|
|
|
|
| Wasting money without broadband-attached meters |
| After over 5 years of attempting AMI, there is very little to show for it. Solutions have proven to be nascent, complex and expensive with very long lead times. Today, AMI solutions are closed-access networks requiring complex OEM technology platforms for mesh management, data acquisition, and meter data management. The industry is deploying massive numbers of single-point failure devices with MTBFs that are 1-3 years in reality (concentrators, gateways, repeaters, etc). Some SmartGrid capability can be acquired from non-broadband-attached metering, but it's not economically feasible (from a TCO perspective), or architecturally defensible. MuNet and Silver Spring Networks are moving in the right direction, but the most feasible solution is Web-enabled AMI with broadband-attached IP-meters using EXISTING broadband premise connections. With Web-enabled AMI, you get security and management for free, plain HTML reporting, and you avoid the cost of complex, expensive closed-access network technologies supplied by OEMs, who are basically out of their element when it comes to engineering good software. Using the standard protocols of the Web, meters become nodes on the Internet with all the robustness that implies. The Web is good enough for Banking, Wall Street, Insurance, and all global commerce...why not metering? Resolved: If you're not using the existing broadband Internet infrastructure for AMI, you ARE wasting your money. Nick Noecker, IBM |
| Nicholas J Noecker - 04/23/2008 - 07:57 |
| Jesse's comments are correct |
| Jesse has hit the nail on the head and is absolutely right. This notion that all AMI meters , and for that matter all other grid monitoring poiints need to be connected to internet via broadband or even IP is simply ludicrous. It shows the naivety of the LA times author ( or that he has been misinformed by some vendor selling broadband ). Any network connectivity is based upon three fundamental premise - how much data you want from each node , how much latency do you expect and how much are you willing to pay to meet your business value from that connectivity? Since diffeent elements of smart grid has different answers to these three questions - it does not make any economic sense to impose a broadband requirements for all the elements of a smart grid. |
| Informed Person - 04/23/2008 - 07:59 |
| Incorrect assumption |
| Nick's p thought process is incorrect and I respectfully disagree. Meters are not computers which one lease's from IBM or Dell and gets replaced witha new one every 2- 3 years. Meters are on the side of a house for 20 years in an exposed envionment , with zero ability to be maintained or refurbished unlike an ATM sitting on side of a bank. The utilities do not do the transactions that abank does with its computers - so the connectivity cannot be made to prove economical. Utilities are typically able to afford a price for the meter which is less than 20 cups of star bucks latte and expect this product to last for 20 years.. |
| Informed Person - 04/23/2008 - 08:08 |
| Wasting money without broadband-attached meters |
| The current state of AMI can produce basic SmartGrid capabilities...endpoint Voltage test, remote TurnOn/Off, Ad hoc Remote read, etc. But, current solutions rely on "Rube Goldberg" architectures and have a poor track records, at best. The future for these approaches is not rosy. Remember, the money for AMI belongs to the stockholders and it's only a matter of time before they wake-up and put an end to the current approaches until we get the architecture right. Stockholders and rate payers would be better served with a Pareto optimization model. In other words, it's quite likely that 80% of "SmartGrid" benefits lie in 20% of the premises in the mass market (in AMI). It's a lead-pipe-cinch that the same 20% also have broadband. The network for AMI is free. RE: meters are not computers. Actually, even old analog meters can be thought of as computers. The current crop of AMI meters are definitely computers even in the modern sense of the term. The Metering Industry is stepping into the world of massively scalable computing nodes on an intergalactic network topology. That's a world where IBM (and, yes Dell) is quite comfortable. Along with AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon. I have no doubt that we could take a basic set of requirements to Dell and get a mass-produced IP-based meter with an embedded Web server and an 802.11n radio at whatever price point is required. Smart Metering is now in a totally different world. The Utilities just haven't realized it--yet. |
| Nicholas J Noecker - 04/23/2008 - 09:00 |
| AMI vs. Smart Grid |
| While I would agree it would be great to use a broadband for all AMI from the technology point of view, it is very difficult to justify it from the financial perspective. If you have a broadband infrastructure available or if there is a third party (not utility company) that is willing to pay for this infrastructure, by all means, use broadband. But if utility company has to build the broadband to every customer at the expense of ratepayers the $$ numbers just don’t work. It makes total scene to build a broadband backbone to eliminate potential bottleneck and enable advanced functionality for other Smart Grid components. But for the “last mile” it’s just too expensive. While I am on the subject of the AMI and Smart Grid let me address another related issue. There is a tendency in the industry to equate the Smart Grid concept to AMI system. While AMI is an important component of the Smart Grid, it is NOT the Smart Grid by itself. There are several systems that need to be put in place in order to enable full Smart Grid functionality. Without going into the excruciating level of detail I would identify three major components of the Smart Grid: Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), Substation Automation ("Smart Substation") and Distribution Automation. These components allow to enable "management and control of the electric distribution system" as defined in the proposed California legislation and to implement other Smart Grid functions such as Demand Side Management, Distributed Generation and others. Now, some of these systems may require a broadband... |
| Michael - 04/23/2008 - 10:10 |
| Smart Grids Can Use Broadband |
| I thought the LA Times article raised some good points, especially when you consider that it was written by a writer who writes from the viewpoint of a consumer rather than from the viewpoint of a utility executive of engineer. I agree that the article was unnecessarily hard on SCE, who I believe has been doing a lot to move this technology forward. I work for Burbank and we are developing an TCP IP fiber/wireless with probably some BPL elements smart grid. The issues SCE raised in 2005 and 2006 were instrumental in helping us shape our approach. Smart grids need to be able to scale over time and we expect latency to be an issue. Having lots of broadband capability early on we believe is a strategic advantage. Twelve years ago we upgraded our SCADA from 2400 baud to 10Mb Ethernet, when the conventional wisdom was to go to 28.8k. The improved performance in SCADA created a much more responsive tool for the system operators with the higher speed and much lower latency. The Smart Grid is a bigger step than was SCADA and will require effective change management throughout the utility. Get as much bandwidth in your system as you can justify, and then make way to potentially increase it in the future if needed. |
| Fredric Fletcher - 04/23/2008 - 13:45 |
| AMI vs SmartGrid |
| Michael is right, AMI and SmartGrid are not identical. Many of us talk about AMI as Wave 1 of SmartGrid because it has some basic SmartGrid functionality (endpoint Voltage monitoring & test, On-demand premise load history), and because AMI is rolling out on such a massive scale, globally. But, it's also true that SmartGrid-type technologies have been rolling onto the T&D infrastructure for some time in terms of IP networks, substation servers, substation PLC devices, smart RTUs, soft switches, etc. AMI seems to be gathering most of the regulatory and investment funding, for now. Basic SmartGrid benefits from AMI may well quicken the pace of SmartGrid. |
| Nicholas J Noecker - 04/24/2008 - 11:03 |
| Broadband and AMI |
| SGN's blog above ends with the example of SmartSynch's SmartRouting Solution (SRS). SmartSynch is an industry veteran and says with their AMI solution, "Utilities need no new software, no new training, and no new networks." A fairly disruptive technology, if true. It will be interesting to see if solutions like this find a place on the AMI landscape. |
| Nicholas J Noecker - 04/24/2008 - 11:33 |
| Goals: What Future Architectured Space Data Throughput |
| All of this discussion and I don't think any one agrees on what the future of control and information is for electricity services in purposed spaces. If we were to eye the possibility of remote monitoring of test beds, design beds, learning and intelligent building systems for efficiency optimization, or data foundations for electricity services contractors, a big pipe might be useful. There's a lot of future out there, so, not committing on capital outlays in initial stages could be wise. That's why Nick is right about beginning with existing Web infrastructure. |
| Rich Patterson - 04/25/2008 - 09:40 |
| Marketing Distortions by Certain BPL Providers |
| Guerrilla Marketing? Unfortunately, one or more vendors of BPL (Broadband over Powerline) technology apparently believe that, if they cannot sell their technology on its merits, they can force the utility industry's to buy it by creating coercive legislation and one-sided regulatory pressures, and fostering industry misperceptions through the press. One aspect of this tactic is to claim that any AMI system that operates at less than "broadband" data rates is inadequate for Smart Grid. This notion was apparently “bought” by the LA Times writer, although no competent technical authority has advanced a convincing argument that broadband communication is needed to support Smart Grid within the foreseeable future. California's recent draft legislation SB 1438 would require California utilities to issue RFPs for a Smart Grid implementation, and establishes data throughput requirements. Unfortunately, this legislation appears to have been conceived and promoted by --- and not coincidentally intended to serve the commercial self-interests of --- BPL providers, not the utility industry they allege to serve. It thus deserves to be rejected. At least one BPL vendor is attempting to introduce forcing legislation in other states. While visibly touting the benefits of Smart Grid, the vendor actually seeks to force the utility industry to act prematurely and to reject other valuable and productive AMI and "Smart Grid" enabling technologies, which have proven perfectly capable of doing the job. Unwitting legislators, seeing what look like "motherhood and apple pie," may not see what is really going on. The utility industry and its respected advisors are perfectly capable on deciding if, how, where, when, and at what cost AMI and Smart Grid fit into each utility’s blueprint for the future. The unwanted and unneeded existence of misguided legislation at the state level, and one-sided and uninformed media discussion, seriously harms - not helps - orderly progress of the Smart Grid vision. |
| Ralph E. Abbott - 04/28/2008 - 12:20 |
| Computer person perspective |
| I am not a power industry person, but I have decades of experience in the computer industry. I realize power is different, with longer time horizon and extensive regulation, but I think our experience is still relevant. Here are a couple of things to consider: First, after many battles, the computer industry has rejected proprietary network solutions in favor of TCP/IP. In the long run open solutions are far cheaper, which is why vendors push so hard for closed solutions. Second, communication requirements always grow as new, unforeseen, applications develop (what is the best way to price wind power?). Finally, I believe there are many consumers who would gladly pay a one time charge of, say, $50 to $100 for a WiFi-capable electric meter that would communicate to their home network, let them monitor their power usage in real time, and respond to peak use pricing incentives. |
| Arnold Reinhold - 04/29/2008 - 06:01 |
| Electricity Services Industry |
| This just makes the point again that we don't know enough to commit on communication methodology for power information and control on the back side of the meter. Somebody says WiFi. I say Zigbee. We don't know how highly engineered buildings will become in this century. A building on the auction block may come with dozens of liens, contracts and rights by entrepreneurs who have devised ways to provide services to the occupants at lower costs, while taking their profits out of electricity demand reduction. The contractor may own the reflective roof paint, the R-200 wall insulation, the 99% efficient built-in refrigerator, or the storage device in the basement. Such businesses require a baseline of tight data, and an ongoing, well parsed data stream. The electricity services industry is the fifth wheel, mining waste from our enclosures, separating the building occupant from an ineptly used power outlet. |
| Rich Patterson - 04/30/2008 - 09:02 |
| Smarter Meters |
| I think it’s safe to say that there will never be one single solution or medium for delivering the smart grid and it will certainly be a mix and consolidation of technologies including BPL, Smart meters and Wireless sensor networks that will finally make the ‘Smart Grid’ a reality. For many of us in the wireless fault sensor and switchgear manufacturing community the overall consensus is that the current generation of smart meters just don’t go far enough, and in my opinion it looks like a missed opportunity simply because they have gone from smart substations technology directly to the meter, leap frogging the entire distribution grid and all of the critical assets that make up the grid. The other issue with the current generation of smart meters is that they missed a golden opportunity to go beyond the grid to deliver new services to the public, other utilities & governmental essential service providers, services that could generate enough revenues that would pay for the smart meter rollouts in months not years or decades. The key issue here is leveraging platforms to there fullest potential and at least BPL providers can generate income where the current generation of smart meters can not, simply because it’s a single use system. So if you are looking at a future AMI/AMR rollout and think PECO got a sweet deal just wait, the next generation of smart meters, WIFI and BPL routers is coming. James Eades CEO |
| James Eades - 05/06/2008 - 20:00 |
|
|
|
|
