Slashdot Mirror
Millions of Smart Meters May Over-Inflate Readings by up to 600% (bleepingcomputer.com)
"Lab tests carried out by Dutch scientists have shown that some of today's 'smart' electrical meters may give out false readings that in some cases can be 582% higher than actual energy consumption," reports BleepingComputer. An anonymous reader quotes their report:
The study involved several tests conducted on nine different brands of "smart" meters, also referred to in the industry as "static energy meters." Researchers also used one electromechanical meter for reference... Experiments went on for six months, with individual tests lasting at least one week, and sometimes several weeks. Test results varied wildly, with some meters reporting errors way above their disclosed range, going from -32% to +582%...
The results of the study also matched numbers posted on an online forum by a disgruntled Dutchman complaining about high energy bills... Researchers blamed all the issues on the design of some smart meters, and, ironically, electrical devices with energy-saving features. The latter devices, researchers say, introduced a large amount of noise in electrical current waveforms, which disrupt the smart meter sensors tasked with recording power consumption...
Long-time Slashdot reader ClarkMills points out the researchers estimate that "potentially inaccurate meters have been installed in the meter cabinets of at least 750,000 Dutch households," while the article suggests that worldwide, "the numbers of possibly faulty smart meters could be in the millions,especially after some governments, especially in the EU, have pushed for smart meters to replace classic electromechanical (rotating disk) meters."
The results of the study also matched numbers posted on an online forum by a disgruntled Dutchman complaining about high energy bills... Researchers blamed all the issues on the design of some smart meters, and, ironically, electrical devices with energy-saving features. The latter devices, researchers say, introduced a large amount of noise in electrical current waveforms, which disrupt the smart meter sensors tasked with recording power consumption...
Long-time Slashdot reader ClarkMills points out the researchers estimate that "potentially inaccurate meters have been installed in the meter cabinets of at least 750,000 Dutch households," while the article suggests that worldwide, "the numbers of possibly faulty smart meters could be in the millions,especially after some governments, especially in the EU, have pushed for smart meters to replace classic electromechanical (rotating disk) meters."
That's what they told one woman who complained about a 5 fold increase of her electric bill after the smart meter was installed: "Your smart meter is working fine. Possibly your old meter was faulty and we have been under-charging you all these years". Which might even be true, sadly the reporter didn't mention what the woman was paying (which should have made it instantly clear whether or not something was out of whack). But it does point out that they make it very hard to dispute these bills. The company told her she could have an electrician check out all of the wiring and appliances for any problems that would cause an increased power draw, or she could have the meter recalibrated, but she would have to bear the cost of around €900 (which seems unnecessarily high by the way).
I think we're seeing deplorable but wholly expected behaviour in a typical case where there could well be a problem with a company's equipment, which could turn out very embarrassing and expensive for them if they admitted it. So instead they deny everything and chalk any complaints up to isolated defects or fraud.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
A few years ago I was working for a power retailer who were the first to start pushing smart meters in my country. The first meters were still read by human meter readers, and the data was downloaded. We were also collecting meter readings from customers who wanted to track their usage on a more regular basis than the meter readers would come round.
Anyway, what we discovered from these various collection mechanisms was that the human meter readers were making up an awful lot of readings and not actually visiting the meters at all in many cases. If they're not going to bother going it'd have been better for our customers if they just didn't report rather than making up a number, we could model a more accurate number .
And what if the error is not in the instantaneous reading, but the figures that get accumulated and sent to the power company?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
The problem isn't just some 0.X% being over charged, it's being over charged and being unable to do anything about it. The power company's response is always "you used more this month", and there's literally nothing you can do about it. It's in the same problem category as cops shooting black people. Nobody is saying we can avoid all the accidents, but everyone wants justice system to stop shielding the cops from any and all liability.
Does an analog meter measure the amount of energy correctly? If yes: it's criminal to impose a mandatory change to the new meter.
Does it measure the incorrect amount of energy? Yes. Is it defective? Yes. Are the testing standard broken? Yes. Are people actually being charged 6 times their power usage in practice? No.
As I said, there is a certification failure here, but the headline and the statistic that all of these news sites are parrotting is pure clickbait.
There are other methods to verify if the meter is performing as expected.
A third party device that allows you to monitor your own electrical usage is available and dead simple to install. Ammeters clamp around your mains and track / log how much power you're using in real time. Will store said information locally as well as allow for export into something like Excel for long term analysis.
They can tell you how much power you're using as well as what the current and projected costs will be.
If the monitor and your meter are off by X margin, it would be a good time to get someone to check it out.
One such device ( and the one I've utilized for over a decade now ) is call T.E.D. ( The Energy Detective ) Google it.
You may doubt that there is an "extra metering" company, but that is exactly what happens in multiple countries with deregulated energy supply.
While I don't know in detail how the Dutch system works, the UK system seems to work in a similar way, and I describe that here:
An end user can choose their electricity supplier, who provides the retail service (i.e. billing, sourcing of bulk energy, customer service, etc.). The supplier sources the energy from generators via the wholesale market (ante hoc) and balancing market (post hoc). The electricity is delivered by a combination of the transmission operator, and the local distribution operator, who own and operate the transmission grid and distribution network respectively. Metering is provided by an independent metering operator.
The metering operator is responsible for collating meter readings and verifying the correct operation of the meters, as well as periodic recalibration. In the event that consumption data is unavailable or inaccurate, and the supplier and customer cannot agree on a reading (or if a customer is transferring to a new supplier, but the two suppliers disagree about the meter reading at changeover; it is, after all, common for customers to "adjust" readings when suppliers publish new tariffs or a customer changes to a cheaper supplier), the meter operator provides independent arbitration.
The independence of the meter operator is important, because the same meter readings that are used by the supplier to compute bills for customers, are the same readings that are used by the balancing market operators to reconcile bulk electricity accounts (including the post hoc accounting between generators and suppliers). Part of the job of the meter operator is to provide independent mathematical modelling of consumption patterns, to correct for incorrect or missing data, and which are legally binding on balancing market paticipants.
Another poster has mentioned an issue of energy theft elsewhere in the discussion, and the above system has an impact on the detection and prevention of energy theft. Because the same meter reading which the supplier uses to bill a customer, also determines the energy purchased by the supplier from the wholesale/balancing markets, there is little incentive for suppliers to investigate energy theft. If a meter reading is lower than it should be, then the supplier pays less to the generator. The discrepancy appears in the energy accounting of the distribution network operator, who must absorb the cost. However, if the energy theft is discovered, then the independent meter operator will compute a consumption measure which is legally binding on the supplier and customer. The supplier therefore has to pay for the stolen energy in the wholesale market. The customer, who is likely a deadbeat if they've been tampering with the meter, has no money with which to pay, and either disappears or goes bankrupt. Thus, having discovered an energy theft, the likely outcome for the supplier is that they take a loss equal to the value of the stolen energy.