Categories
Alan Weissberger Smart Grid

Integrated Critical Communications Infrastructure for Smart Grid at Connectivity Week

Jon Sessions, Chief Technologist for Utilities IT Group, SAIC

SAIC is a systems integrator that oversees an extensive multi-state network in Arkansas.  The network covers corporate IT, T&D SCADA, and AMI.  Four major hurricanes were handled by that network in the past decade.  This (un- named) utility network has survived hurricanes, tornados, and ice storms.  The land mobile radios, network inftrastructure equipment, towers, etc all survived and were in tact during those natural disasters.

Jon articulated three key wireless network drivers for utilities:

  • Handling emergencies is fundamental to Public Safety and Utilities
  • Emergencies are obviously unexpected, making responsiveness and availability critical
  • Key to handling an emergency is communications reliably spanning broad regions

He stated that 20% of telecom facilities can reach 80% of customers (but isn’t that true only in densely populated areas?).

Trust and control were seen to be of paramount importance.  Jon opined that self determination drives utility behavior, which is very conservative to begin with.

Leveraging the Cloud for Smart Grid Efficiency
Leveraging the Cloud for Smart Grid Efficiency

“When it counts, count on only yourself,” he said.  This is basic to human nature in emergencies, so cultural values come into play in a big way. Trust can only be established through strong agreements (that to date, don’t exist between utilities and telcos).  Jon believes that we’ll only know once it has worked at least once, which will take some risk taking on the part of the utility.

Regarding the public vs private network approach for Smart Grid, Jon stated that using public (commercially available) networks is appealing from a cost perspective.  No distinction was made between telco and MSO supplied public networks.  “Recent history has shown that these work for non-critical uses, but inconsistently in emergencies,” according to Mr. Sessions.

The utility network that SAIC runs is using VZW (the former Alltel) public wireless network to shut off pumps in rural areas, but that’s not seen as a critical task.  That public network is used for demand shedding of peak load to optimize energy load for the utillity.  In contrast, the utility relies on a private 800MHz wireless network for critical voice communications.  Wireless telcos are seen as network providers of last choice in the event of a natural disaster.  Therefore, SAIC’s point-of-view is that “a private mechanism for wireless communications is going to be needed for at least another decade or longer.”

Jon expressed the following thoughts related to sharing of spectrum/bandwidth between a utility and public safety agency:

  • More direct control of the emergency environment can be achieved using joint public safety
  • The larger the utility, the more likely sharing will become untenable
  • For smaller utilities or for munis, the opportunities for sharing with public safety look attractive
  • Implementing models for sharing might need to include third parties to intervene or manage

As many other speakers at Connectivity Week suggested, the FCC should allocate more dedicated spectrum to utilities to expedite the transition to the Smart Grid.  Jon said, “It is in the best interest of society to allocate dedicated bandwidth to utilities just like military and public safety. Many utilities have dedicated spectrum today, and this should continue to be supported.  It is unlikely that true broadband capacity can be provided, so only narrowband functions can be supported by the available licensed spectrum.  For the emergency scenarios, it is therefore likely that only voice functions need to be supported in this space.”

In closing, Mr Sessions offered the following implementation guidance for utility communications:

  • The utility must fully understand its emergency scenarios and grapple with self determination
  • For large utilities, “Hybrid” solutions will emerge, part public (broadband), part private (emergency critical)
  • For smaller utilities and especially munis, sharing with public safety is very viable
  • Only operational experience (track history) will change the view of utilities that handle emergencies
  • Diversification of technology choices in wired and wireless will yield the most dependable solutions

Click here to read the next part of the article.

Author Alan Weissberger

By Alan Weissberger

Alan Weissberger is a renowned researcher in the telecommunications field. Having consulted for telcos, equipment manufacturers, semiconductor companies, large end users, venture capitalists and market research firms, we are fortunate to have his critical eye examining new technologies.

10 replies on “Integrated Critical Communications Infrastructure for Smart Grid at Connectivity Week”

Previously published articles on Connectivity Week at the global IEEE ComSoc Community web site:

http://community.comsoc.org/blogs/ajwdct/keynotes-and-smart-grid-communications-highlights-connectivity-week-conference-santa-cl

http://community.comsoc.org/blogs/galadriel/summary-connectivity-week-panel-session-mobile-data-offload

Future articles on other communications related Connectivity Week sessions will appear here at Viodi View.

Please share your thoughts and opinions in the Comment Box below.

Alan, thanks for the comprehensive article on just one panel from this event. Lots of great content that you covered.

On aggregate, the utilities have huge data collection and transmission needs, but on the per home basis, it seems like the data is still relatively small compared to other demands, like video or Internet access. It seems like telco and cable companies could easily support the data rates, but, as you point out, the cultural differences between the organizations may be an initial barrier.

Still, it seems like carving out spectrum just for utility and first-responder applications doesn’t seem to be the most efficient. I have an article and video that will soon be posted on TV “white spaces”. I wonder if cognitive radio, which is the heart of making that approach work, could go a long way to gaining spectrum efficiencies and making for a more efficient license regime?

Alan,
Like Mr. Pyle I was surprised that a utility would build its own network. Priority virtual networks within a large, highly redundant public network seems to be the preference for first responder infrastructure. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Intro: Steve Weinstein is someone I look up to. We worked very well together on an optical network project at NEC Research Labs and he is my mentor on IEEE ComSoc matters. A past ComSoc President and long time volunteer, Steve is currently Chair of the ComSoc Strategic Planning Committee that I’m a member of.

As both Steve and Ken suggested, utilities might be better off going to a public network provider for critical applications. But from the ConnectivityWeek sessions I attended, that will not happen in the near future. The main issue is lack of trust and concerns about avaialability (especially in an emergency/ natural disaster). Security is also an issue, especially for wireless mesh networks.

In a forthcoming article, I will describe Silicon Valley Power’s network, which is currently all owned and managed by that utility. They actually have a fiber backbone for a service area that’s only about 18 miles in coverage area. I have particular interest in that utility, which has offered me excellent servcie and reasonable prices for the 41+ years I’ve lived in Santa Clara, CA.

Steve’s comment reminds me of an article Alan wrote a couple of years ago regarding the fiber cut that affected a large swath of Silicon Valley:

http://viodi.com/2009/04/12/could-major-telecom-outage-been-prevented-or-alleviated/

It seems like the best way to have redundant networks is to have multiple providers, with multiple networks in a market. This might be a strong argument for not allowing a T-Mobile/AT&T merger that I haven’t necessarily heard from those opposed to the merger.

Thanks for an information packed articles with many new, previously undisclosed facts about utilities, e.g.building/maintaining or outsourcing their own private networks.

To Ken’s point: Wouldn’t a utility be better off using a public wireless network (3G or outdoor mesh WiFi) for back-up of their own private network? What do they now use for backup/redundancy in the event of network or equipment failure?

Klaus Bender of UTC (Advocate of Utility Telecommunications interests) writes there are several potential smart grid telecom networks: corporate enterprise backbone network, the field force voice dispatch/ mobile data terminal network, the AMI meter reading network, and the command/control network for the power grid itself.

Evidently, utilities have different backup/redundancy strategies and mechanisms for each of these sub networks.

Whatever happened to the “Public/Private Partnership” that FCC was promoting a few years ago for the 700MHz auction D Block? Such a wireless broadband network could be shared by commercial telco subscribers, public safety agencies and utilities. It seemed like a great idea to amortize buildout and operational expenses. Why didn’t that happen? Might it happen now that the smart grid is here?

Thanks for the very informative article and provocative questions/comments.

The FCC got no bids on the 700 MHz D-block, primarily because the terms of the public-private partnership did not make business sense to the private parties. The current state of the D-block is that bills are being circulated through Congress to gift the spectrum to public safety for use as a 5+5 FDD LTE band.

…dtw

Smart meters are seen as a key technology enabler for reducing the output of greenhouse gases, improving energy efficiency and increasing the percentage of renewable energy. Smart meters enable two-way communication between the meter and the central system. Unlike home energy monitors, smart meters can gather data for remote reporting.

The network between the measurement devices and business systems allows collection and distribution of information to customers, suppliers, utility companies and service providers. This enables these businesses to participate in demand response services. Consumers can use information provided by the system to change their normal consumption patterns to take advantage of lower prices. Pricing can be used to curb growth of peak consumption.

AMI differs from traditional automatic meter reading in that it enables two-way communications with the meter. Systems only capable of meter readings do not qualify as AMI systems. But the AMI does not specify a standard network interface or method for smart meters to send/receive data. How can smart grid ever reach economies of scale unless AMI network interface and related functions are standardized? And by whom?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.