California approves smart meter opt-out program for PG&E with one option: the legacy analog meter February 1, 2012
Posted by Russ Henderson in Utility Industry News.Tags: analog meters, California Public Utilities Commission, Central Maine Power, Chartwell, Chartwell research, CPUC, Maine Public Utilities Commission, opt out, Pacific Gas & Electric, PG&E, San Diego Gas & electric, SDG&E, smart grid, smart meter, smart meters, Southern California Edison
add a comment
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) ruled unanimously today to require Pacific Gas & Electric to create a smart meter opt-out plan.
Many observers predicted earlier this week that the commission would create a program that included an option for customers to keep their legacy, analog meter, as well as the ability to choose a smart meter with its wireless capability turned off among other options. After all, that’s what the Maine Public Utility Commission did in May – required Central Maine Power to initiate an opt-out program with four options.
But what the California commission did today was initiate an opt-out program with analog as its only option.
Customers electing to retain or return to an analog meter will be assessed an initial fee of $75 and a monthly charge of $10. Customers enrolled in the CPUC’s low income program – California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) – electing to opt-out will be assessed an initial fee of $10 and a monthly charge of $5.
The decision ends PG&E’s smart meter installation “delay list.” Customers on that list have about 30 days to ask to participate in the opt-out program or their analog meter will be replaced with a smart meter.
Today’s decision came during a somewhat verbally quarrelsome meeting this morning which started with a public comment period of about 90 minutes, during which 60 or so smart meter opponents voiced their disapproval of the devices. The proceedings were broadcast live on the internet here.
CPUC President Michael R. Peevey then began to speak about the benefits of smart meters, including their vital role in creating a nation of “fully empowered energy consumers.” As he spoke, many in the crowd erupted with shouts such as “Lies! Lies!” Peevy repeatedly asked the attendees to show the commission the same respect they had shown by quietly allowing complainants to speak about smart meters.
Peevey spoke about the study by California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) released early last year, which reported that smart meters “result in much smaller levels of radio frequency exposure than many common household electronic devices including cell phones and microwave ovens.”
“Wrong!” came the yells. “Why are you reading it to us? It’s wrong!”
Peevey said that the CPUC is “not a public health agency” and that it must rely on the judgment of agencies such as the CCST and the FCC. The commission in July adopted privacy and security rules regarding smart meters in response to customer concerns.
“And yet after all of this, some customers called for an opt-out program,” Peevey said. He then explained the fees that the program would entail and asked his fellow commissioners to vote on the issue. After long discussion, the commission voted in favor of the opt-out program.
Afterward, there were shouts of protests against the fees.
“This is a crime against humanity!” one person yelled.
In March, PG&E proposed an initial fee of $128 and a monthly charge of $10.69 for the “non-wireless” option, but the PUC rejected those figures. In a November preliminary ruling, the commission proposed that regular customers should be charged an initial fee of $90 and a monthly charge of $15. Meanwhile, customers enrolled in CARE would pay only a $5 monthly charge, with no initial fee.
While some utilities estimate that only about 1% of customers are likely to take advantage of an opt-out program, others – such as Southern California Edison – have said that fees must be set high in order to discourage participation.
In a filing made with the commission Dec. 19, PG&E announced that it now “supports approval of an analog meter option, in addition to the non-communicating radio-off option, in response to customers’ and parties’ continued requests for an analog meter alternative.”
The apparent general consensus among California utilities in recent months has been that whatever opt-out program the PUC ultimately approved for PG&E would provide a model for other utilities, including San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) and Southern California Edison (SCE).
Among the aspects of the motion approved today, the commission ordered PG&E to:
- Establish procedures to inform customers that a smart meter opt-out option is available. A customer currently on the delay list will be informed that the customer will be scheduled to receive a wireless smart meter unless the customer elects to exercise the opt-out option.
- Establish new two-way electric and gas “modified smart meter memorandum accounts” to track revenues and costs associated with providing the opt-out program until a final decision on costs and cost allocation issues associated with providing an analog meter opt-out proposal is issued.
According to the decision, “residential customers may begin signing up to participate in the opt-out option 20 days after the effective date of this decision. PG&E shall have a dedicated phone number for customers to call and sign up for the opt-out option. This number shall be staffed by customer service representatives trained to explain the opt-out option and fees.”
Because customers may “opt-out for any reason, or no reason, PG&E may not require a customer to explain or state why they wish to participate in the opt-out program,” according to the decision. The commission is expected to revisit the issue and adjust fees after the true costs of the program become apparent.
The industry keeps getting smarter and smarter: Hot topics at DistribuTECH January 31, 2012
Posted by Dennis Smith in Utility Industry News.Tags: Chartwell, Chartwell Blog, customer engagement, Customer service automation, demand response, DistribuTECH, electric vehicle, electric vehicles, energy conservation, energy usage, meter data, mobile apps, online energy information, plug-in electric vehicle, smart grid, smart meter, smart meters, utilities, utility, utility communications
add a comment
Analytics, metrics, meters, home automation gadgets, bucket trucks, plug-in electric cars, dog bite repellent and some remote control vehicle that looked like the Mars lander. Even Hooter’s girls. Yes, the 2012 DistribuTECH had something for just about everyone last week in San Antonio.
Once again, the exhibit hall was extensive, or, as one attendee quipped, “big enough to land a [Boeing] 747 on.” We at Chartwell couldn’t cover it all. So we stayed focused. What was there to improve the utility customer experience? And the answer: still plenty. Here’s a recap (more…)
California delays decision on smart meter opt-out, may include analog option January 17, 2012
Posted by Russ Henderson in Utility Industry News.Tags: analog meters, Central Maine Power, Chartwell, Chartwell research, opt out, San Diego Gas & electric, SDG&E, smart grid, smart meters, Southern California Edison
2 comments
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) postponed its vote on a smart meter opt-out plan for Pacific Gas & Electric – originally planned for last Thursday – to Feb. 1.
California may add analog to opt-out plan
The delay leaves customers on PG&E’s smart meter installation “delay list” in a prolonged holding pattern. But the nearly month-long stay may result in an opt-out plan that is more effective in the long run. The standard analog meter – regarded by most die-hard opponents as the only valid alternative to smart meters – now appears to be on the table as an option.
Analog meters were not part of the opt-out program originally proposed in March by PG&E. Nor were they included in the CPUC’s proposed decision issued in November.
Then, in a filing made with the commission Dec. 19, PG&E announced that it now “supports approval of an analog meter option, in addition to the non-communicating radio-off option, in response to customers’ and parties’ continued requests for an analog meter alternative.”
The apparent general consensus among California utilities is that whatever opt-out program the PUC ultimately approves for PG&E will provide a model for other utilities, including San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) and Southern California Edison (SCE). At different times last year, the Commission ordered both utilities to submit proposals to the commission outlining the costs and other requirements of initiating opt-out programs including payment plans for four options: analog meter, digital meter with no radio installed, smart meter with radio transmission turned off and a wired smart meter.
Attorneys for SDG&E have expressed the utility’s opposition to the analog option. In fact, on the same day the PG&E filed its comments in favor of an analog option, SDG&E made its own filing in the case opposing an analog meter offering.
“Multiple parties recommend that the Commission authorize an analog meter opt-out option to alleviate concerns about health impacts. This recommendation is inappropriate because the commission has already ruled that health issues are not within the scope of this proceeding,” according to the SDG&E filing.
That very argument was dismissed by the Maine Public Utilities Commission in May, when it ruled that Central Maine Power (CMP) must provide an opt-out program to customers that included an analog option. Commissioner Vendean Vafiades wrote after the ruling that it had been a matter of “sound public policy.” Opt-out programs “shift the focus” of the conversation from the criticisms against smart meters to the economic and environmental benefits of the meters, he wrote.
A seemingly similar sentiment was stated in PG&E’s Dec. 19 filing, which states that the utility “firmly believes that ‘choice’ is both important and necessary, and that the choice that this commission authorizes should be a meaningful one for all customers.”
PG&E spokesman Greg Snapper said last week that “it’s important that our customers have a choice when it comes to the meter on their home.”
The cost that customers will have to pay for the analog option hasn’t been determined. The California commission has expressed its opinion that “it is appropriate that all ratepayers share in a portion” of the costs of an opt-out program rather than structuring fees in a way that would make the opt-out program revenue-neutral.
In March, PG&E proposed an initial fee of $128 and a monthly charge of $10.69 for the “non-wireless” option, but the PUC rejected those figures. Instead, regular customers will be charged an initial fee of $90 and a monthly charge of $15, according to the November preliminary ruling. Meanwhile, customers enrolled in the state’s low-income program – California Alternate Rates for Energy, or CARE – would pay only a $5 monthly charge, with no initial fee.
While some utilities estimate that only about 1% of customers are likely to take advantage of an opt-out program, others – such as Southern California Edison – have said that fees must be set high in order to discourage participation.
The fate of opt-out rates in California remains to be seen. These discussions will undoubtedly be central as the commission prepares for its decision next month. More information on related developments may be found in Chartwell’s recent report Smart Meter Opt-Out Programs 2012.
Opportunities for next-gen thermostats could bloom this spring December 22, 2011
Posted by Russ Henderson in Utility Industry News.Tags: Chartwell research, EnergyHub, Florida Power and Light, Honeywell, load control, Nest, Opower, smart meters, smart thermostats
3 comments
A new image of the smart thermostat was planted in the popular imagination in November.
The introduction of the Nest – a sleek, circular wall-mounted unit designed by former Apple designer Tony Fadell – was one of many notable stories this year in the field of home energy management, including the launch of EnergyHub’s Mercury thermostat and a new partnership between Honeywell and Opower to produce similar products. All this excitement could yield utility investment, especially if the EPA revives Energy Star certification for these devices in the spring.
Even the massive hype surrounding the Nest’s launch and the thousands of homeowners who flocked to buy them didn’t revive the faith of many utility executives. They asked: Where is the field test data?
The reason for the question is this. In 2009, the EPA stopped granting Energy Star certification for programmable thermostats because field tests by utilities – most notably Florida Power & Light – showed that the homeowners who used them actually burned through about 12% more electricity than folks without the supposedly cost-saving thermostats. As it turned out, users generally programmed the thermostats to perform in very energy-inefficient ways.
Whether the new generation of thermostats – or their users – will perform better remains unclear.
For one, EnergyHub claims that its Mercury thermostat platform has solved the usability problem. David Wechsler, vice president for business development, says that in field tests conducted last year by the company, 85% of users picked comfort settings that met or exceeded Energy Star efficiency recommendations. This compares to 71% of users in the Florida Power & Light study who either didn’t program their thermostats at all or created settings that were so slight their effect was negligible.
Nest, meanwhile, only started field testing in the second half of 2011, so the data is not yet available. Instead, the company uses computer models to demonstrate its cost savings.
Utility company executives say that, in the way that doctors should not prescribe untested medications or therapies to their patients, they are themselves unwilling to prescribe thermostats as a cure for high bills without some sort of official endorsement of their effectiveness.
Such endorsements may be coming soon. This spring, the EPA is expected to begin issuing Energy Star certifications for “climate controls” – a category of products distinct from “programmable thermostats” whose criteria were set in 2004.
The criteria that this new generation of thermostats must meet are at least as concerned with ease-of-use and intuitive programmability as they are with energy efficiency, says Abigail Daken, an environmental engineer with EPA’s Energy Star program.
What does all of this about thermostats – consumer products that anyone can buy over the Internet or from a home improvement store – have to do with utility companies? In my opinion, a great deal.
Of the articles and blogs I have seen on the subject so far, none has remarked on the family resemblance in system architecture between the new thermostats and advanced metering systems.
In the place of a smart meter is a smart thermostat that tracks energy usage. In place of a meter data management system is a cloud computing system that records and analyzes that data. And instead of communicating on the Zigbee protocol that most utilities have chosen – and is used by EnergyHub’s own HAN offering – the Mercury uses WiFi to interface directly with the customer’s home wireless router.
Of course, a smart meter tracks an entire home’s usage while a smart home thermostat only tracks the power used by the heating and air conditioning system. But climate control represents about 44 percent of the average home’s energy usage, according to the Energy Information Administration.
“It can be thought of as ‘load control as a service,’” says Wechsler of EnergyHub.
This service can be provided to customers with or without utility partnerships. Wechsler’s company has partnered with several utilities because the same system, with permissions from the customers, can be used for demand response.
That is, if customers agree, utilities themselves can reduce peak demand by turning down or switching off thousands of residential and customer heating and air conditioning units at critical times of day. And all of this is possible with or without installing smart meters, which utilities themselves usually pay for.
Of the 128 utilities contacted for Chartwell’s 2010 Smart Grid Survey, 38% of respondents reported that they were not considering investments to manage and store data related to customer end-use devices such as smart thermostats. About 17% said they were considering such investment, and 3 percent said they were in the process of taking such action. Times may be changing, though. Chartwell’s 2012 Smart Grid Survey will provide new findings early in the year.
It seems likely that more utilities will enter into partnerships with companies in the crowded home energy management market, but they may watch for a while to see which companies thrive and grow and which get trampled. Chartwell certainly will be watching that process in 2012.
Rocky terrain: Finding smarter routes to dynamic rate success March 31, 2011
Posted by Allison Herdic in Utility Industry News.Tags: AC cycling, Chartwell, customer communications, dynamic, EMACS 2011 - The Customer Experience Conference, energy, peak-time rebates, rates, smart meters
add a comment
With the implementation of smart meters across many service territories, the opportunity for varying, elective rate structures may very well follow. Technology will make the process simpler, as the utility and the customer will have real-time access to usage information for enhanced decision-making.
Traditionally, commercial and industrial customers find greater value in participating in various rate structures due to the sheer volume of energy needed for day-to-day operations. For residential customers, the incentives can be harder to glamorize as the savings are typically much more modest.
In a recent meeting with Chartwell’s Advisory Council of utilities across North America, the conversation around rates was as you would expect: dynamic. Yes, pun intended. The thoughtful quandary of the carrot vs. the stick was presented: do you punish customers who don’t adhere to various rate plans, or do you offer them a carrot for jumping on board to the degree to which they are willing to participate? To that, the solution was offered to provide peak-time rebates, not peak-time rates. (more…)
Unlocking the mysteries of customer engagement March 10, 2011
Posted by Mark Hall in Utility Industry News.Tags: customer behavior, customer engagement, demand response, energy conservation, energy efficiency, smart grid, smart meters
add a comment
Today’s industry buzz is that utilities need to better engage their customers to ensure the success of smart meter and smart grid deployments.
Pretty simple message, right?
While it’s certainly easy for anyone to point out the obvious – that more engagement is needed – strategies for accomplishing this would certainly be more useful. It should be noted that I don’t write this to knock those who hammer this point home; in fact, I am just as guilty as anyone. However, I think it’s time to offer solutions to the problem instead of just hyping it. (more…)
