For the past two decades there have been programmes and projects in place in various countries for the roll-out of smart meters. In 2009 the European Commissionās Third Package for the liberalisation of energy markets marked a monumental change in smartāmetering history as tens of countries commenced their roll-out plans in its aftermath. For this reason, two time periods are presented here: pre-2009 and post-2009.
Pre-2009: pioneering countries
Prior to 2009 smart meter projects had already taken place in Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia, California (USA) and Northern Ireland. The Italian utility ENEL introduced smart meters in 2001 as a result of an in-company investment decision. The rationale for this decision was based on expected savings or revenues in the areas of purchasing and logistics, ļ¬eld operations, customer services and revenue protection, which relates to a better understanding of where fraud occurs within low-voltage distribution networks. Over the years, I have been told by people working for ENEL that an economic business case existed, and this was not in the form of a traditional costābenefit analysis (CBA). In fact, neither the Italian energy regulator nor government had any significant inļ¬uence on requirements ENEL had to fulļ¬l. This means that ENEL could choose the type of meter and the communication infrastructure independently and opted for a smart electricity meter that communicates through power-line communication (PLC) to the nearest substation (Torriti, 2012). By the end of 2005, ENEL had 27 million smart meters installed, of which 24 million meters being remotely managed and bimonthly read (Alberini et al., 2019). The early move by ENEL meant that the Italian regulator was confronted with challenges such as providing smart meters to the minority of consumers not covered by the ENEL and ripping the benefits of the investment made, which was estimated at about 2.1 billion Euros (Meeus & Saguan, 2011).
As a response to these challenges, the Italian regulator issued a mandatory roll-out of smart meters in 2006 and gradually increased operating costs in metering activities reaching the level of 7.1% at the end of the mandatory roll-out period (Lo Schiavo et al., 2013). As of today, more than 95% of low voltage customers, also those located outside ENEL areas, are provided with smart meters.
In Sweden some utility companies developed smart-metering pilot projects in the early 2000s and the government expected economic benefits in terms of energy savings. In 2003 the Swedish government issued a law which contained an obligation for monthly meter readings for all electricity users by 2009, hence creating the conditions for the introduction of smart meters. Since then, investments in smart metering have developed in a faster rate than required by law (Van Gerwen et al., 2006).
In the Netherlands the smart meter roll-out was planned since 2004 as a way to improve demand response at the level of small consumers. However, the regulated roll-out could only start eight years later due to unanticipated resistance from the public in terms of privacy rights infringements (Hoenkamp et al., 2011). An independent cost-beneļ¬t analysis was carried out as part of the decision-making process (see Chapter 3). This also followed the development of pilot projects (Van Gerwen et al., 2010).
In Ontario in Canada, increasing electricity demand peaks were the main factor for smart metering. The Ontario Energy Board installed about one million smart meters up to 2008 with plans to cover all 4.3 million Ontario customers by the end of 2010 (Torriti et al., 2010).
In Victoria in Australia, smart-metering installation started in 2006. The rationale consisted of increasing summer electricity demand peaks by air conditioning causing extra investments in low use plants and the linking of wholesale and retail markets.
Smart meters in California were introduced with the aim to increase the reliability of electricity supply in this state, through the reduction of consumer peak demand. California has a summer peak demand for power during approximately 50ā100 hours per year. This peak is mainly due to the increasing use of air conditioners. The main energy agencies of California saw demand response as an important mechanism to decrease this peak.