This posted to smartgrid@ostp.gov by Conrad Eustis, Portland General Electric Company
1. How are low-income consumers best served by home-to-grid technology?
A single, standardized interface at the appliance, ensures that when a low income customer buys a used appliance that the utility, customer or social agency will be able to provide an appropriate communication and control method for the customer’s use. Appliances with embedded HAN communication protocols have a very strong chance of being obsolete by the time they find service in a second home. Just look at the millions of now obsolete ZigBee 1.0 chips installed in smart meters in California and Texas. In every case, additional hardware will now be required to translate information from these old chips to future smart appliances with embedded communication protocols of a different design. Portland General Electric, as part of the approval of its smart metering implementation in 2007, promised our Public Utility Commission and low income advocates that we would pursue the approach of a standardized interface to serve the public interest.
2. Some appliance manufacturers have announced plans to market Smart Grid-enabled appliances in late 2011 provided that appropriate communication standards are defined in 2010. What standard data communications interfaces(s) should be supported by appliances and the smart meter or data gateway so that appliance manufacturers can cost-effectively produce smart appliances that can communicate with the Smart Grid anywhere in the nation? How can communication between smart appliances and the Smart Grid be made ‘‘plug and play’’ for consumers who do not have the skills or means to configure data networks? If gateways or adapters are needed, who should pay for them: The utility or the consumer?
Do not try to pick Phy/Mac communication protocol winners at this point in time. Very experienced electronics manufacturers such as Intel and Dell, added WiFi external to laptops via PCMCIA before embedding it in the laptop even though, at the time, WiFi was a standard much more mature than ZigBee or HomePlug are today. Engineering best practices dictate obtaining market experience with a new communication protocol in millions of homes AND market acceptance before committing to embedding a communication protocol. With all due respect to the likes of Whirlpool and General Electric, I do not think they have the communication engineering experience to go against best practices established elsewhere in the consumer electronics industry to implement embedded communications protocols and get it right the first time. Appliances last much longer than communication protocols. I still use a freezer in my house that was in service before I bought my first 486 computer with Windows 3.1. AOL hadn’t even happened yet, and when I did sign up for AOL a bit later, I connected the PC to the internet via a standardized interface called the serial port with an external 9,600 baud modem. The risk of obsolescence with embedded wireless communication protocols in the appliance is very real. Security risks with immature protocols are an even bigger concern. The answer to plug and play is the standardized interface that EPRI and U-SNAP are currently working to define. Don’t start the Smart Home without it.
Conrad Eustis
Director of Retail Technology Development
Portland General Electric Company
No comments:
Post a Comment