Digitalisation: The Case for Open Source in the Substation
The energy transition is frequently framed as a challenge of capacity: loads increase inexorably while renewable supplies proliferate, and utilities require more copper and more steel. However, the papers in this issue demonstrate that a critical path lies in the digitalisation of hardware. We have moved beyond high-level roadmaps to the complex task of integration, where data is no longer a byproduct of operation, but the primary driver of asset strategy.
Recent developments underscore this shift; digital twins, for instance, are now recognised as key to unlocking hidden grid capacity. Yet, the urgency of this digital evolution is defined by visibility. John D. McDonald argues that our networks are currently data-rich but intelligence-poor, leaving vast reservoirs of “non-operational” data, such as waveform records and contact wear indicators, stranded in the field.
This lack of transparency is a liability. Carina Lehmal, Stephanie Windhager, and Daniel Kroepfl reinforce this, outlining the architectural bridge required to transform secondary substations from passive nodes into active, observable assets capable of supporting AI-driven analytics. However, connectivity is not synonymous with control. Hassan Zaheer and Saifa Khalid identify the “brownfield barrier” as a defining constraint; software-defined virtualisation must contend with decades-old legacy infrastructure where latency and failover protocols are not yet standardized. To navigate this, Gaurav Joshi notes that industry demands a fundamental recalibration of engineering skillsets, merging HV expertise with coding and data to manage self-healing networks.
Yet, these digital systems ultimately govern hard physical constraints. As lead times stretch beyond three years, the supply chain pressures detailed by Robert le Roux demonstrate that digital procurement and specification strategies must be more rigorous than ever. Simultaneously, SF6 and PFAS regulations analysed by Dr. Shibani Bose and René Smeets impose strict deadlines on asset replacement. Marius Grisaru’s work on dielectric trade-offs serves as a reminder that while we digitise control, the material science underpinning insulation remains the bedrock of safety and reliability.
In this hybrid landscape, validation becomes the currency of trust. Yasunori Itou demonstrates that continuous digital monitoring can detect mechanical degradation that escapes static testing, establishing the baseline for true Condition-Based Maintenance. CESI reinforces that “interoperability” in digital standards like IEC 61850 does not guarantee “interchangeability” without precise system integration. Finally, Niclas Wetterstrand shows that High-Fidelity Digital Twins are essential not just for design validation, but for training the workforce to operate these increasingly complex systems.
Substations: Cathedrals and the Bazaar
While the technical challenges of integration are substantial, they point toward a deeper structural shift in how our industry operates: the necessity of “openness”. Throughout this issue, we see a recurring tension between the need for rapid innovation and the constraints of proprietary silos.
CESI reminds us that the promise of IEC 61850 relies entirely on open standards that allow devices from different vendors to communicate. Carina Lehmal advocates for vendor-neutral environments using open protocols like MQTT and OPC UA to prevent utility lock-in. Even in the physical realm, Marius Grisaru points to “material passports”—a form of open data—as a requirement for the circular economy. But if open standards and open architectures are the prerequisites for a flexible grid, then Open Source is the engine that can drive it at speed.
Historically, switchgear development has followed the “Cathedral” model, to borrow Eric Raymond’s famous analogy [1]. This represents the traditional, proprietary approach: technology is meticulously crafted by exclusive groups working behind closed doors. For switchgear, this secrecy is often justified by safety; the consequences of failure in a switchyard include fatalities and blackouts, necessitating a slow, centralised, and highly controlled release schedule.
Contrast this with the “Bazaar”: the chaotic, decentralised marketplace of ideas that gave us the Linux kernel. Here, code is developed transparently, allowing thousands of co-developers to view, test, and contribute. It appears unstructured, yet a coherent, stable, and high-quality system emerges from differing agendas.
In our cover interview, Sander Jansen and Nico Rikken of Alliander challenge the traditional utility reliance on the Cathedral with open source models. They argue that relying on proprietary “black boxes” for protection and control is a strategic risk in a congested grid. To manage the volatility of Inverter Based Resources, they posit that we cannot wait for vendors to unlock their IP; we must build the solutions together. Their work with the Linux Foundation Energy represents a bold step away from the commercial protectionism that has defined our sector for a century. They make a compelling case: when the challenge is ensuring the stability of the entire energy system, the code that runs it should belong to everyone.
Operational Deployment
Sceptics might argue that OEMs will never surrender the “crown jewels” of proprietary HV designs, or that Open Source Hardware (OSHW) is simply too dangerous for critical infrastructure. However, “openness” in the substation is already a reality, categorised into three distinct areas where theory has already transitioned into practice.
First, we see the shift in Secondary Systems & Control—the “brains” of the substation. Projects like SEAPATH (Software Enabled Automation Platform and Artifacts) under LF Energy are defining reference designs for running protection and automation on Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) servers. This effectively decouples the software from the hardware, treating the server as an open platform. Furthermore, the OpenEnergyMonitor project provides fully open-source schematics for sensing grid parameters, while the RISC-V / OpenHW Group is laying the foundation for open-source processor cores, potentially freeing future IEC 61850 devices from proprietary silicon licensing.
Second, we encounter “Virtual” Open Hardware. We face a “Heavy Metal Barrier”: one cannot simply open-source a 400 kV gas-insulated breaker for home assembly. Instead, the industry is using “Open Reference Models” to accelerate R&D. The SuperGrid Institute has developed standard DC breaker designs for technology transfer, while CIGRE Working Groups [2] create generic “virtual” breaker designs that serve as open benchmarks for simulation. Similarly, the work on open gases at SINTEF and ETH Zurich provides the open-access physics data for new insulation gases, acting as the “source code” that allows the industry to build accurate models without relying on proprietary data.
Finally, there are the exceptions in Low Voltage & Microgrids. Here, true “download and build” OSHW exists, exemplified by Libre Solar’s BMS designs [3] and OwnTech’s programmable power converters [4].
Collaborative efforts like the NEMEGIS project [5], which targets a reliable SF6-free grid, further illustrate this shift. Whether through digital architecture, shared material physics, or open control platforms, the walls of the cathedral are becoming permeable. In an interconnected world, just as Linux operates the vast majority of servers on the internet, open source grid controls can provide a secure path forward.
[1] R. M. Raymond, The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, 1999. The book itself is vailable as open access: http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/
[2] CIGRE Working Group A3.36, “Application and benchmark of multiphysics simulation tools for temperature rise calculations,” Tech. Rep. TB 830, CIGRE, Paris, France, 2021.
[3] Libre Solar, “Hardware,” https://libre.solar/hardware/.
[4] OWNTECH, “Homepage,” https://www.owntech.io/.
[5] See the announcement in the News section of this issue.
