Utility Views on AMI & Home Area Networks


End User Survey

Published: Q2 2011

Analysts: Mareca Hatler,
Darryl Gurganious,
and Michael W. Ritter Ph.D.

Pages: 32 (49 figures)


Table of Contents

amiSurvey

ON World's Research Features:
* Leading industry experts
* Primary investigation
* Fortune 1000 customers
* Money back guarantee

Press release

Methodology

Testimonials

Related report(s):

WSN Power Set
25% off 4 reports

WSN Smart Industries Set
25% off 3 reports


WSN for a Smart World Set

35% off 3 reports

Home Area Networks
802.15.4 & ZigBee
Perpetual Power Solutions
Smart Homes
Healthcare
Smart Metering/HAN
Oil & Gas
Smart Buildings
Smart Cities

Smart Crops




Price:

Multi-user/corporate: $1499
*Includes AMI/HAN Initiatives

Included in a multi-user set license for
"Smart Metering"

Single user license: $999


Synopsis:

Based on 110 in-depth phone interviews with utility project managers, this report provides actionable market data on utility plans, preferences and opinions on AMI, distribution grid management and residential demand response.

In addition to widespread plans for AMI, utilities are investing in a variety of smart grid systems for distribution grid management and the next generation of residential demand response solutions.   The Home Area Network is still an emerging concept with the majority of utilities focused on in-home communications through their AMI network.  However, a growing number of utilities have aggressive goals for their residential demand response programs with the majority planning dynamic pricing and advanced two-way energy management solutions.

Some utilities such as British Gas, OG&E, San Diego Gas & Electric, and the City of Leesman are planning at least hourly energy consumption updates through Web portals and/or in-home displays as the default for all customers with smart meters. Utilities are also opening up to third party partnerships and collaborating with a range of vendors and consumer oriented service providers.

A few key points include the following:

  • Sixty-one percent (61%) offer or are planning to give residential customers access to their energy consumption information, updated at least daily
  • 14% are planning energy consumption updates of several times per day or more frequently
  • Almost half are installing or planning meter-to-HAN gateways
  • ZigBee is preferred by a factor of ten over other HAN technologies  
  • Forty-four percent (44%) believe that third party alliances are essential or will be an important component of their residential programs after more planning


ON World has researched smart technologies and advanced metering for over a decade and is the first research firm to predict the displacement of AMR by AMI.



Primary Research:

110+ phone interviews with project managers with leading IOUs, cooperatives, and municipal/public owned utilities





Primary Research:

Utility End Users: ON World conducted in-depth phone interviews with the following utilities and government agencies:

North America:
Adams-Columbia Electric Coop
AEP Ohio
Alliant Energy Corporation
Alpena Power Company    
Ameren Corp.    
Austin Utilities   
BC Hydro           
Bear Valley Electric         
Black Warrior EMC          
Boone Electric Cooperative          
Burbank Water and Power
CenterPoint Energy, Inc   
Central Alabama Electric Coop      
Central Lincoln PUD        
Central Vermont Public Service Corp.         
Charlotte County Utilities
Chelan County PUD        
Cherokee Electric Cooperative      
City of Anaheim Public Utilities    
City of Danville Utilities  
City of Leesburg, Florida 
City of Ruston, Louisiana 
Clallam PUD       
Constellation Energy Group
Consumers Energy           
Crow Wing Cooperative   
Cullman Electric Cooperative        
DTE Energy     
Dominion Virginia          
Duke Energy Ohio           
EPCOR Utilities Inc.        
Florida Power & Light     
Glendale Water and Power           
Golden Valley Electric Association 
Groton Public Utilities
Hawaiian Electric Industries       
High West Energy           
Idaho Power       
Itasca-Mantrap Co-op      
Kenergy Corporation       
Knoxville Utilities Board  
Lafayette Utilities System
Loup Power District        
Midamerican Energy Company      
Minnesota Power (Allete) 
Modesto Irrigation District 
Montana-Dakota Utilities 
National Grid     
Northeastern REMC         
Oakdale Electric Coop   
Oklahoma Gas & Electric (OGE)  
Oncor Electric    
Otter Tail          
Overton Power District    
Pacific Gas & Electric      
PacifiCorp         
Pasadena Water & Power
PECO Energy      
Pedernales Electric Coop 
Peninsula Light Company 
Pepco Holdings

     
   


Peterborough Utilities Group
Piedmont Electric Membership      
Pioneer Electric Cooperative
PNM
Portland General Electric Company
Poudre Valley Rural Electric      
Powder River Energy Corp
PPL     
Prairieland Electric
Progress Energy
Public Service Electric and Gas Co.
Puget Sound Energy      
Pulaski Electric System
Rappahannock Electric Coop         
Sacramento Municipal Utility District   
Salt River Project
Scana Corporation          
Seattle City Light           
Sempra Utilities 
Sioux Valley Southwestern Electric Cooperative
Snohomish PUD  
South Alabama Electric Cooperative           
South Kentucky Rural Electric       
South Mississippi Electric Power    
Southern California Edison
Southern California Gas   
Southwest Gas Corporation           
Southwest Transmission Cooperative          
Springfield City Utilities
Tacoma Power   
TECO Energy       
Tennessee Valley Authority           
Tri-county Electric Coop  
United Power     
Unitil   
Vectren Corporation        
Wabash Valley Power Association        
Westar Energy    
Wiregrass Electric Cooperative     
Wisconsin Public Service     
Xcel Energy        
Yampa Valley Electric Association

Europe & Australia:
British Gas
EnergyAustralia
Jemena/United
SP AusNet
Scottish and Southern Energy
Yello Strom

Government Agencies:
Australia, Dept. of Primary Industries
California Public Utilities Commission
Dept. of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), UK
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Texas Public Utility Commission

Survey Overview:

amiHanPages

 

Table of Contents:


Methodology
Summary
Respondent Overview
Advanced Metering Infrastructure
AMI Technologies
Planned Electric AMI Technology (ies)
Public AMI Networks
Distribution Grid Management
Meter-to-HAN Gateway
Residential Demand Response/Home Area Networks
Residential Programs
Energy Consumption Access
Home Area Network Approach
Distribution Channels
Home Area Network Incentives
Adoption Inhibitors

List of Figures

Figure 1: Respondents by Utility Type
Figure 2: Respondents by Job Position
Figure 3: Respondents by Number of Electric Customers
Figure 4: Current AMI Status
Figure 5: Number of Electric AMI Meters Installed by end of 2010
Figure 6: Number of Planned/Installed Electric AMI Meters
Figure 7: Electric AMI Features Ranked
Figure 8: Total - Electric AMI Technology Used/Planned
Figure 9: IOU - Electric AMI Technology Used/Planned
Figure 10: Coops - Electric AMI Technology Used/Planned
Figure 11: Munis - Electric AMI Technology Used/Planned
Figure 12: Current/Planned AMI Vendor(s)
Figure 13: 2010 AMI Communications Market Shares
Figure 14: 2010 AMI Meter Vendor Market Shares
Figure 15: Current/Planned AMI Backhaul Technology
Figure 16: Likelihood to Use Public Networks for AMI w/in 5 Years
Figure 17: Concerns about Public Networks
Figure 18: Using/Planning Distribution Automation
Figure 19: Importance of Integrating DA with AMI Network
Figure 20: Planning/Will Have Meter-to- HAN Gateway
Figure 21: Planned HAN Technology
Figure 22: Utility Views on Energy Aware Customers in Five Years
Figure 23: Energy Aware Customers in 5 Years by Percent
Figure 24: Residential Programs – Direct Load Control
Figure 25: Residential Programs – Time of Use Pricing
Figure 26: Residential Programs – Net Metering
Figure 27: Residential Programs – Smart Charging
Figure 28: Total - In-Home Energy Management Devices
Figure 29: IOUs - In-Home Energy Management Devices
Figure 30: Coops - In-Home Energy Management Devices
Figure 31: Munis- In-Home Energy Management Devices
Figure 32: Residential Programs – Dynamic Pricing
Figure 33: Default Energy Consumption Update Frequency
Figure 34: Planned Energy Consumption Update Frequency
Figure 35: Energy Web Portal (w/at Least Daily Updates)
Figure 36: Total - Approach to In-Home Energy System
Figure 37: IOUs- Approach to In-Home Energy Systems
Figure 38: Coops - Approach to In-Home Energy System
Figure 39: Munis - Approach to In-Home Energy Systems
Figure 40: Planned HAN Architectures
Figure 41: Preferred HAN Technologies (Ranked)
Figure 42: Utility Views on How to Pay for In-Home Energy Systems
Figure 43: Totals – HAN Incentives
Figure 44: IOUs – HAN Incentives
Figure 45: Coops – HAN Incentives
Figure 46: Munis – HAN Incentives
Figure 47: Opinion on Third Party Alliances
Figure 48: Adoption Inhibitors – Consumer Factors
Figure 49: Adoption Inhibitors – Utility Factors


About ON World:
ON World provides world class business intelligence on smart technology markets.  Our research reports and information services are sold to Fortune 1000 companies, startups, and investors worldwide.

Questions? We welcome your questions on completed reports or suggestions on upcoming research. The fastest way to process your request is to send us an eMail

About Us Reports Customers Our Team