SMART METERS IN VICTORIA

An Individual Case Study

Ma. Jo-Anne Loquellano University of Melbourne Emerging Technologies & Issues

Assignment Coversheet
COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Date: 6 October 2012 Department: Department of Computing and Information Systems Subject: ISYS90032 Title: Emerging Technologies and Issues

2. COMPULSORY STUDENT DECLARATION DETAILS:

Plagiarism Plagiarism is the act of representing as one's own original work the creative works of another, without appropriate acknowledgment of the author or source. Collusion Collusion is the presentation by a student of an assignment as his or her own which is in fact the result in whole or in part of unauthorised collaboration with another person or persons. Collusion involves the cooperation of two or more students in plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct. Both collusion and plagiarism can occur in group work. For examples of plagiarism, collusion and academic misconduct in group work please see the Universitys policy on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism: https://academichonesty.unimelb.edu.au Plagiarism and collusion constitute cheating. Disciplinary action will be taken against students who engage in plagiarism and collusion as outlined in University policy. Proven involvement in plagiarism or collusion may be recorded on my academic file in accordance with Statute 13.1.18. STUDENT DECLARATION Please tick to indicate that you understand the following statements: I declare that: This assignment is my own original work, except where I have appropriately cited the original source (Appropriate citation of original work will vary from discipline to discipline). This assignment has not previously been submitted for assessment in this or any other subject. For the purposes of assessment, I give the assessor of this assignment the permission to: Reproduce this assignment and provide a copy to another member of staff; and Take steps to authenticate the assignment, including communicating a copy of this assignment to a checking service (which may retain a copy of the assignment on its database for future plagiarism checking).

Student Signature:

MA. JO-ANNE B. LQOUELLANO

Date:

6 OCTOBER 2012

Table of Contents
Preface .................................................................................................................................................... 2 Question 1: Organisational Adoption .................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 AMI Program Benefits .................................................................................................................... 3 Advantages for DPI......................................................................................................................... 3 Advantages for Utility Companies .................................................................................................. 4 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Question 2: Domestic Adoption ........................................................................................................... 6 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Analysis of Costs and Benefits ....................................................................................................... 6 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Question 3: Innovation........................................................................................................................ 10 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 10 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 12 Question 4: Roll Out ........................................................................................................................... 13 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 13 Critical Analysis on DPIs Roll Out ............................................................................................. 13 What the DPI Can Change ............................................................................................................ 14 Criticisms on Utility Companies Roll Out................................................................................... 16 What the Utility Companies Can Do ............................................................................................ 16 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 17 Reference List ...................................................................................................................................... 18

Preface
The succeeding pages contain four separate and self-contained reports pertaining to the Advanced Metering Infrastructure program. They deal with the following broad issues: 1. Organisational adoption 2. Domestic adoption 3. Innovation; and 4. Roll Out. A reference list that combines resources used for all of the papers is provided at the end.

Page 2 of 23

Question 1: Organisational Adoption

Explain the advantages that make the roll out attractive to the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) and utility companies. You must refer to relevant, credible company information to substantiate your answer.

Introduction
With the 2004 Victorian Essential Services Commission (ESC) decision to replace manual with interval meters, and then in 2006, add two-way communications and more advanced functionality as part of an upgrade to an Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) program, Victoria achieved the first state-wide rollout of digital smart meters (Deloitte 2011a). This comes prior to the establishment of the 2008 National Smart Metering Program (Australian Energy Market Operator 2011). This brief report focuses on advantages that make the AMI rollout attractive to Victorias regulatory and policy-making body, the Department of Primary Industries (DPI), and Victorian utility companies. The rationale or project benefits are first established to lay the foundation in examining these advantages. For the conclusion and summary, I ground my analysis in relevant literature on IT adoption of organisations.

AMI Program Benefits

Global consultancy firm Deloitte, in a report to the Department of Treasury and Finance, identified four broad benefit categories from the AMI program (2011a): 1. An estimated $802 million representing avoided costs from installing old-technology accumulation meters and their manual readings; 2. Increased efficiencies from network operations, which include faster detection of blackouts and quicker reconnections, avoiding errors from time switches, reducing theft, avoiding overloads and transformer failures, and being able to regulate demand in times of supply shortages; 3. Innovative tariffs and better demand management from Time-of-Use (TOU) pricing; and 4. Other smaller benefits from minor efficiencies obtained, particularly for retail operations.

Advantages for DPI

Insights can be drawn from the above rationale and the departments key work areas (DPI 2012e) to pinpoint possible advantages for DPI, which may include: 1. Improved ability to create more relevant policies from digitization of consumer metering data; 2. Increased acumen for tariff design and regulation resulting from TOU pricing; and 3. Enhanced energy management capability. Firstly, swifter access to more real-time metering data can result into an improved capacity for policymaking. Granular data obtained from smart meters can feed into administrative policies that better benefit consumers, particularly disadvantaged groups, providing more solid investment and decision support (DPI 2012e).

Page 3 of 23

Secondly, regulation of energy consumption through more complex rate structures can be derived from Time-of-Use (TOU) pricing. An important caveat on this is Deloittes acknowledgement that TOU benefits can be very difficult to estimate because of great variability, being highly dependent on the publics response to AMI and flexible pricing itself (2011a). To capture this advantage, DPI must astutely implement Demand Side Management or DSM. This helps encourage consumers to opt-into TOU and positively change consumer behaviour through decreased energy consumption at peak hours (Breukers, Heiskanen, Brohmann, Mourik, Feenstra 2011). DSM coupled with pricing signals provides the DPI with a regulatory tool to encourage a shift in energy consumption to less critical times. This then leads to the third identified advantageenhanced energy managementsuch that policy and regulation enables the DPI to achieve its charter to build and support the energy industry ( DPI 2012a). Key to realizing this advantage is improving TOU rate designs so that rates are based upon marginal costs and not at several multiples higher, alongside wholesale consumer adoption of smart meters in order to have the capacity for flexible pricing in the first place (Friedman 2011, p. 13). International studies suggest that implementing a basic TOU tariff reduces energy consumption roughly 5%, but this could already halve the spot price of electricity (Newsham and Bowker 2010; Rosenzweig, Fraser, Falk and Voll 2003 cited in Deloitte 2011a). These can bode well for DPIs energy management and bolster the Victorian governments efforts towards reducing the countrys carbon footprint.

Advantages for Utility Companies

On the other hand, utility companies seem to benefit the most, if one looks at the absolute number of benefits ticked for distributors and retailers under DPIs Categorisation of Benefits Table (DPI 2012b). These can be summarized as increased efficiencies in network and retail operations, which lump together benefits 2 and 4 of Deloittes benefits categorization in the preceding page. Specifically, these include (Deloitte 2011a): Operational advantages for remote connectivity and access to data, validation and monitoring, and energy load balancing and management; Less reliance on manually-read meters with decreased billing errors; Improved forecasting and scheduling based on past demand and simulations of future use; and Increased ability monitor energy consumption and demand, minimizing outages (distributors) and enabling flexible tariffs (retailers). Distributors Arguably the main advantage for electricity distributors is that smart meters enable them to track almost in real-time customers electricity consumption and demand, and then respond accordingly. In the shortterm, they can relocate power where demand is high to avoid outages, while in the long-term, they can project how much extra capacity and infrastructure they might need to meet future demand (Deloitte 2011a). Retailers The Energy Retailers Association of Australia or ERAA considers financial gains for an electricity retailer to depend not so much in terms of the amount of energy it sells, but on how it efficiently trades in the wholesale market (ERAA 2012). Smart meters allow half-hourly readings, as opposed to once every three months. This enables retailers an opportunity to design a flexible scheme that is responsive to consumer demand during peak and off-peak hours, and also, better manage the companys own assets and debts (ERAA 2012).

Page 4 of 23

Conclusion
The above report briefly examined the advantages that accrue to DPI and utility companies. Digital smart meters make energy data more accurate and more readily-available. This information offers tremendous business value, empowering the DPI and the utility providers to do something that [they] could not do before (Seddon 2012). If widely adopted by consumers and wisely managed by these organisations, smart meter technology, and benefits it enables, can become a resource that allows competitive advantage for the Victorian energy industry. Seen this way, it arguably follows Barneys (1991) Resource-Based View of the firm and provides insight as to why DPI and the utilities consider AMI advantageous.

Page 5 of 23

Question 2: Domestic Adoption

Analyse the costs and benefits that accrue to the householder as a result of the roll out. You must make use of relevant and credible literature.

Introduction
Electricity distributors commenced Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) installation in 2009, targeting a 2013 completion. As at 1 May 2012, there have been more than half of an estimated 2.6 million replacements, with consumers paying between $160-$270 for AMI meters (Deloitte 2012; Deloitte 2011a). Meanwhile, an extensive State Government review finds that the most responsible option is to continue the rollout of Smart Meters, because delay in installations mean the customers reap fewer benefits while facing more [energy] cost increases (VAGO 2009). This brief report analyses the costs and benefits that accrue to Victorian householders as a result of the smart meter roll out. The following table summarises the main arguments, with succeeding paragraphs discussing each point in detail. Finally, a conclusion is derived from the analysis. COSTS Possible threats to privacy and security with the collection and tracing of personal information Concerns on health from electromagnetic exposure Economic costs related to smart meter roll out BENEFITS Consumer empowerment: obtaining real-time data on energy usage and being able to respond accordingly Better customer service through alerts that can notify electricity distributors of any problems

Table: Costs and Benefits of the Smart Meter Rollout in Victoria

Analysis of Costs and Benefits

Threats to Privacy and Security Smart Meters are two-way, digital communication systems that record electricity usage every 30 minutes, with such information accessible through web portals or In-Home Displays (IHD) that make tracking electricity consumption more detailed and immediate (ESC 2012b, p.5). On a basic level, the technical security standards are compliant with the requirements of the Essential Services Commission (ESC) and other regulatory agencies, which minimises accidental privacy risks particularly when IHDs are connected to Home Area Networks (Lockstep 2011). On a deeper level, the collection of data presents a rich goldmine for more targeted advertising from electricity distributors, retailers and even third parties. As such, it poses a threat to consumer privacy and security when used unknowingly and without consent. For example, large retailers already mine various shopper habits, among them, to determine who are pregnant customers and entice loyalty among them, as they are seen as lucrative sales targets (Duhigg 2012). The US-based chain Target came under fire for directly marketing baby products to an adolescent before she had revealed that she was pregnant to her Page 6 of 23

family (Wilson 2012). In the same manner, behavioural patterns obtained from digital meter readings over time make it possible to trace, and later on, target, customers based on their electricity usage data (ESC 2012b). Electricity distributors and retailers under the Victorian smart meter program are bound by the Privacy Act to handle data generated from smart meters with discretion, confidentiality and secrecy. The Australian Governments Privacy Act considers as Personal Information (PI) information or opinionabout an individual whose identity is apparent, or can reasonably be ascertained from the information or opinion (Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 2012). Therefore, energy providers can stand in breach if they use information collected for other purposes and without the consumers consent because the individual retains the right to choose how, or whether, their metering data can be used for purposes other than monitoring electricity consumption. This puts the onus on both provider and consumer to reach a respectable middle ground: the former needs to be prudent in the manner it retains, protects and discloses data, and communicate so clearly, while the latter bears the cost of trusting the providers, while being circumspect when opting into secondary use of data. Indeed, this is reflected in a recommendation by Lockstep Consulting, a private practice specialising in digital identity and privacy based in NSW. In its Privacy Impact Assessment Report for the ESC, Lockstep determines that metering data belongs to the customer and are bound by Australias National Privacy Principles (2011).

Concerns on Health A report from EMC Technologies (2011) states that smart meters radiation levels are within the limits defined by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, and are in fact lower than other household items such as mobile phones and baby monitors. However, the scientific community is divided on this matter of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and health effects. Some research do not find conclusive evidence on adverse health effects (van Rongen, Croft, Juutilainen, Lagroye, Miyakoshi, Saunders, de Seze, Tenforde, Verschaeve, Veyret, & Xu 2009; Otto and von Muhlendahl 2007; Valberg 2006). Meanwhile, research quoted by Stop Smart Meters Australia, a private sector coalition opposing the smart meter program, argues that chronic radiation exposure has been found to cause adverse health effects, among these, cancer, neurological diseases and impairments particularly among children, loss of fertility, and insomnia (Fragopoulou et al. 2010 cited in Stop Smart Meters Australia 2011; Sage & Carpenter 2009). The coalition also cites the World Health Organizations report that while evidence is still being gathered, radiofrequency EMFs [are classified] as possibly carcinogenic to humans, a statement echoed by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (cited in Stop Smart Meters Australia 2011; Sage & Carpenter 2009). As such, the health and safety of households, especially those with children, are cast in doubt.

Economic Costs Related to AMI Roll Out The question of who pays the real bill in the AMI program is a politically-sensitive issue. Network costs are essentially passed through to consumers even though it is the electrical distributors who shoulder upfront costs related to the smart meter installation (Deloitte 2011a). For example, experience in California, USAs implementation of smart meters shows a short term cost in addition to costs of installing the smart meters (NERA Economic Consulting cited in McGann and Moss 2010).

Page 7 of 23

Consumer Empowerment One highly-touted consumer benefit of smart meters is its enabling use of flexible or time-of-use (TOU) pricing that can empower consumers to manage and reduce electricity bills (DPI 2012d). However, this can only materialize if consumers indeed shift their energy consumption to off-peak hours as a result of pricing signals, and if energy suppliers are able to introduce appropriately-tiered tariffs. One concern is that retailer adjustments to the tariff structure can directly increase or decrease the benefits obtained by consumers from these (Deloitte 2011b). Both TOU tariffs and Critical Peak Pricing tariffs are seen as potentially problematic particularly for vulnerable or inelastic electricity use households who, through economic or social circumstances, do not have as much leeway to change their energy usage (Deloitte 2011b; McGann and Moss 2010). Nonetheless, DPIs SwitchOn campaign aims to encourage this shift in consumer behaviour by providing more information on TOU pricing, the actual cost and breakdown of electric bills, and managing energy consumption, either by switching retailers or through increased appliance efficiency (DPI SwitchOn 2012a, passim). All of these pertain to increasing consumer knowledge and empowering the consumer to make informed choices, benefits of which will redound to the customers themselves. Such a process can be seen to follow Rogers Innovation-Diffusion Decision Process for individuals (1995), wherein empowered and knowledgeable consumers are hoped to be persuaded to adopt smart meters.

Better Energy Provision for Consumers There are numerous consumer benefits derived from increased efficiencies in network operations, such as avoided costs of manual meter readings (Deloitte 2011a). However, perhaps the million-dollar question is whether smart meters lower electricity prices in the long-term. There is conflicting research on this depending on the approach. A University of Melbourne paper cites a NERA Economic Consulting report that reduced consumption during peak demand is not enough to defer future investments in generation infrastructure (McGann and Moss 2011). Meanwhile, the Brattle Group Consulting posits that a combination of TOU tariffs with Demand Side Management (DSM) is needed to truly reduce electric bills (Faruqui 2012; Sergici and Faruqui 2011). Regardless, the commonality is that smart meters can potentially provide better energy services, primarily through less blackouts and swifter remote connections and disconnections, by directly affecting the supply and demand of load. Because smart meters can communicate with other inherently energyintensive but smart appliances (such as air-conditioners) through a home area network, consumers who enable direct load control can reduce overall consumption when usage is cycled on and off during critical periods (McGann and Moss 2010). Meanwhile, supply-side considerations mean offering sophisticated financial incentives alongside stricter codes and standards for appliances, buildings and machines to promote energy efficiency (Faruqui 2012).

Conclusion
At first glance there seem to be straightforward costs and benefits to the smart meter program for households. However, closer inspection reveals that there are attendant issues to be addressed, and a need to closely manage the program, in order to minimize costs and truly maximize benefits. One example is that ensuring consumer privacy and security may conflict with gathering and sharing consumer data to create advantageous tariffs. This puts the pressure on government to regulate electricity providers so that they not only abide by the law, but also, collect just the right quantity and quality of data in order to Page 8 of 23

sufficiently derive value for them (i.e. marketing research) to pass on as value for the consumers (i.e. tiered pricing). As another example, consumer empowerment through improved choices for wiser decisions can only materialize if TOU pricing is implemented in a way that benefits the public, without undue disadvantage to more vulnerable sectors of society. Lastly, better energy provision can be more meaningful if this is tied to lower electric bills, energy being a staple commodity. This means that shortterm spikes in electricity expenses must be offset with long-term savings. The cost-benefit analysis emphasizes a need for better project management, greater regulation and increased transparency, key themes on which the ESCs recommendations build on (ESC 2012b).

Page 9 of 23

Question 3: Innovation
Develop a proposal that illustrates how smart meter technology should be adapted to ensure that householders are made conscious of their power consumption, and therefore change their consumption behaviour. In your answer consider technical feasibility (how this could be implemented, legislated, monitored and administered), likely problems, and additional benefits to the society.

Introduction
Program mismanagement seems to be rife with the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) roll out schedule delayed by a year (VAGO 2009), overblown costs by half a billion Australian dollars (ABC News 2010), and mounting opposition from consumers on installing digital meters in their homes due to privacy, security and health concerns (Stop Smart Meters Australia 2011). This brief report outlines a proposal justified by theory, expert advice and practice. I draw from key AMI roll out recommendations from the Victorian Auditor-Generals Office (VAGO), Deloittes Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Brattle Group to form a three-pronged proposal that focuses on changing consumer energy consumption behaviour. Ultimately, the aim is decreased energy consumption and increased energy efficiency (VAGO 2009). I endeavour to ground this proposal on IT adoption theory. The conclusion examines the proposals merits and shortcomings. The table on the next page offers the proposal approach, people responsible, and actions needed, with further detail in the succeeding paragraphs.

Page 10 of 23

PROPOSAL ASPECT
1. Demand Side Management (DSM)

STAKEHOLDER RESPONSIBLE
1.1 Government regulatory agencies, particularly the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) and the Essential Services Commission (ESC) 1.1.1 1.1.2

ACTION/S NEEDED
Create a focused and realistic DSM program learning from the implementation experience of others (Gehring 2002) Consider a transdisciplinary context (particularly drawing from economics, psychology and sociology disciplines) for DSM program design (Breukers, Heiskanen, Brohmann, Mourik, Feenstra 2011) Communicate and engage with consumers to enable understanding, transparency and sustainability (Gehring 2002) Partner with interested third parties to improve participation, reduce cost and emphasize the message of energy conservation (Gehring 2002) Become aware that a rationale of AMI is energy efficiency and affordability, because in the past twenty years, electricity prices have risen 82% compared to consumer goods 37%. This rationale is related to sustaining Australias competitive advantage as a resource-rich country with a sustainable and environmentallyconscious energy sector (Barney 1991) Proactively obtain more knowledge on DSM and smart meters from a wide range of reputable sources, and perhaps, even consider testing touted benefits of the meters and TOU pricing, to help make an informed decision on adoption Ensure DPI has the organizational structure to properly manage AMI and attendant risks (VAGO 2009), alongside DSM implementation Continue efforts on consumer engagement to work through issues, particularly on safety & health, energy efficiency, innovative tariffs (Deloitte 2011b;VAGO 2009) Proactively manage technology risks involved, such as delivery of the smart meter equipments expected functionality, alongside promoting related projects to reap expected benefits, such as usage of In-Home Display units (Deloitte 2011b) Closely monitor the AMI programs costs and benefits following Deloittes analysis Keep abreast of AMIs economic viability by reflecting the effects of risks and changes in scope and assumptions (Deloitte 2011b) Design a regulatory framework to reasonably incentivize the energy industry in maximizing benefits from AMI (VAGO 2009) Coordinate with relevant national government and industry bodies

1.2 Victorian utilities (electrical distributors and retailers)

1.3.1 1.3.2 1.3.1

1.3 Victorian consumers

1.3.2

2.

Project Management and Implementation

2.1 Department of Primary Industries (DPI)

2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3

3.

Governance and Control

3.1 Relevant government agencies: AER, ESC, DPI

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4

Table: Changing Consumer Behavior: An AMI Proposal in Brief

Page 11 of 23

The table in the previous page summarizes a three-pronged approach to change consumer behaviour, based on an understanding that individual IT adoption is a complex decision process, influenced by prior conditions (Rogers 1995). At one level, we first need to change cultural perceptions that were reinforced by previous practice. DSM as a portfolio of measures to improve the energy system at the side of consumption helps package smart meters attractively (Palensky and Dietrich 2011, p. 381). Key to deriving the benefits of AMI is if consumers opt into Time-of-Use (TOU) pricing and, through either IHDs or web portals tracking consumption, monitor and conserve their households energy (McGann and Moss 2010). Behavioural changes are thus seen as complementary to achieving more efficient energy usage (Palensky and Dietrich 2011). Deloittes recommendation of web portals, and its subsequent take-up by energy distributors, is a step in the right direction. On a macroeconomic level, consumer behaviour needs to be reinforced with the right messages from the environment. Because government is such a big and powerful entity, it arguably can influence norms of social systems through policy and regulation, albeit not immediately. Over time, however, effective project management and implementation alongside tight program governance and control on AMI, and the smart grid network of Australia as a whole, can help change entrenched cons umer consumption behaviour. The Brattle Group, a practice specializing in encouraging smarter methods for the electricity industry, makes the case for dynamic pricing, which is simply time-based pricing that is maximized through DSM and smart meters (Faruqui 2012; Sergici and Faruqui 2011).

Conclusion

The experience of other countries, particularly recent years that has seen a renewed interest in DSM, is generally positive, if designed and implemented properly. For example, energy efficiency financing programs that are made possible with DSM is estimated to have saved 4,500 MW on average over three decades (Faruqui 2012). More vulnerable sectors of society need not be disadvantaged, as low-income consumers in California, who are able to shift energy consumption by at least 22% relative to average consumers, prove (Sergici and Faruqui 2011). While the benefit of a DSM-based proposal is that it administers a portfolio of measures to encourage energy efficiency (Palensky and Dietrich 2011), its limitation is that it needs a well-constructed package of policy, program administration and regulation in order to succeed. DSM has been around since the 1980s and can be considered on its third generation (Gehring 2002; Faruqui 2012). The experience of energy efficiency and DSM programs in Canada, Germany and the Netherlands, to name a few, is closely tied to giving due regard to contextual factors apart from careful program management and governance (Breukers et al 2011). Because DSM targets those who need and demand energythe consumersit is particularly important that there be real social and behavioural changes among them for a successful implementation.

Page 12 of 23

Question 4: Roll Out

What should the DPI and utility companies change about how they are approaching the smart meter roll out? What can be improved, and how?

Introduction
Consulting firm reports and consumer advocacy websites paint a roll out of the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) program that is fraught with opposition and lack of clear understanding on its objectives and benefits (Deloitte 2011a; Stop Smart Meters Australia 2011). This brief report has two main sections, one on areas of improvement for the Department of Primary Industries (DPI), and second, for utility companies. First, we delve a bit deeper into the origins of AMI in order to provide a historical context. We next summarise main criticisms of the roll out based on reviews from private sector (Deloitte) and government (Victorian Auditor Generals Office or VAGO) to form the basis of our recommendations for DPI. We draw from literature on individuals adoption of technology to provide context on our suggestions for improvement. For a conclusion, these changes are synthesized together with the approach used. The AMI Origin: A Lack of Clear Communication from the Start The AMI program leapfrogged the replacement of old accumulation to interval meters, which was the 2004 Essential Services Commission (ESC) ruling, and instead mandated digital smart meters in early 2006. This followed a 2005 cost-benefit study on the societal benefits of advanced functionality (VAGO website 2011). The study proposed that the interval meter upgrades could be enhanced because there was a positive cost-benefit to having remote meter reading, and remote connect and disconnect capabilities (CRA International 2005). Late in 2004, the year of the ESC ruling, a pilot project on smart meters had been launched by an electricity distributor to understand customers propensity to change their electricity consumption patterns if provided with more information about their consumption and its relative cost at different times of the day and year (Bayard 2004).

Critical Analysis on DPIs Roll Out

Arguably, understanding and responding to the cultural and behavioural changes that smart meters require is central to improving the AMI program roll out and avoiding its risks. Judging from the brief history sketched above and the gap of consumer-targeted information until the first VAGO report came out in 2009, it seems that the DPI underestimated the effort in convincing consumers of the benefits of smart meters. Deloitte alludes to this need of a mindset change, stating, AMI creates a platform for changing the way electricity is delivered to customers (2011a). Therefore, the main criticisms of the roll out are (VAGO 2009; Deloitte 2011a): 1. Lack of consultation and a progressive engagement with stakeholders, particularly the biggest end-user group, the consumers; 2. Lack of project governance and control to minimize and manage implementation and technology risks; and Page 13 of 23

3. Inadequate cost-benefit analysis to create a comprehensive economic justification, and then to engage with groups who stand to become better or worse off. The critical failure of the DPI is to communicate, particularly with consumers who stand to be most affected with the changes. When the decision was made to adopt smart meters instead of proceeding with less-intrusive interval meters, this should have signalled a need to begin engaging end-users in a dialogue, particularly if the technology is foreseen to impinge on consumer privacy. This did not happen, nor did any awareness campaign occur to encourage outspoken respondents from the pilot run to influence their social networks. Rogers (1995) theorizes early adopters as more inclined to adopt technology and characterize them as more risk-tolerant, have higher socioeconomic status, and highly-interconnected with peers. The DPI could have engaged with pinpointed early adopters from the pilot study (those generally favourable and supportive of smart meter roll out) to leverage on their communication and social networks. Inferring from the role that early adopters play in speeding up adoption of innovations (Tushman cited in Seddon 2012), this could have helped catalyse the informal acceptance of smart meters among the broader majority.

What the DPI Can Change

The improvements suggested on the following table draws from the critique above and on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology or UTAUT, a synthesis of eight models on IT acceptance (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis and Davis, 2003). The UTAUT helps understand what drives acceptance of IT innovations as a means to create interventions that facilitate adoption (Venkatesh et al 2003). Recognizing that the AMI program is already mid-implementation, we further segment the first set of recommendations based on Rogers Innovation-Diffusion process (1995), to target consumers who are still deciding whether or not to adopt smart meters, those who decided favourably, and those who rejected.

Page 14 of 23

CRITICISMS

1. Lack of consultation and a progressive engagement in engaging with consumers midimplementation

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE DPI AT DECISION STAGE FAVOURABLE DECISION UNFAVOURABLE DECISION (Convince to Adopt) (Support Decision) (Persuade Otherwise) 1.1 Have consumer focus groups to 1.2 Reinforce facilitating conditions 1.3 Establish regular dialogue with groups find out current expectancies on (Venkatesh et al 2003) that opposing the roll out, such as Stop performance and effort, and encourage the consistency of smart Smart Meters, beginning with people structure awareness campaigns meter adoption with values, needs who are perceived as opinion-leaders, accordingly and experiences. to use social influence in persuading the public of the merits of AMI Publicise the SwitchOn campaign Provide information on the online and through traditional SwitchOn website for different Acknowledge that simplistic fact media to introduce the concept of needs: sheets online will not deter flexible pricing, and encourage - those who have already installed opposition. consumers to opt-in and become smart meters and are considering Address the fundamental concerns of mindful of reducing energy switching to TOU pricing consumers on privacy and health consumption - those who have switched to TOU through more detailed websites pricing and need guidance in Reach out to different consumer and/or dialogue with respected adjusting groups that have price sensitivity, spokespersons (researchers or drawing from Deloittes highlight success stories of reduced practitioners who have experience in vulnerable and non-vulnerable electricity costs and benefits to the implementing AMI). classifications through social media household from smart meters 2.1 Understand that adoption of smart meters and Time-of-Use pricing (TOU) requires a fundamental mindset change, but is essential for the program to be successful 2.2 Acknowledge inadequacy of program management staff (possibly in both numbers and in skillset) handling the AMI program and take steps to create more efficient team 2.3 Develop a risk management plan immediately, starting with the risks that have already materialized 3.1 Learn from published papers and international research on states that have adopted digital metering technology, combined with AMI lessons learned to date (Houseman 2010) 3.2 Adopt a whole-of-project view to complement incremental analysis of benefits and risks

2. Lack of project governance and control to minimize and manage implementation and technology risks 3. Inadequate costbenefit analysis to create a comprehensive economic justification

Table: Opportunities for Improvement for the DPI

Page 15 of 23

Criticisms on Utility Companies Roll Out

Five Victorian electricity distributorsCitiPower, Powercor, Jemena, United Energy and SP AusNet businesses that own and maintain the electrical equipment such as poles and wires (ESC 2012a), are responsible for the installation of digital smart meters across the state (DPI 2012c). A national cost-benefit analysis on the national smart meter program decided on a distributor-led roll out, however, this was only expected to be beneficial in Victoria if the cost of the roll out fell in the lower bound of estimates and if benefits of the business efficiencies achieved were in the upper bound (McGann and Moss 2010). As such, Victorian electricity distributors are arguably even more pressured towards recouping investments and maximizing revenues. This possibly helps explain why the Australian Energy Regulator finds an estimated AUD$500 million cost blowout over the three-year roll out, which may eventually be passed on to consumers (ABC News 2010; Edwards 2011).

What the Utility Companies Can Do

The current situation of Victorian distributors, coupled with conflicting information on digital meters safety and privacy ramifications, makes them easily susceptible to mistrust by the Australian public (Stop Smart Meters Australia 2011, passim). It is therefore imperative that there is heightened communication and transparency, alongside learning from other countries experience, for distributors to allay the publics anxieties and assist government in a smooth transition. These include: Establishing smart meter compatible web portals. Currently, only Origin Energy and Jemena have portals that enable consumers without In-Home Displays to access and track energy consumption in almost real-time, with United Energy in a trial phase (DPI SwitchOn 2012b). These portals should be mandatory, to enable transparency and sustained engagement with consumers, a key recommendation of private consultancy firm Deloitte (2011b). Working with the Australian Energy Regulation to create tariffs addressing both vulnerable and non-vulnerable households. Deloitte (2011a) distinguishes these consumer segments and recommends carefully structuring energy tariff levels. Although a Melbourne University study shows households unable to shift consumption because of specific circumstances (i.e. disabled, unemployed, retired, single-income, etc.) are made worse-off with Time-Of-Use (TOU) pricing (McGann and Moss 2010), Deloittes Customer Impacts Study reveals tariff structures are key to avoid this (2012aa). Regardless, the capability of digital metering enables a more granular approach towards pricing that should be maximized. Having the distributor organisations ready for change, particularly in preparing billing changes. Considering that reduced electricity bills is arguably significantly related to customer satisfaction, distributors must have processes, systems and resources in place to deliver this benefit soonest. This ensures consumers performance expectancy of lowered utilities is addressed (Venkatesh et al 2003). This particular benefit is just one among many lessons captured in an Electric Power Research Institute report, which itself would be recommended reading for the companies (Houseman 2010).

Page 16 of 23

In fairness to the distributors, response papers they submitted to the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) seem to convey an open attitude towards discussion on controversial issues. They address a number of issues on privacy and security, health, and billing (DTF website 2012) (DTF 2012). In light of these being main consumer concerns, these specific suggestions are further recommended to spur the rate of smart meter adoption, such as: Publishing the privacy plans of distributors in general terms. Apart from simply-worded privacy statements to safeguard consumers, plans of distributors as encapsulated in their responses to DTF can be synthesised and/or publicised in general terms, to enable transparency and consumer engagement. Responding tactfully but directly to perceived health concerns. Energy providers seem to have left this up to the government and not engaged on this issue, although they refer to these in their communications (response papers). Apart from coordinating for an intra-industry panel with independent speakers for clarity, they can also be pro-active and engage one-on-one where feasible. Examples are providing certified personnel for installation, and thoughtful placement of smart meters away from bedrooms or water sources.

Conclusion
The recurring theme in identifying opportunities for improvement is recognizing the complexity and multi-layered issues involved in AMI. Consumer issues of privacy, security, health and safety are closelyrelated to their sense of well-being and therefore warrant continuous dialogue and engagement in a sincere and transparent manner. Theories concerning an individuals decision to adopt an IT innovation and the rate of his/her adoption are useful contexts in making recommendations. Drawing from the research of Rogers (1991), one should first target increased consumer knowledge, while recognizing socioeconomic and personality characteristics and prior conditions such as social norms and current needs in persuading the consumer to make a decision to adopt. Meanwhile, the collaboration of government and the energy industry in terms of ensuring that consumers performance and effort expectancies are fulfilled, are useful insights in hastening the adoption process (Venkatesh et al 2003). Together, these theories lay the foundation for the manner and context of the opportunities presented.

Page 17 of 23

Reference List
Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) 2011, National Smart Metering Program Australia, viewed 6 October 2012, http://share.aemo.com.au/smartmetering/default.aspx. Barney, JB 1991, Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage Journal of Management, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 99-120. Breukers SC, Heiskanen E, Brohmann B, Mourik RM, Feenstra CFJ 2011, 'Connecting research to practice to improve energy demand-side management (DSM)', Energy, 5th Dubrovnik Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy, Water & Environment Systems, vol. 36, pp. 2176-2185, viewed 5 October 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Deloitte 2012, Advanced Metering Infrastructure Customer Impacts Study - Stage 2, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/publications/reports-and-consultations/advancedmetering-infrastructure-customer-impacts-study-stage-2. Deloitte 2011a, Advanced Metering Infrastructure cost benefit analysis, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/publications/reports-and-consultations/advancedmetering-infrastructure-cost-benefit-analysis/2.-background. Deloitte 2011b, Advanced Metering Infrastructure customer impact study: Final report volume 1, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/publications/reports-and-consultations/advancedmetering-infrastructure-customer-impacts-study-volume-1. Department of Primary Industries (DPI) 2012a, About smart meters, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/about-smart-meters. Department of Primary Industries (DPI) 2012b, Categorisation of benefits table, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/publications/reports-and-consultations/advancedmetering-infrastructure-cost-benefit-analysis/categorisation-of-benefits-table. Department of Primary Industries (DPI) 2012c, Energy in Victoria, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/energy. Department of Primary Industries (DPI) 2012d, Flexible pricing, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/flexible-pricing.

Page 18 of 23

Department of Primary Industries (DPI) 2012e, Our key work areas, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/about-us/department-overview/work-area. Department of Treasury & Finance 2012, Review of the advanced metering infrastructure program, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/CA25713E0002EF43/pages/dtf-projects-past-dtf-projects-review-ofthe-advanced-metering-infrastructure-program. DPI SwitchOn 2012a, Generators, distributors and retailers, viewed 6 October 2012, http://m.switchon.vic.gov.au/why-are-power-bills-so-high/generators-networks-and-retailers. DPI SwitchOn 2012b, Smart meter compatible web portals, viewed 6 October 2012, http://m.switchon.vic.gov.au/how-can-i-take-charge-of-my-power-bill/smart-meter-compatibleweb-portals. Duhigg, C 2012, How companies learn your secrets, The New York Times, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?_r=2&. EMC Technologies 2011, AMI meter electromagnetic field survey, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/publications/reports-and-consultations/ami-meter-emfield-survey-repor. Energy Retailers Association of Australia 2012, Realising the benefits of smart meters for consumers and industry (ERAA smart meter working paper 1), viewed 6 October 2012, http://eraa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/ERAA_WP1-Benefits-of-smart-meters.pdf. Essential Services Commission (ESC) 2012a, How is energy delivered to you? viewed 6 October 2012, http://yourchoice.vic.gov.au/energy-facts/industry-overview. Essential Services Commission (ESC) 2012b, Smart Meter Privacy Impact Assessment Draft Report viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.esc.vic.gov.au/getattachment/b8d6a4d7-cacb-4c73-8af3-34ba2a18f0ef/SmartMeter-Privacy-Impact-Assessment-Draft-Report.pdf. Faruqui, A 2012, The rediscovery of Demand-Side Management, PowerPoint slides for TVA Board of Directors Meeting, The Brattle Group, Tennessee, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.brattle.com/_documents/UploadLibrary/Upload956.pdf. Friedman, LS 2011, 'The importance of marginal cost electricity pricing to the success of greenhouse gas reduction programs', Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 11, pp. 7347-7360 viewed 30 September 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Gehring, K 2002, 'Can yesterdays Demand-Side Management lessons become tomorrows market solutions?', The Electricity Journal, vol. 15, pp. 63-69, viewed 6 October 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/.

Page 19 of 23

Houseman D, 2010, Smart Metering: Lessons Learned? (a report for the Electric Power Research Institute found in Appendix B: Advanced Metering Infrastructure cost benefit analysis), viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/138927/Deloitte-Final-CBA-2August.pdf. Lockstep Consulting 2011, Privacy impact assessment report: Advanced Metering Infrastructure, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/publications/reports-and-consultations/lockstep-dpiami-pia-report. McGann, M & Moss, J 2010, Smart meters, smart justice? Energy, poverty and the smart meter rollout, commissioned report, University of Melbourne Social Justice Initiative, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.socialjustice.unimelb.edu.au/Research/smart_meters_smart_justice.pdf. Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 2012, What is privacy?, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.privacy.gov.au/aboutprivacy/what. Otto, M & von Muhlendahl KE 2007, 'Electromagnetic fields (EMF): Do they play a role in children's environmental health (CEH)?' International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, vol. 210, pp. 635-644, results of an international workshop, Children's Environment in Central Europe - Threats and Chances, Osnabruck, 21-24 November 2006, viewed 28 September 2012. http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Palensky, P & Dietrich, D 2011, 'Demand Side Management: Demand response, intelligent energy systems, and smart Loads', IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 381-388, viewed 6 October 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Rogers, EM 1995, Diffusion of innovations, 4th edn, The Free Press, New York. Sage, S & Carpenter DO 2008, 'Public health implications of wireless technologies', Pathophysiology, vol. 16, pp. 233-246, viewed 28 September 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Seddon, P 2012, Organizational adoption of innovation: Three types of IT-innovation by a non-ITvendor firm, PowerPoint slides, University of Melbourne, Melbourne. Sergici, S & Faruqui, A 2011, Dynamic pricing: Past, present, and future, PowerPoint slides for Queens University, The Brattle Group, Ontario, viewed 6 October 2012, http://www.brattle.com/_documents/UploadLibrary/Upload956.pdf. Stop Smart Meters Australia 2011, Smart meters in Victoria: Information and concerns updated, viewed 6 October 2012, http://stopsmartmeters.com.au/2011/10/28/smart-meters-in-victoria-information-and-concerns/.

Page 20 of 23

Valberg, P, Van Deventer, T, & Repacholi, M 2007, 'Workgroup report: Base stations and wireless networks--Radiofrequency (RF) exposures and health consequences', Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 416-424, viewed 28 September 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. van Rongen, E, Croft, R, Juutilainen, J, Lagroye, I, Miyakoshi, J, Saunders, R, de Seze, R, Tenforde, T, Verschaeve, L, Veyret, B, & Xu, Z 2009, 'Effects of radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields on the human nervous system', Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 572-597, viewed 28 September 2012 http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Venkatesh, V, Morris, MG, Davis, GB, & Davis, FD 2003, User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425-478, viewed 6 October 2012, http://dl.acm.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/. Victorian Auditor-Generals Office (VAGO) 2009, Towards a smart grid: the roll-out of Advanced Metering Infrastructure, Victorian Auditor-Generals Office, viewed 6 October 2012, http://download.audit.vic.gov.au/files/111109_AMI_Audit_Summary.pdf. Wilson, S 2012, What stops Target telling you're pregnant?, Lockstep Consulting, viewed 6 October 2012, http://lockstep.com.au/blog/2012/03/07/target-tells-youre-pregnant.

Page 21 of 23