Key evaluation method for digital transformation demand of power grid enterprise

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of power grid system digital transformation, and particularly discloses a power grid enterprise digital transformation demand key evaluation method, which comprises the following steps: constructing a compliance evaluation model, and screening out effective projects; constructing a project data integrity index evaluation model, and evaluating the data integrity of the effective project by using the data index set to obtain a project with complete data; constructing a feasibility index evaluation model, and performing feasibility evaluation on the project with complete data according to the feasibility index to obtain a project with feasibility; constructing a necessity index evaluation model to obtain a necessity project; constructing a technical index evaluation model, and evaluating items with necessity according to technical indexes to obtain items with safety implementation conditions; and an economic benefit index evaluation model is constructed, projects with safety implementation conditions are evaluated according to economic benefit evaluation indexes, and key digital transformation requirements of the power grid enterprise are obtained.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of digital transformation of power grid systems, and in particular to a method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises. Background Art

[0002] With the development of information technology, especially the emergence of big data and cloud computing, the collection and processing of massive amounts of grid operation data has enabled a deeper understanding of grid operation, more accurate predictions of future grid demand, faster responses to various abnormal events, and more effective optimization of grid operations. The digital transformation of the power system involves the collection, transmission, storage, and processing of massive amounts of data, as well as the application of big data and cloud computing technologies. This raises many new issues and challenges. How can we obtain comprehensive, accurate, and timely grid operation data? How can we ensure the security and timely transmission of this data? How can we efficiently store and process large amounts of data? How can we accurately analyze this data and make informed decisions? These issues all require in-depth research and solutions.

[0003] The digital transformation of power systems requires continuous optimization and improvement to adapt to the ever-changing power system and new challenges. How to better utilize information technology to achieve continuous optimization and intelligentization of the power system? Focusing on the security and privacy of power system data to ensure the smooth progress of the digital transformation of the power system has become a pressing issue. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In response to the above problems, an object of the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises.

[0005] The technical solution adopted by the present invention is: a method for evaluating the key digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises, including:

[0006] Step S01: Build a compliance evaluation model, evaluate planned projects using financial compliance indicators as the basic indicators, and select effective projects;

[0007] Step S02: Construct a project data integrity index evaluation model, use the data index set to evaluate the data integrity of valid projects, complete the project data based on the evaluation results, and obtain projects with complete data;

[0008] Step S03: Construct a feasibility index evaluation model, conduct feasibility evaluation on projects with complete data based on feasibility indicators, and obtain feasible projects;

[0009] Step S04: Construct a necessity index evaluation model, evaluate feasible projects based on the project establishment necessity index, and obtain necessary projects;

[0010] Step S05: Construct a technical indicator evaluation model, evaluate necessary projects based on technical indicators, and obtain projects that meet the conditions for safe implementation;

[0011] Step S06: Construct an economic benefit indicator evaluation model, evaluate projects that meet the safety implementation conditions based on the economic benefit evaluation indicators, and obtain the digital transformation needs of key power grid companies.

[0012] Preferably, the financial compliance indicators in step S01 include: whether there are duplicate projects or data barriers, whether there are split projects, whether capital expenditures and cost expenditures are accurately divided, and whether the investment estimate is reasonable.

[0013] Preferably, the data indicator set in step S02 includes: basic project information, investment estimate, project implementation progress and time nodes.

[0014] Preferably, the feasibility indicators in step S03 include: project scheme design capability, policy consistency, and project evaluation and investment decision-making capabilities.

[0015] Preferably, the indicators of necessity for project establishment in step S04 include: degree of advancement, innovation and technical demonstration.

[0016] Preferably, the technical indicators in step S05 include: applicability, reliability D2 and economic rationality of the technical solution.

[0017] Preferably, the economic benefit evaluation indicators in step S06 include solution profitability and risk evaluation.

[0018] Preferably, the profitability evaluation method of the scheme includes: firstly conducting an economic benefit maximization evaluation of the project, and the indicators of the maximization evaluation include: applicability, reliability and economic rationality of the technical scheme.

[0019] Preferably, the profitability evaluation method of the scheme also includes: conducting an economic evaluation of the project, and the indicators of the economic evaluation include: financial net present value, benefit-cost ratio, financial internal rate of return, dynamic investment recovery period, average annual net present value rate, present value of expenses, operating income and economic risk.

[0020] Preferably, the risk assessment method is uncertainty analysis.

[0021] Beneficial effects of the above technical solution:

[0022] This paper provides a method for evaluating the key digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises. This method integrates financial compliance, data, feasibility, necessity, technical, and economic benefit indicators to better leverage information technology and achieve continuous optimization and intelligentization of power systems. By focusing on the security and privacy of power system data, it ultimately identifies the key digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises, ensuring the smooth implementation of the digital transformation of the power system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0023] Figure 1 A flowchart of a method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises is provided in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0024] The following further describes the implementation methods of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present application, rather than an exhaustive list of all embodiments. It should be noted that the embodiments and features in the embodiments of the present application can be combined with each other unless there is a conflict.

[0025] The terms "first," "second," and the like (if any) in the specification and claims are used to distinguish similar objects and are not necessarily used to describe a particular order or sequential sequence. It should be understood that the terms used in this manner are interchangeable where appropriate so that the embodiments described herein can be implemented in sequences other than those illustrated or described herein. In addition, the terms "including" and "having," and any variations thereof, are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions, e.g., a process, method, system, product, or apparatus that includes a series of steps or elements is not necessarily limited to those steps or elements expressly listed, but may include other steps or elements not expressly listed or inherent to such process, method, product, or apparatus.

[0026] It should be understood that the term "and / or" as used in this disclosure is merely a description of the relationship between associated objects, indicating that three possible relationships exist. For example, "A and / or B" can represent: A exists alone, A and B exist simultaneously, or B exists alone. Furthermore, the character " / " in this disclosure generally indicates that the associated objects are in an "or" relationship.

[0027] Example 1

[0028] One embodiment of the present invention provides a method for evaluating the key digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises. The method specifically includes the following steps:

[0029] Step S01: Build a compliance evaluation model, evaluate planned projects using financial compliance indicators as the basic indicators, and select effective projects;

[0030] Step S02: Construct a project data integrity index evaluation model, use the data index set to evaluate the data integrity of valid projects, complete the project data based on the evaluation results, and obtain projects with complete data;

[0031] Step S03: Construct a feasibility index evaluation model, conduct feasibility evaluation on projects with complete data based on feasibility indicators, and obtain feasible projects;

[0032] Step S04: Construct a necessity index evaluation model, evaluate feasible projects based on the project establishment necessity index, and obtain necessary projects;

[0033] Step S05: Construct a technical indicator evaluation model, evaluate necessary projects based on technical indicators, and obtain projects that meet the conditions for safe implementation;

[0034] Step S06: Construct an economic benefit indicator evaluation model, evaluate projects that meet the safety implementation conditions based on the economic benefit evaluation indicators, and obtain the digital transformation needs of key power grid companies.

[0035] The specific steps are as follows:

[0036] 1. Building a compliance evaluation model

[0037] Before determining the focus of internal needs, we first evaluate whether the projects of each department are compliant. Therefore, we build a compliance evaluation model, with financial compliance indicators as the basic indicator A0, and the secondary indicators include four: whether there are duplicate projects or data barriers A 01 ; Is there a split project A 02 ; Whether capital expenditure and cost expenditure are accurately divided 03 Is the investment estimate reasonable? 04 If all four secondary indicators are in compliance, the requirements will be ranked according to the subsequent evaluation indicator system.

[0038] If any of the secondary indicators are not in compliance, it is considered non-compliant and needs to be returned for modification.

[0039] The evaluation contents of the secondary indicators include:

[0040] (1) Whether there are duplicate projects or data barriers A 01 : Whether the project construction content overlaps or intersects with the functions of projects already constructed or proposed by the State Grid headquarters and units within the system, and whether there is any duplication of project establishment;

[0041] Whether it complies with the direction of State Grid Corporation's information system integration construction and whether new data islands will be created.

[0042] (2) Whether the project has a split project A02 : Is there a plan to split the overall project into two parts?

[0043] (3) Whether the project accurately divides capital expenditure and cost expenditure 03 : Whether the division is accurate according to the standards.

[0044] (4) Is the project investment estimate reasonable? 04 : Whether the workload of each link of the project is reasonable, and whether the project development and implementation costs exceed the standards uniformly implemented by State Grid Corporation. Preferably, in this embodiment, the labor standards (including direct labor costs, indirect labor costs, indirect non-labor costs, and taxes) are calculated as follows: consulting and design are calculated at 2,500 yuan / person-day, system design and development are calculated at 2,100 yuan / person-day, integration implementation is calculated at 1,500 yuan / person-day, business operations are calculated at 1,500 yuan / person-day, data product (application) R&D is calculated at 2,100 yuan / person-day, data standardization, catalog construction quality management, etc. are calculated at 1,500 yuan / person-day, and data access, upload, distribution, and data product (application) implementation are calculated at 1,500 yuan / person-day.

[0045] Project compliance is assessed using financial compliance indicators, and compliant projects are further evaluated. This evaluation is conducted across six dimensions: project feasibility, necessity, technology, economic benefits, social benefits, and environmental impact. This is then used to prioritize internal needs and identify key requirements for Shanxi Power Grid's digital transformation.

[0046] 2. Data integrity indicators

[0047] When evaluating a project, the first step is to ensure the validity and completeness of the project information. The project's validity is ensured through the previous step of financial compliance evaluation.

[0048] Project data is a crucial basis for assessing project feasibility and potential impact. Incomplete data can lead to biased assessment results and compromise decision-making accuracy. Therefore, we have established a data completeness indicator to assess the completeness of project data across three aspects: basic project information, investment budget, and implementation progress and timelines.

[0049] Construct an indicator set: Data integrity A = {Basic project information A1; Investment estimate A2; Project implementation progress and time nodes A3}. Specifically:

[0050] (1) Basic information of the project A1: This measures the completeness of the basic information of the project, mainly evaluating the project category, project establishment basis, project necessity, project construction content and implementation plan, main equipment and material list and budget estimate.

[0051] (2) Investment Estimate A2: This indicator examines whether the total amount and detailed content, the name (version), quantity and amount of the configured software and hardware in the investment appraisal document are complete.

[0052] (3) Project implementation progress and time nodes A3: This indicator includes time nodes such as design, commencement, material arrival, and completion.

[0053] 3. Feasibility indicators

[0054] In order to ensure the successful implementation and sustainable development of the project, a key assessment of the project's feasibility is conducted.

[0055] The feasibility index evaluation content is mainly divided into three aspects: whether the project design is optimal, whether it complies with the guidance of superior and national policies, and whether scientific decisions can be made.

[0056] Construct an indicator set: Feasibility indicator B = {project scheme design capability B1; policy consistency B2; project evaluation and investment decision-making capability B3}. Specifically including:

[0057] (1) Project design capability B1: Whether the project design is feasible, whether the design is sufficiently detailed, whether the design meets the objectives, and the design unit's qualification level. Whether the project design is reasonable. Project design capability refers to the evaluation of the ability to scientifically demonstrate and compare multiple schemes for a new project at the beginning of the design process to achieve the optimal design effect.

[0058] (2) Policy consistency B2: Evaluate whether the project meets the requirements, give priority to the projects, and grasp the key projects.

[0059] (3) Project evaluation and investment decision-making ability B3: Whether the project implementation time, implementation location, and implementation method are scientific and reasonable. The ability to conduct comprehensive analysis and demonstration of all indicators to make scientific decisions.

[0060] 4. Necessity indicators

[0061] To achieve the best economic results, a comprehensive analysis of the necessity of new project investment should be conducted during the feasibility study phase. This indicator set is constructed: Project Necessity Index C = {Advancedness C1; Innovation C2; Technical Demonstration C3}. This includes:

[0062] (1) Advanced level C1: The technology, equipment and process used in the project should be as close as possible to the international advanced level or domestic leading level in terms of performance indicators, equipment life, energy saving, productivity, automation level and energy cleanliness.

[0063] (2) Innovation C2: includes three aspects: technical difficulty, project novelty and project results.

[0064] (3) Technical Demonstration C3: This indicator focuses on whether the project demonstrates typicality, leadership, practicality and potential value in terms of technical application.

[0065] Five: Technical indicators

[0066] The technical evaluation analyzes and compares the applicability and reliability of the construction processes, technologies and equipment used, the technical guarantee system, and the economic rationality of the technical solutions.

[0067] Construct an indicator set: Technical indicator D = {applicability D1; reliability D2; economic rationality of technical solution D3}. Among them:

[0068] (1) Applicability D1: Whether it is suitable for the construction scale, the available materials, the level of management personnel and the quality of employees, the construction environment, and the technical equipment and processes.

[0069] (2) Reliability D2: Whether the technology and equipment used have been inspected by relevant departments for production and operation, whether the technology is mature and has a good reliability record, and whether the safety of operators during operation can be ensured.

[0070] (3) Economic rationality of the technical solution D3. Besides being advanced, applicable, safe, and reliable, the technical solution should also be analyzed for its economic rationality. If a project with a low investment scale and low construction difficulty adopts internationally leading technology, it will inevitably lead to economic irrationality, which will not only be detrimental to saving investment but also increase construction costs. Therefore, in order to improve the comprehensive benefits of construction projects, technical and economic rationality is also an important factor influencing the comprehensive evaluation.

[0071] 6. Economic benefit indicators

[0072] The economic benefit evaluation indicators of construction projects are analyzed from two aspects: profitability and risk assessment. Risk assessment is measured through uncertainty analysis.

[0073] Economic evaluation indicators will include: financial net present value, benefit-cost ratio, financial internal rate of return, dynamic investment payback period, average annual net present value rate, present value of expenses, operating income and economic risk.

[0074] Construct an indicator set: Economic benefit index E = {applicability E1; reliability E2; economic rationality of technical solution E3}. The specific description of the indicators is as follows:

[0075] (1) Financial Net Present Value

[0076] The financial net present value method is one of the most important dynamic evaluation indicators in project economic evaluation. It is also widely used and is one of the evaluation indicators used to assess project profitability. The financial net present value expresses the investment return in monetary terms, while also taking into account the costs and benefits during the calculation period and the time value of money during the evaluation process. It is relatively intuitive. The practical significance of the financial net present value is the level at which the project's returns exceed the benchmark return during its life cycle. Its calculation formula is as follows:

[0077]

[0078] Where: FNPV is the financial net present value; CI and CO are the net cash flow; i c is the standard discount rate; n is the project calculation period

[0079] When comparing multiple options, the project with the larger net present value is relatively better, which is the maximum net present value criterion.

[0080] (2) Benefit-cost ratio

[0081] The benefit-cost ratio refers to the ratio of the discounted value of all financial income to the discounted value of all financial expenditures during the entire financial calculation period. Its expression is as follows:

[0082]

[0083] When comparing independent options, the option with the larger financial benefit-to-cost ratio has the better financial performance. When comparing mutually exclusive options, an incremental analysis between the options is required. When the incremental financial benefit-to-cost ratio is greater than or equal to 1.0, the scale-up option is reasonable.

[0084] (3) Financial internal rate of return

[0085] The financial internal rate of return (IRR) is another important economic evaluation metric besides the financial net present value (NPV). It measures the discount rate at which the net present value (NPV) equals zero and represents the expected rate of return on an investment. Its value is a relative ratio. When comparing multiple options, it's inappropriate to solely compare the IRR to avoid dismissing a project with a low rate of return but a large NPV due to its large investment scale as unfeasible. Therefore, the IRR and NPV must be considered together.

[0086] (4) Dynamic investment payback period

[0087] The dynamic payback period is the time required to recover a project's entire investment, calculated based on annual net income. It is an indicator used to assess a project's financial payback potential. To reduce investment risk, investors seek to recover their investment as quickly as possible. Its expression is as follows:

[0088]

[0089] The unit of investment payback period is "year", and the calculation starting time is generally the initial construction period or the initial production period of the project. t ≤P0. This is the benchmark dynamic payback period determined by investor willingness, at which point the project is accepted. Construction projects are generally large-scale, have long payback periods, and are subject to numerous unforeseen risks, making investment control difficult. Therefore, the payback period indicator is crucial for selecting optimal project options.

[0090] (5) Average annual net present value rate

[0091] The average annual net present value rate is a comprehensive decision-making indicator proposed based on the analogy between dynamic indicators and static indicators. The average annual net present value rate is equivalent to the average annual rate of return in static indicators. It can be expressed as the following formula:

[0092]

[0093] The average annual net present value rate takes into account input, output, and time factors, reflecting both the level and speed of a project's profitability. The average annual net present value rate is a positive indicator; the higher the value, the better.

[0094] (6) Present value of expenses

[0095] The present value of costs (PVV) method evaluates the economic impact of an investment proposal using the net present value (NPV) metric, requiring the project's benefits to be calculated in monetary terms. However, some project benefits are difficult to calculate directly in monetary terms. If alternatives meet the same needs, a comparison of their investment and operating costs is sufficient. When comparing multiple options, if each construction plan meets the same needs, or if the estimated benefits after completion are difficult to measure in monetary terms, a comparison of the PVV of each plan can be used to determine the winner. PVV can only be used when comparing multiple plans; the plan with the lowest PVV is considered the preferred option.

[0096] (7) Operating income

[0097] Operating income refers to the total revenue generated by a project during its operation period. The size of operating income depends on the charging standards, which are directly related to the profitability of the project.

[0098] (8) Economic risks

[0099] The data used in project economic analysis primarily comes from forecasts and estimates, which carry significant uncertainty. Uncertainty analysis is necessary to analyze the potential risks of each option and assess its economic viability. Uncertainty analysis measures the magnitude of changes in economic evaluation indicators caused by changes in various uncertain factors, assessing the impact of these changes on achieving the desired objectives and making appropriate decisions based on this information. Uncertainty analysis generally includes sensitivity analysis and break-even analysis. Sensitivity analysis analyzes and predicts the impact of changes in sensitive factors on option evaluation indicators and assesses the indicators' sensitivity to these factors. Analyzing the greatest adverse factors is crucial for determining the option's tolerance. Generally speaking, sensitivity analysis examines the impact of individual or simultaneous changes in factors such as output, price, cost, and fixed asset investment on economic indicators such as internal rate of return, net present value, and payback period. Break-even analysis examines the balance between option inputs and benefits, measuring the option's ability to adapt to market changes. A lower break-even point indicates a more adaptable option and greater risk tolerance. The break-even point requires additional calculations based on normal revenue, variable and fixed costs, sales revenue, and taxes, and is typically expressed as capacity utilization or output. The following table shows the breakdown:

[0100]

[0101] Among them: BEP is the break-even point; TFC is fixed cost; TR is sales revenue; VC is variable cost.

[0102] Obviously, the above embodiments of the present invention are merely examples for clearly illustrating the present invention, and are not limitations on the implementation methods of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in the relevant field, other different forms of changes or modifications can be made based on the above description. It is impossible to list all the implementation methods here. Any obvious changes or modifications derived from the technical solution of the present invention are still within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises, characterized by: include: Step S01: Build a compliance evaluation model, evaluate planned projects using financial compliance indicators as the basic indicators, and select effective projects; Step S02: Construct a project data integrity index evaluation model, use the data index set to evaluate the data integrity of valid projects, complete the project data based on the evaluation results, and obtain projects with complete data; Step S03: Construct a feasibility index evaluation model, conduct feasibility evaluation on projects with complete data based on feasibility indicators, and obtain feasible projects; Step S04: Construct a necessity index evaluation model, evaluate feasible projects based on the project establishment necessity index, and obtain necessary projects; Step S05: Construct a technical indicator evaluation model, evaluate necessary projects based on technical indicators, and obtain projects that meet the conditions for safe implementation; Step S06: Construct an economic benefit indicator evaluation model, evaluate projects that meet the safety implementation conditions based on the economic benefit evaluation indicators, and obtain the digital transformation needs of key power grid companies.

2. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The financial compliance indicators described in step S01 include: whether there are duplicate projects or data barriers, whether there are split projects, whether capital expenditures and cost expenditures are accurately divided, and whether the investment estimate is reasonable.

3. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The data indicator set in step S02 includes: basic project information, investment estimate, project implementation progress and time nodes.

4. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The feasibility indicators in step S03 include: project scheme design capability, policy consistency, and project evaluation and investment decision-making capabilities.

5. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The indicators of necessity for project establishment in step S04 include: degree of advancement, innovation and technical demonstration.

6. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The technical indicators in step S05 include: applicability, reliability D2 and economic rationality of the technical solution.

7. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The economic benefit evaluation indicators in step S06 include solution profitability and risk evaluation.

8. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 7 is characterized in that: The profitability evaluation method of the scheme includes: firstly conducting an economic benefit maximization evaluation on the project, and the indicators of the maximization evaluation include: applicability, reliability and economic rationality of the technical scheme.

9. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 8 is characterized in that: The profitability evaluation method of the scheme also includes: conducting an economic evaluation of the project, and the indicators of the economic evaluation include: financial net present value, benefit-cost ratio, financial internal rate of return, dynamic investment payback period, average annual net present value rate, present value of expenses, operating income and economic risk.

10. The method for evaluating the digital transformation needs of power grid enterprises according to claim 7, characterized in that: The risk assessment method is uncertainty analysis method.

Images