Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Smartmeter: Anyone knows how to get detailed info on them?

D

D Yuniskis

sj said:
Some basic information on the meters can be found here...
http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/metering/en/utility_revenue_meters/index.htm

There is a pdf link for a fact sheet about the I-210+ meter near the
bottom of that page. As D Yuniskis mentioned, the utility customer has
some options. The changing LCD display reflects these choices. On this

By "utility customer", you mean "your electricity provider" (?).
Yes, they can configure the "parameters" that are displayed
as well as how long the display pauses on each. It's a
crappy interface but "flexible". For the homeowner, you just
learn *which* parameter is of interest and ignore the rest.
meter, the top big display field seems to be the elapsed kWh measurement
(mostly). The lower left on this one changes: current kW, voltage, and

Does your display actually have icons/legends saying "current kW",
"voltage", etc.?
the letters Adl. I have no idea what Adl means; there is no number on
the bottom then, just Adl. When the voltage is displayed on the bottom,
the top goes to all 8's with a minus sign. So that 888 thing seems to be
just some artifact of the voltage display configuration. There's a

"Display test" -- to prove all the segments "light". Depending
on their choice of "fonts" (blech), it can help ensure a '7'
doesn't appear as a '1', '9' (without a tail) as a '4', etc.
little bar graph at the right middle too. It may be a crude differential
indication -- power use up or down. Seems the lower left can indicate
power direction, like if the customer has solar panels and can pump back
power to the grid.

Yes. One selling point is to support co-generation for "consumers"
like that.
In the above link page, if you select AMR meters from the left column,
it takes you to a page of options the utility can choose for phoning
home. This meter seems to have the SSL wireless link at the bottom of
the page. There is another pdf fact sheet. Seems it uses 900 MHz
wireless. Later I may run a wireless sniffer to see if I can find new
IPs in the neighborhood.

Note it will be 900MHz spread spectrum so not "WiFi".
 
D

D Yuniskis

Hi Charlie,
Even with mechanical meters they can get away with 'estimating' your
usage!

Back in Irvine, it apparently was the practice to actually read the
meters only every other month. We could tell, because every other
month we would get hit by large 'overuse' charges, as they 'estimated'
that we would have used a lot more electricity, and gone into the high
tariff rates, and then the next month we would be barely out of
baseline. A couple of times I got the bill, looked at what they said
the meter read, went out and LOOKED at my meter, and realized that I
wasn't there yet a week after they had supposedly read the meter.

And no, they never put on there 'ESTIMATED'...

In every service area that I've lived, the bill announced
"estimate" if it indeed was an estimate. And, in every such
area, the utility couldn't *regularly* resort to estimates
as it *is* unfair to the consumer (since most utilities
don't have flat tariffs)

Note there is a subtle but hugely significant difference, here:

If a meter reader couldn't read your (mechanical) meter
(because he was lazy, work stoppage, bad weather, etc.)
the utility *could* estimate and then, in the *next* billing
cycle, an actual reading would come up with a correction.
Granted, you couldn't tell how far off the estimate was
FOR SURE, *but*, at the end of that billing period, you
once again have a record of the *total* power consumed
in the two periods.

This isn't true of an estimate brought about by a meter
*failure*.
 
D

D Yuniskis

Joerg said:
I've never heard of one breaking. Only electronic ones that broke. Also,
they'd have to somehow leak out of the utility's materials management
system to end up in surplus stores.

<grin> They can be (ahem) "acquired". I was going to change the
ratio on one (to make it more interesting) and build a *lamp*
out of it but was vetoed ("You *don't* think you're going to put
that UGLY thing in the living room, do you??")
 
C

Charlie E.

Hi Charlie,


In every service area that I've lived, the bill announced
"estimate" if it indeed was an estimate. And, in every such
area, the utility couldn't *regularly* resort to estimates
as it *is* unfair to the consumer (since most utilities
don't have flat tariffs)

Note there is a subtle but hugely significant difference, here:

If a meter reader couldn't read your (mechanical) meter
(because he was lazy, work stoppage, bad weather, etc.)
the utility *could* estimate and then, in the *next* billing
cycle, an actual reading would come up with a correction.
Granted, you couldn't tell how far off the estimate was
FOR SURE, *but*, at the end of that billing period, you
once again have a record of the *total* power consumed
in the two periods.

This isn't true of an estimate brought about by a meter
*failure*.

I just figured it was another way to bilk an extra dollar or two from
the customer. Estimate high, based on general usage and not actual
usage, and you get to hit the customer with higher rate levels. The
next month, when you actually read the meter, you are 'crediting' him
with low rate levels, so you make out like a bandit.

I just figured they had decided to reduce costs by only reading every
other month. The meter was on the street side of my house, literally
3 feet from the cul-de-sac driveway, so they would have no trouble
reading it.

Charlie
 
D

D Yuniskis

Hi Charlie,
I just figured it was another way to bilk an extra dollar or two from
the customer. Estimate high, based on general usage and not actual
usage, and you get to hit the customer with higher rate levels. The
next month, when you actually read the meter, you are 'crediting' him
with low rate levels, so you make out like a bandit.

Yup. The "fair" way is to average usage over N (2 in this case)
billing periods and assume the user used exactly half the power
in each. Otherwise, you charge the user more than he *might*
have used (hey, *you* are the guys who elected to estimate
the meter reading so *I* should get the benefit of the doubt)
I just figured they had decided to reduce costs by only reading every

Of course! :> But, I think your PUC will find that practice
frowned upon -- for the reasons we've discussed. Why not read
it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the consumption during
the summer months (highest rates, typically) and bilk the
user accordingly?! :<
other month. The meter was on the street side of my house, literally
3 feet from the cul-de-sac driveway, so they would have no trouble
reading it.

Yup.
 
D

D Yuniskis

Hi Jan,

Jan said:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis
<[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:

[overly ambitious snipping?]
That is what they do here, once a year.

presumably, a response to my comment:
"Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the
consumption during the summer months (highest rates,
typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!"

If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt,
are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't
opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round
usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in
the summer, etc.
And you can internet the number to them yourself if they find you not home,
the meters are in the house here (do not get wet tha tway I suppose).

Yes, some places I've lived have left "postcards" at the house
on which the resident would mark the positions of the dial
indicators (they don't trust you to *read* them as alternate
decades rotate in opposite directions) and mail it in. They
would actually take your word on the reading (presumably, checking
that it isn't "outrageous") as they would eventually catch
up with you (i.e., if you distort this month's reading as
"low", then *next* month they will see the net as *high*
(no free lunch)
 
D

D Yuniskis

I've seen what looks like brand new meters at different electronics
flea markets. I just never really knew what I would do with one. Not
expensive, maybe $25.
I do have a Killawatt. Damn handy toy.

You might want to check the accuracy of that "toy" :>
(i.e., with some known loads of various power factors)
 
S

sj

By "utility customer", you mean "your electricity provider" (?).

Yes, that's what I meant.
Yes, they can configure the "parameters" that are displayed
as well as how long the display pauses on each. It's a
crappy interface but "flexible". For the homeowner, you just
learn *which* parameter is of interest and ignore the rest.


Does your display actually have icons/legends saying "current kW",
"voltage", etc.?

Yes, but not quite that specific. If you download the 2-page fact
sheet...
http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/metering/en/downloads/i_210_plus.pdf

The second page shows the full LCD display. The top number field seems
to show the elapsed kWh most of the time with the kWh legend displayed.
The lower number field is usually combined with one of the two legends
to its right. I've seen 246 Volts and 1.01 kW. It also shows Adl with
nothing else and the main number still showing the normal kWh number.

The lower-right display shows Delivered with flashing triangle. I assume
if I was generating power into the grid this would become Received
instead.

Hmm. Looking at the fact sheet right now, maybe Adl is accumulated
delivery. Seems maybe at Adl display the Received and/or Delivered
legend could be on, indicating what has happened since [some time
period].
 
S

sj

But there were people who claimed the bill was 3x the previous year's or
more. That can't be an estimate. Also, on the bill it should clearly say
"estimated".

Yes, from what I have heard the big increase in bills is the most common
complaint. I was just reporting what I think I heard about some small
number of meters that died (in response to the question).

On TV, in the last couple days, I think I also heard that they are not
going to halt distribution of the new meters, but there is an
investigation team that will deliver a report around August.

Want to place odds on the results?
 
J

Joerg

sj said:
Yes, from what I have heard the big increase in bills is the most common
complaint. I was just reporting what I think I heard about some small
number of meters that died (in response to the question).

On TV, in the last couple days, I think I also heard that they are not
going to halt distribution of the new meters, but there is an
investigation team that will deliver a report around August.

Let's see. If they are really diligent now it might fly but they've got
so much egg in the face by now that that isn't guaranteed. In America we
have relatively direct access to our representatives and that's a
wonderful thing. People expect them to put the foot down when something
is seriously amiss.

A hearing about a technical problem, broadcast in detail on the evening
news, that's pretty bad. I think only Toyota and some investment banks
came close to that lately.

Want to place odds on the results?

Nah, I can almost picture it ;-)
 
S

Skybuck Flying

Greegor said:
http://www.nctimes.com/business/article_244ff4dc-7f2b-5a8b-96d2-dc14c17681bf.html

ENERGY: Experts hack new power meters
Utilities installing networked devices on homes

By ERIC WOLFF Posted: January 10, 2010 9:30 pm

Lee Campbell shows the "smart meter" installed by SDG&E above his
regular electric meter at his home in San Diego last Feb. 12. (File
photo by Hayne Palmour IV - Staff Photographer) .

As California's utilities roll out millions of "smart meters" in the
coming years, they're creating, for the first time, the possibility
that the electricity infrastructure could be hacked through a home,
security consultants say.

With San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison
installing 7.3 million smart meters ---- upgrading their entire
customer base ---- they're essentially attaching small computers to
each house, each equipped with wireless communications back to the
utilities.

Utilities say they have been hardening the smart meters since they
began development, but security consultants say they are worried: If
criminals cracked the system, they could remotely install a virus that
could shut down power for millions of customers.

The new smart meters will have a host of capabilities: They will
credit homeowners who produce their own electricity via solar cells or
wind mills, be able to wirelessly communicate data to the utility and
let utilities turn off the power remotely, among other functions that
could be added.

"Were it telemetry only, then the only compromise is privacy," said
Mike Davis, senior security consultant for the security service
IOActive. "When you add remote disconnect, then you increase the
attractiveness of the meter as a target."

Davis and his team hacked into smart meters last spring as part of a
proof-of-concept they showed off at a Las Vegas security conference
last summer.

They reverse engineered meters they bought on eBay and found in trash
bins near installation sites. Then they installed a computer virus
that would replicate itself across the wireless network and block the
utility from each meter as it went.

Representatives from Edison and SDG&E said that the demonstration
didn't change their work at all; that they've been working on security
since they started development three years ago.

But Davis noted that utilities now require secure recycling of old
meters, and eBay won't allow that sort of gear to be sold on the site
any longer. Davis said they have done such a good job keeping the
meters out of his hands that he hasn't hacked the most recent meters
because he can't find one through legal means.

The demonstration may have also driven the federal government to
create standards for smart meters in the previously unregulated smart
meter arena. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, a
branch of the Department of Commerce, released a draft of standards in
September.

"Our security complies with the emerging smart grid standards in
NIST," said Paula Campbell, director of the Edison Smart Connect
Program. "There's unique encryption, all designed with the goal in
mind of minimizing the vulnerabilities."

The encryption would apply primarily to over-the-air communications
from the devices. In theory, a criminal could sit in a car up to a
mile away from a site and attempt to hack the WiFi signal of the
devices.

Baker said that would be pretty hard.

"It's called security in depth," Baker said. "The old technology is
there's one key that could open every door in the neighborhood. In the
systems employed today, you need a different key for every room in
your house."

Alternatively, a hacker could just try to wire directly into a meter.

All the devices will include a detector that sends an alert to the
utility if the meter is shaken, removed or even if the front cover is
taken off.

^ Most interesting.

Soon they will know if you have a big ass fat girlfriend banging a bit too
hard ! ;) :) >=D

And the frequency there-of hehehehehehehehe.
 
E

E

Jan Panteltje said:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis

That is what they do here, once a year.
And you can internet the number to them yourself if they find you not
home,
the meters are in the house here (do not get wet tha tway I suppose).

Ah, same way here just read the meter once a year yourself and post it to
some form in internet.
Self-service is best service or so...

btw. the meter here has been running since 1968. Those old meters are really
quite sturdy. Don't
mind little lightning and whatever crud long rural lines can generate.
 
J

JosephKK

That's the way our water meters are read.

...Jim Thompson

Same here. I used to be on flat rate, my bills actually seem to have
gone down. Just installed a few months ago.
 
D

D Yuniskis

Hi Joerg,
D said:
Jan said:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis
<[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:

[overly ambitious snipping?]
That is what they do here, once a year.

presumably, a response to my comment:
"Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the
consumption during the summer months (highest rates,
typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!"

If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt,
are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't
opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round
usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in
the summer, etc.

Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a
"small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather
modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. That's why I'd be
squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to you.
And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us a
"minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next
month. I ended that practice right in the tracks.

That's why the only *fair* way of dealing with "estimates" is
to average the estimated period into the adjacent "measured"
periods. This ends up dinging the utility (on average) for
their decision *not* to read the meter (instead of dinging the
user)

Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence,
KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for
the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in*
that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time"
but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity
pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but
on a *continuous* (i.e., 100%) basis.

This has led to all sorts of bizarre schemes -- most of which
increase the *total* energy used -- to shift the load or
average it out. E.g., some firms "make ice" at night (when the
business is closed and there is *no* significant energy demand)
and then use the ice in lieu of running their ACbrrr's
during the following day (when the *added* load of the ACbrrr
would dramatically increase their "peak demand").

The goal of the utility (besides making money :> ) is to have
a nice *steady* load (since variations in load require
power plants that have quick response times -- like coal
and gas fired -- which tend to be more expensive to operate).
 
D

D Yuniskis

D said:
Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence,
KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for
the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in*
that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time"
but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity
pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but

Grrr... s.b.:

"pays *more* than a business that uses electricity at half that rate but"
 
J

Joerg

D said:
Hi Joerg,
D said:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis

[overly ambitious snipping?]

That is what they do here, once a year.

presumably, a response to my comment:
"Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the
consumption during the summer months (highest rates,
typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!"

If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt,
are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't
opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round
usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in
the summer, etc.

Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a
"small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather
modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. That's why I'd be
squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to
you. And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us
a "minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next
month. I ended that practice right in the tracks.

That's why the only *fair* way of dealing with "estimates" is
to average the estimated period into the adjacent "measured"
periods. This ends up dinging the utility (on average) for
their decision *not* to read the meter (instead of dinging the
user)

Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence,
KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for
the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in*
that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time"
but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity
pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but
on a *continuous* (i.e., 100%) basis.

This has led to all sorts of bizarre schemes -- most of which
increase the *total* energy used -- to shift the load or
average it out. E.g., some firms "make ice" at night (when the
business is closed and there is *no* significant energy demand)
and then use the ice in lieu of running their ACbrrr's
during the following day (when the *added* load of the ACbrrr
would dramatically increase their "peak demand").

The goal of the utility (besides making money :> ) is to have
a nice *steady* load (since variations in load require
power plants that have quick response times -- like coal
and gas fired -- which tend to be more expensive to operate).


It can lead to even more bizarre results: I once spoke to a business
owner who couldn't avoid peaks because of the way their machines worked.
During a planned outage they rented a big Diesel and found out that
their cost for electrical energy _dropped_, even when factoring in the
daily costs of the generator.
 
D said:
Hi Joerg,
D Yuniskis wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis

[overly ambitious snipping?]

That is what they do here, once a year.

presumably, a response to my comment:
"Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the
consumption during the summer months (highest rates,
typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!"

If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt,
are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't
opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round
usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in
the summer, etc.

Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a
"small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather
modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. That's why I'd be
squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to
you. And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us
a "minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next
month. I ended that practice right in the tracks.

That's why the only *fair* way of dealing with "estimates" is
to average the estimated period into the adjacent "measured"
periods. This ends up dinging the utility (on average) for
their decision *not* to read the meter (instead of dinging the
user)

Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence,
KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for
the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in*
that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time"
but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity
pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but
on a *continuous* (i.e., 100%) basis.

This has led to all sorts of bizarre schemes -- most of which
increase the *total* energy used -- to shift the load or
average it out. E.g., some firms "make ice" at night (when the
business is closed and there is *no* significant energy demand)
and then use the ice in lieu of running their ACbrrr's
during the following day (when the *added* load of the ACbrrr
would dramatically increase their "peak demand").

The goal of the utility (besides making money :> ) is to have
a nice *steady* load (since variations in load require
power plants that have quick response times -- like coal
and gas fired -- which tend to be more expensive to operate).


It can lead to even more bizarre results: I once spoke to a business
owner who couldn't avoid peaks because of the way their machines worked.
During a planned outage they rented a big Diesel and found out that
their cost for electrical energy _dropped_, even when factoring in the
daily costs of the generator.

If (big if) the charges reflect the marginal costs of the electricity, this
isn't bizarre at all. He's doing the peaking rather than forcing the power
company to do it.
 
J

Joerg

Jim said:
[snip]
It can lead to even more bizarre results: I once spoke to a business
owner who couldn't avoid peaks because of the way their machines worked.
During a planned outage they rented a big Diesel and found out that
their cost for electrical energy _dropped_, even when factoring in the
daily costs of the generator.

I'm not surprised. In the early '70's perpetual side-kick technician
Jim Foster and I worked up numbers for a VW-engine-driven generator
for his cabin out in the boonies... amortized equipment cost plus
maintenance plus gasoline (no road tax) yielded about 2¢/kWh, about
1/2 of the going rate from APS.

I only have a link in German but over there you can buy power/heating
combos like this:

http://www.focus.de/immobilien/ener...rke-golf-strom-aus-dem-keller_aid_452064.html

Some are one-cylinder engines that can burn just about anything, others
like the one from Volkswagen burn natural gas. The engines have been
modified so they feature very long oil change and other service
intervals, and really long warranties. I've seen one with a 10-year
warranty, pretty amazing.
 
Top