Texas hold 'em!

There's been far too much written on smart meters and not enough about the less visible technologies that should wring efficiencies from the grid, defer massive capital investments and deliver a level of grid awareness and responsiveness that's a utility's dream.

Mea culpa.

This situation has evolved, however, for one very good reason. So far, smart meters are the most prominent, consumer-facing technology to be deployed. Not necessarily employed, but definitely deployed. And the issues surrounding those deployments will have a direct effect on the politics of the smart grid and its acceptance.

In a sense - and I don't think this is exaggerating - as go smart meters, so goes the fundamental notion of wise energy use, consumer-utility interactivity and national energy independence.

Yesterday a reader wrote in to ask, "Does the consumer get a vote?" on the nature of their data connection to the utility. 

The latest answer to this question comes from Dallas, Texas, and it is not just "yes." It is $%&* yes!" As in, "Yes we get a vote. And we vote NO!"

Last week, The Dallas Morning News reported that as many as a score of people each day in Oncor's service area were refusing to allow installation of smart meters on their property. The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) had already acted on complaints about the meters - even from people who did not have a smart meter - and ordered third-party testing of the devices. (No doubt Oncor had already done this prior to PUCT approval of the rollout.)

Some complainants - number unknown - banded together to form "Smart UR Citizens" with a blog and a petition. The latter makes seven demands. One calls a halt to deployment until an investigation is completed. Another demand is that Oncor, not the ratepayers, cover the cost of an investigation and upgrading meters for the next 20 years. Another demand is that Oncor's future rate increase requests be rejected or minimized. Another demand is that Oncor notify by phone or email any customer whose usage exceeds 3,000 kilowatt hours per month.

A follow-on article noted that Oncor was performing side-by-side, public testing of smart meters along with their predecessor meters on live television.

And here I quote a few of the comments posted on The Dallas Morning News' site that carried these stories:

"Smart people should refuse to have these [meters] installed. These smart meters will be abused and enable dynamic pricing. Somewhere the citizens need to say enough is enough and take action."

"Notice these are 'smart meters'? That means they are software controllable, so what's the point in 'testing' them? Oncor will already cut people off without due notice, so of course they'll lie, cheat or steal because they feel their interest is above the law."

"Be very wary. My bills have definitely gone up since they were installed. I think these things should have been checked at installation, not 12 months later. Are we living in Russia, or what?"

"The smart meter is a way to charge more to every customer."

"These smart meters will assume you are guilty and you must prove your innocence if there is a dispute. Let's say [Gov.] Perry decides to use them for political reasons and multiply all opponents' usage by 30 percent. How could you prove your innocence? This is no different than red light cameras and electronic toll roads."

"Businesses like Oncor's sole goal is to extract as much cash out of their customers as possible by any means necessary."

"Do you really think that Oncor would install meters that read too high to cheat customers? Oncor has no motive to rip you off because they get a regulated rate of return. Hint: read your meter everyday and track your usage! You'll find that extreme temperatures cause extreme usage. You'll learn the true cost of your habits if you monitor daily and then you'll have the power to modify your behavior and save big bucks!"

"YOU OBVIOUSLY MUST BE EMPLOYED BY THE PROVIDERS."

How to cap this real-life slice of consumer backlash? In this and past columns I've turned to newspaper forum postings to illustrate the general suspicions, delusions and ignorance of the public. I do this not to demean the citizens who write in - though I take comic relief where available - but to illustrate the toxicity of the environment for civic discourse and the hurdles utilities must clear. And the sometimes contradictory claims of complainants. It has been established that, in Texas, many complainants, in fact, do not have smart meters on their homes.

My take?

The recession is deeper and harder than most of us understand, though no one has been spared. Mistrust of institutions is at an all-time high. Critical thinking is in short supply. Anger and finger-pointing are de rigueur.

In this instance in Oncor's service area, public side-by-side testing of old meters and new smart meters is seen by some as a manipulative sham. Transparency is viewed as an illusion.

It is into this environment that the smart grid meets reality and reality is biting back. When I read stuff like the foregoing in The Dallas Morning News, I see an entire nation's goals foundering on mistrust, not to mention the failure of a nascent industry with laudible goals.

Something's gotta give, and fast.

Phil Carson
Editor-in-chief
Intelligent Utility Daily
pcarson@energycentral.com [3]
303-228-4757

 

 

Administrative

First Published Date: 

Thu, 03/11/2010