estimates, such as £20bn from the Smart Data Forum and £7bn delivered by Open Banking, suggest significant but potentially understated economic value.
- There is intra-organisational disjointment, making it even harder to achieve inter-organisational collaboration.
- It was discussed that:
- Determining what is pre-competitive infrastructure (e.g. Schemes, Trust Frameworks) versus competitive innovation space, is key to unlocking participation from a wide range of actors.
- A collectively developed model could help engage government stakeholders and clarify implementation pathways, moving the proposal from conceptual to operational.
- It was agreed that a credible valuation of a joined up approach to data infrastructure is essential to building momentum, and that both top-down and bottom-up estimation approaches have limitations, and that Open Energy should continue to explore this proposal.
- However, it is currently not the right time to proceed with it, instead we should all consider what comes out of the Flexibility Roadmap publication, and the Government response on developing a data scheme in the energy sector (these were both published the day after the SG, on 23 July 2025, along with a Call for Evidence on improving the visibility of Distributed Energy Assets and a Consultation on the best way to engage consumers on consumer led flexibility).