Deploying Smart Meters for Compliance with Deploying Smart Meters for Compliance with Future Standards

Branko Bjelajac & Ruben Salazar, Landis+Gyr

Agenda

+ The “Utilities Paradox”

+ Standards Panorama in North America and Europe

+ Characteristics of Current Smart Grid Deployments

+ Future Proof Smart Meter Design+ Future Proof Smart Meter Design

+ Smart Meter Deployments – Real Cases

2

The “Utilities Paradox”

+ Meters are deployed for an extended period of time (15+ years)

+ Functionality of Smart Meters is expected to evolve over time:

– New functions: load control, service disconnect, enhanced security.

– Evolving comms: capability and data speed.

– Richer services: bidirectional metering, consumption history, multiple rates, …

+ New functions, services and evolutions of the technology are neither well + New functions, services and evolutions of the technology are neither well known nor well defined today.

+ Req’s for standards and interop are added constantly.

+ Candidate standards are still being worked out:

– Selected standards must evolve to accommodate new services and features, so will continue to be incomplete.

– Process of updating or modifying standards is known to be lengthy.

+ Overall cost of solution must meet tight business cases.

3

Standards Panorama in the USA

Smart Grid Conceptual Reference Diagram

4

Source: NIST Interoperability Framework 1.0)

Standards Panorama in Europe

5

Characteristics of Current Smart Grid Deployments

+ Most of ongoing Smart Grid deployments are based on optimized proprietary solutions.

+ This will continue to be the case for some years to come.

+ Standards will be available for use asynchronously for different areas of the Smart Grid and different layers of the implementation.

+ Standards can be put in use (relatively) quickly after their availability.

+ Every upgraded area of the comms stack will generate more interoperability.

6

Future Proof Smart Meter Design

+ Key components of the Smart Meter.

+ (The design can be Modular but also deeply Integrated.)

7

Future Proof Smart Meter Design (cont.)

A “future proof” Smart Meter design will ideally contain:

+ Capacity to extend the functions and services of the metrology.

+ Capacity to support increasing storage capabilities.

+ Flexibility to support multiple NAN schemes.

++ Flexibility to shape the NAN to improved and faster comms needs.

+ Flexibility for support of single or multiple HANs.

8

Smart Meter Deployments: Real Case 1 “HAN”

+ Case: Mass deployment of Smart Meters in the US with HAN support.

+ Requirement: HAN to every home, compliant with SEP1.0.

+ Event: NIST did not list SEP1.0 as part of candidate standards for interop.

+ Consequences:

– Potential regulatory implications for Utilities.

– Availability of HAN ecosystem based on SEP1.0 impacted.

+ Options: + Options:

– Deploy and foster ecosystem operating with SEP1.0/SEP1.x

– Continue current deployments, but wait for SEP2.0, upgrade deployed hardware, then enable HAN.

– Stop current deployments and wait for SEP2.0 while it is still “in the works”.

+ Issues:

– Hardware cannot be upgraded remotely, only software.

– Can deployed hardware support upgrade to newer, heavier, specification?

– Most likely a light version of specification could be accommodated but…

9 - Landis+Gyr Innovation SYmposium 2011 (LISY’11), London, March 22nd , 2011

Smart Meter Deployments: Real Case 1 “HAN” (cont.)

+ Solutions:

– Compatibility with existing deployments required, first at application level, then at hardware level (at risk given added complexity of SEP2.0).

– Build new hardware so that remaining and new deployments have more resources and flexibility available.

– Change architecture such that HAN SoC’s can be open to share resources with the main processor.with the main processor.

+ Lesson learned:

– Deploy new Smart Meters with significantly increased computing resources for HAN (2-5x in code and execution space required to be future proven).

– Ensure that new design offer flexibility to remotely change comms stack, the application and the HAN architecture if necessary.

10 - Landis+Gyr Innovation SYmposium 2011 (LISY’11), London, March 22nd , 2011

Smart Meter Deployments: Real Case 2 “NAN”

+ Case: Mass deployment of Smart Meters with proprietary NAN comms

+ Event:

– IEEE starts working group on PHY/MAC for utilities: SUN

– NIST/SGIP funnels concept of standards-based comms to ensure interop.

+ Consequences:

– Current Smart Meter deployments may face regulatory issues. – Current Smart Meter deployments may face regulatory issues.

– Smart Grid market may be stalled.

+ Options:

– Continue current deployments and work on interop at higher levels of stack.

– Stop and wait for standards-based election.

+ Issues

– Mostly cost driven design, so…

– Hardware selected is not flexible.

– Limited capabilities to change speeds, bands, operating modes.

11 - Landis+Gyr Innovation SYmposium 2011 (LISY’11), London, March 22nd , 2011

Smart Meter Deployments: Real Case 2 “NAN” (cont.)

+ Solutions:

– Make standardization activities friendly to existing deployments.

– Build new more flexible Smart Meter hardware, which:

• Supports changes to layers of comms stack,

• Has spare computing speed, spare code space and spare execution space,

• Has flexibility in physical layer to accommodate different channelization, modulation schemes, data speeds, transmission power. modulation schemes, data speeds, transmission power.

– Prefer selection of general purpose chipsets instead of dedicated modems.

+ Lessons learned:

– Build and deploy new Smart Meters with significantly increased computing resources for NAN.

– Ensure that new design offer flexibility to remotely change comms stack, application and NAN architecture and topology, if necessary.

– Basically, promote a software configurable comms platform.

+ Cost?

12 - Landis+Gyr Innovation SYmposium 2011 (LISY’11), London, March 22nd , 2011

Conclusions

+ Utilities deploy meters for long periods of time.

+ Technology changes constantly and more quickly than ever.

+ Smart Meters should provide flexibility to re-shape their functions, services and comms capabilities according to changing needs.

+ Smart Meter upgrades must be made effective w/o visiting the meter.

+ Upgrades should verify strict security provisions for their originator.

+ Needed: a flexible Smart Meter platform that can accept remote device upgrades for its components and respond with increased comm bandwidth, storage capabilities, functions and services.

13

The best positioned provider of Smart Meters is the one that satisfies the max. number of key future proofing req’s with its solution.