Ergon Energy's fixed quarterly GreenPower amounts are not supported by the spec

[garychapman]

Description

Ergon Energy has a number of energy plans that feature quarterly fixed GreenPower amounts.

e.g. https://cdr.energymadeeasy.gov.au/ergon/cds-au/v1/energy/plans/ERG404694RRE1@EME

There is no way to determine that the amount represents a fixed quarterly amount, other than by parsing the description field.

Change Proposed

The spec needs to be expanded to include a FIXED_PER_QUARTER type enum.

[CDR-API-Stream]

This issue was discussed with AER/DELWP. Below is the summary:

• The data shared by AER/DELWP, including the type of charge (ENUM values) within EnergyPlanGreenPowerCharges is provided by the retailers
• FIXED_PER_QUARTER, or any other indication that a rate is fixed per quarter, is not currently provided to AER/DELWP. Consequently, they cannot share the data.

Based on the above, the DSB's recommendation is to not proceed with this change. If the community feels this is an important issue to consult on it can be revisited.

[garychapman]

So how do we compel Ergon to provide their pricing in time units that are supported by the spec?

In every non-Ergon plan document, FIXED_PER_UNIT is used to denote a per-kWh GreenPower amount.

If the tiers objects had an optional measureUnit property then this wouldn't be an issue, but API consumers shouldn't be required to parse ancillary text fields on the off chance that a retailer has chosen to supply data that doesn't comply with the spec.

[CDR-API-Stream]

@garychapman, the data holder for Product Reference Data (PRD) is AER/DELWP as per the energy sector designation. Ergon is not required to provide PRD information.

Given the issue highlighted above relates to PRD information retailers currently provide to AER, which is outside the scope of the CDR, the best way to discuss it would be to reach out to AER. Their contact details for CDR PRD issues can be found here - https://www.aer.gov.au/consumers/energy-product-reference-data

[mattyp]

Given the issue highlighted above relates to PRD information retailers currently provide to AER, which is outside the scope of the CDR, the best way to discuss it would be to reach out to AER.

I feel as though the pertinent point of this issue has been unfortunately missed. The issue highlighted does not actually relate to the PRD information retailers currently provide to AER. The issue highlighted relates to the fact that the spec does not cater for a specified energy plan use-case. In this instance there are plans which are designed with a green power charge of $ per quarter. The spec caters for $ per day, $ per week and $ per month, but does not cater for $ per quarter.

It might seem a matter of semantics and that the data should simply be put in one of the specified boxes (e.g. $30 per quarter should be represented by $10 per month), but I would imagine that retail plan designers deliberately choose these parameters and representing them differently could actually be misleading to consumers (e.g. fee is represented as $10 per month but is then charged as a $30 quarterly amount up front).

Given there are legitimate business requirements for per quarter charges, it makes sense to simply extend the ENUM to include a FIXED_PER_QUARTER value.

Once in the standards, the retailers can provide the appropriate enum value to AER for the plan to be appropriately represented to consumers.

Until then, ugly error-prone workarounds will be in full swing...