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."

8 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. I am Jack's total lack of surprise. by steak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The one thing people were afraid of when they were forced to switch over the smart meters happened.

    1. Re:I am Jack's total lack of surprise. by fnj · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's no law against selling shitty products

      An electric meter is not a "product" anybody buys. An electric meter is an asset belonging to the electric utility company which they use to determine how much actual product (electricity) you buy. For most things you buy, the quantity is obvious at the point/time of sale. The closest thing I can think of to an electric meter is the flow measurement device in a motor fuel pump. You better believe those are regulated. The state calibrates and checks them periodically. They have stickers attesting to their accuracy as certified by the state authority. The weight scales at your grocer are regulated and certified as to accuracy.

      The electric utilities are getting a pass on these meters because it would be very difficult and expensive to test each one individually at its point of installation. And it stinks. Random testing should be done, and huge penalties should be assessed where it mismeasurement found.

      P.S. - there ARE laws against overbilling where wrongdoing or gross negligence can be shown.

    2. Re:I am Jack's total lack of surprise. by marcansoft · · Score: 5, Informative

      56% measured power usage much greater than what was actually being used in a ridiculous corner case scenario involving a parallel string of identical low-quality LED lights with an absolutely dismal power factor, connected to a dimmer to make the power factor even more extreme. Read the actual article with the current waveforms. They looks like something a 2 year old scribbled on a piece of paper, not a sine wave.

      Yes, there's a certification failure here (meters are not tested with non-sinusoidal current loads), but no, nobody's meter is actually measuring 6 times real power usage in reality. The moment you have any reasonable loads in parallel the current waveform will start being something more reasonably approximating a sine wave and the meter will read more accurately.

      This is the actual list of tests from the article:

      • Resistive load 1800W: <3%
      • 20 LED + 30 CFL <3%
      • 20 LED + 30 CFL + Cx <3%
      • Dimmer 90deg, LED+CFL -28%, +64%
      • Dimmer 90deg, LED+CFL + line choke <3%
      • Dimmer 135deg, LED+CFL -32%, +575%

      So no, unless your whole house consists of crappy LED and CFL lights behind a huge shared dimmer at a 135 degrees setting, and no other appliances, your meter isn't going to read 600% of real energy consumption. To even get 164% readings you still need everything behind a dimmer at 90 degrees.

    3. Re:I am Jack's total lack of surprise. by marcansoft · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

  2. Re:A cure for which there is no disease by skids · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're underestimating the value of predictive data in stabilizing the grid... and throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    Getting smart meters up to snuff on privacy, accuracy, and useful features is a worthy endeavor. Saying "hulk hate smart meters, hulk smash!" is not.

  3. Re:That's pretty smart by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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...
  4. Re: A cure for which there is no disease by Type44Q · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd rather reap the benefits of lower priced electricity.

    "Sir, we apologize if you somehow received the impression that that was an option... but it is not. Is there anything else we can help you with?"

  5. Re:A cure for which there is no disease by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The amount one person draws, and hence the predictive power of any one smart meter is minuscule and nearly useless. For grid scale predictions you need aggregate data that is more efficiently and inexpensively acquired at aggregation points -- transformers, substations, etc.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.