Smart Metering 2.0

Over the last few months it’s been interesting to look at the coverage of smart meter deployments, as people are starting to question as to what the benefits have been?  Did the billions of dollars invested in them help either the grid or consumers?  The pace of deployment has certainly slowed in the US and Europe and in recent months there seem to have been as many headlines about smart meters being replaced with old analogue ones as there have about new deployments.  At the same time the interest of energy suppliers in smart metering has been waning.  Instead they’ve fallen in love with smart thermostats as the way to woo consumers with energy savings.  British Gas’ recent purchase of AlertMe for £44 million (a tad short of the $3.2 billion that Google paid for Nest) is the latest example of that trend.  And with energy prices falling, any claim that smart metering will engage customers in energy saving is looking increasingly spurious.

But that’s a malaise specific to the North American and European energy suppliers, who are probably beginning to feel that they’ve been mugged by meter manufacturers into deploying white elephants that have turned out to be little more than an overpriced AMR system.  If we look at the next generation economies, like Brazil and India, they have a very different set of problems.  The most important of which is the amount of electricity which simply disappears.  In India around 25% of electricity “goes missing”, equivalent to almost $20 billion of revenue every year.  In Brazil around 11 GW is stolen, equating to 20% of generation. The effect of this is not only lost income, but power outages associated with illegal connections and tampering.  It is a level of disruption that calls for a very different approach to the one provided by the expensive, over-specified meters of the Western world.

These problems require a far more pragmatic approach to smart metering – generating a new breed of solutions which I refer to as Smart Metering 2.0.  Whilst the western deployments should have been about data, they ended up being little more than new billing solutions because the systems were designed from the wrong perspective.  That’s largely because they were designed by people who didn’t really understand the architecture of end-to-end systems and were hung up on a legacy approach.  In effect they made the meter more complex so the head end could stay simple.  That was all about not rattling the cage of the utilities’ IT departments, most of which don’t want to have to deal with more data.  The new meters are taking the correct view of keeping the meter as a simple source of data and adding value in the comms and head end.  It’s no surprise that these are being spearheaded by companies with a background in comms who understand how M2M and the Internet of Things systems work.  It’s an approach which drastically reduces the cost of deployments and allows utilities to upgrade their capabilities as they need them, rather than trying to do everything from day one.

Read More

UK Smart Meters Delayed. Again.

Last week the UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change announced that the UK’s smart metering deployment was facing another 12 months delay.  That’s 18 months after they announced that the UK’s smart metering deployment was facing another 12 months’ delay.  This is not all bad news.  It means that the growing population of consultants within DECC can look forward to what is fast becoming a never-ending gravy train of consultancy work, public consultations and project reviews.  For the consumer it’s likely to mean even more unnecessary costs heaped onto future energy bills.  But not until after the next election, so nobody in Westminster really cares.

Despite the charade of one step forward, one step backwards, we still don’t know whether the deployment will have any practical value.  There is no EU mandate for it – individual countries need to show that smart metering is cost effective.  The first DECC survey showed it was not, but DECC mandarins then fudged the numbers (not my phrase, but that of an involved MP), since when they’ve spent a considerable amount of time and effort in concealing what’s behind their calculations.  The approach of “DECC knows best” has resulted in the most complex and expensive smart metering scheme in the world, which appears to be beyond the ability of both suppliers and utilities to deliver.

Read More

FATZ and DECCY – the UK’s cartoon approach to Smart Meters

The UK Government has enlisted two cartoon characters – FATZ and DECCY to explain the need for smart meters to a sceptical public. FATZ – the corpulent blue one, represents the cold, uncaring fat cat executives of the energy industry, eager to take still more of your money, while the manic yellow DECCY represents the seriously scary civil servants of the Department of Energy and Climate Change who have been tasked with dreaming up the world’s most complicated and unworkable smart metering specification. Their bulging eyes and demented smiles tell the average consumer all they need to know about the UK smart metering plan and the mentality of the people behind it.

Claire Maugham, director of communications at Smart Energy GB, who’s responsible for the campaign said: “FATZ and DECCY are embodiments of what we’ve heard about consumers’ experiences about buying gas and electricity. We heard time and time again that people are anxious because they don’t know what they’re spending, they don’t know if they are on the right tariff or with the right supplier. It’s almost like they are out of control, causing chaos around the house like two naughtily children.”  So it’s fitting that they’ve chosen utility bosses and DECC employees as models for their chaos and out of control metering specification.

The aim of the campaign is two-fold. Firstly to try and persuade consumers to allow a smart meter to be fitted, secondly to try to convince them they that might save money, not least because if they don’t it exposes the alleged consumer savings trumpeted by DECC as pure fiction, relegating the whole project into another expensive Government IT fiasco. Achieving either of Smart Energy GB’s aims looks increasingly difficult.

Read More

Smart Metering is FCUKED

Having delayed the Fiendishly Complicated United Kingdom Enduring Deployment** of smart meters earlier this year because of technical delays, you might expect that the British Government would have spent some time reviewing the technology they had mandated.  If they had done so, it would have become clear that the program was out of control.  Under the surface, too many cooks have ratcheted up the technical complexity to the point where it is no longer fit for purpose. However, it appears that no-one wants to point out that the Smart Metering Emperor is stark naked.  That’s largely because those overseeing the programme don’t have the depth of technical knowledge to understand the implications of what is going on.

As always with big Government driven IT programs, whilst there’s money to be made by the metering industry and consultants, momentum rules.  It seems perfectly justifiable to carry on and saddle consumers with a £12 billion white elephant which will further inflate domestic energy bills.  As a result of this lack of due diligence, smart metering is firmly on course to be the next big UK Government IT disaster.

It’s not that there’s a fundamental problem with smart metering, but there are massive mistakes in the way that the UK has decided to do it.  When the programme started, it was seen as world-leading.  It should have set a global standard for smart metering, giving UK plc a commanding lead in exporting expertise to the rest of the world and creating long term employment opportunities.  Instead it has resulted in an out-dated, over-complicated system which will be incompatible with any other solution in the world, cost more than any other, fail to deliver the promised customer benefits, add risk to our energy security, threaten jobs, further alienate customers and make the UK energy industry a laughing stock.

If we look at the issues, the GB smart metering program appears to have a unique capacity not just to duplicate major errors from previous Government disasters, but to combine many of them into one overarching Government- destroying fiasco.

Read More

UK Smart Metering Plan Delayed

Today in Parliament, the UK Secretary for State for Energy and Climate Change – Ed Davey, announced that there would be a one year delay in the GB deployment of smart meters.  That’s not a great surprise to anyone.  Rather than copy what has been deployed in other countries, the UK industry has been developing specifications to make our smart metering system the most complex (and expensive) of any deployment anywhere in the world, and complexity takes time.

However, the timing is not great.  Anyone following smart meter deployment will have noticed a distinct slowdown over the past few years.  Some of the larger US utilities have already rolled out smart meters, helped by $83 billion of stimulus funding.  A significant chunk of Australia has them as well.  But as stimulus funds have dried up, so have the bulk of smart meter deployments.

The one remaining gung-ho project was the UK one, where previous ministers had been keen to pull it forward.  A lot of the rest of the world, particularly other countries within Europe, who are working out how to address the EC directive on smart metering, have been waiting and watching to see how we’re doing.  On the surface it’s looked good.  Underneath there are conflicting interests which have been building up delays.  Unfortunately the timing of today’s announcement plays to quite a lot of those underlying politics, which could further derail the future of the program.

Read More

Fifty Shades of Tariff

There’s nothing that better illustrates the sado-masochistic relationship between energy suppliers and their customers than Tariffs.  They’ve evolved to be the whip that utilities deploy to beat their users into “correcting” their behaviour.  That form of correction may be trying to limit the total amount of energy you use, or changing when you use it.  But there’s a clear message coming through – energy suppliers want to be in control of the relationship. 

It’s a concept that consumers have a problem with.  Survey after survey reports the message that consumers don’t understand tariffs.  They don’t even understand the word.  And regulators are often less than happy with multiple or complex tariffs, because they’re aware how much they confuse people.  That was highlighted in the UK earlier this year when the regulator OFGEM took the paddle to the utilities to persuade them to reduce the hundreds of tariffs in the UK to a few simple ones.  But that doesn’t stop utilities fantasising about a future where they can run riot with tariffs.  The most extreme example is now being constructed in the UK as part of the British smart metering specifications.  These allow a level of complexity that makes the most diabolic tortures devised by the Inquisition look simple.  Fighting the consumer interest corner is our Energy regulator – OFGEM, which is about to give up on persuasion and start meting out some punishment itself.

There are some valid reasons for considering complex tariffs, but these need to include consumer engagement as a fundamental feature of their development.  What is happening instead, particularly in theUK, is that tariffing structures are being developed as a technical exercise.  They are now so complex that they threaten the interoperability, cost and usability of the British smart metering roll-out, setting smart metering up to be the next major UK Government IT disaster. 

Read More