Utility Week - authoritative, impartial and essential reading for senior people within utilities, regulators and government
Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/844956
UTILITY WEEK | 7TH - 13TH JULY 2017 | 23 Operations & Assets interest, seemed ready to accept that time pressures, not endemic or deliberate incom- petence, were to blame for the incidents they had uncovered. Interviewing Energy UK's director of energy supply Audrey Gallacher, Watchdog's Matt Allwright suggested: "Don't you just need more time?". Somewhat surprisingly, however, Gal- lacher refused to take this bone. "There's no doubt that it's a really challenging pro- gramme," she said, "there's a lot to be done, but health and safety would never be com- promised to meet a target." Pressed further, Gallacher repeatedly turned down offers to blame the timeline for programme problems. "I really don't think there are any systemic risks in the programme," she concluded. Energy UK's reluctance to side with the broad church of complainants calling for the smart meter rollout deadline to be put back will seem particularly odd to some in the wake of the Queen's Speech. The Smart Meter Bill proposes to extend the cut-off date for government powers to intervene in the smart meter programme and some industry figures have suggested this paves the way for also shuffling back the installation deadline. Ryan Thomson, a partner at energy con- sultancy Baringa, believes the bill certainly offers "wiggle room", while Dan Lewis, energy policy adviser for the Institute of Directors, is confident it represents a water- ing down of the 2020 deadline. The govern- ment has acknowledged "there was no way they were going to make the 2020 target", says Lewis, and he looks forward to some "healthy debate" around the practicalities of smart metering when the bill comes through. Technically, of course, this is simple spec- ulation. The government has given no formal indication that there is room for negotiation on the deadline. Indeed, it has resolutely maintained rhetoric around the absolute nature of the end date. It's understandable that the government would not want to appear so on the energy industry. Critics would no doubt argue that the 2020 deadline would have been emi- nently achievable had companies been more proactive from the get-go. But this accusa- tion would overlook the technical hitches that have prevented the widespread early deployment of meters – the grinding pro- cess of agreeing meter specifications, hold- ups in the launch of the central data system and overruns in testing for the introduction of SMETS2 meters, for example (these are ongoing). To have pushed ahead with getting meters on walls while the functionality and performance of meters was fragile would have been the height of irresponsibility and government must accept the truth of this. Arguably, these technical hitches might have been avoided had there been greater co-ordination and project management from a central body, but again, government chose not to go down this route. In the cold light of day, the pure impracti- cality of the 2020 deadline must be accepted and measures taken to bring all stakehold- ers together to resolve programme challenges once and for all. Without this pragmatism, the industry, and custom- ers, will miss out on the great promise that smart metering should deliver. It's not all bad Despite the significant challenges faced by the smart meter programme, there is evidence that the technology can deliver on expectations for it to make customers more engaged with their energy use, and to reduce consumption. In February this year, Smart Energy GB – the body responsible for consumer awareness of smart metering – published the results of a survey of more than 10,000 UK adults, asking them about their perceptions and experience of smart meters. Of those who had already had a meter installed, 81 per cent said they would recommend them to others. Furthermore, respondents on lower incomes were even more likely to recommend smart meter adoption to others (88 per cent) – an encouraging result for those with concerns that vulnerable customers might miss out on the benefits of smart energy. Other insights in the report were that 82 per cent of people who have smart meters have taken at least one step to reduce energy usage and that 87 per cent of those with smart meters believe they now have a better idea of what they are spending on energy. Meanwhile, 70 per cent of respondents with smart meters said they now feel confident that they have the information they need to choose the right energy tariff, compared with 57 per cent of respondents without smart meters. Smart Energy GB is not alone in receiving positive feedback from early smart meter adopters. Independent research conducted by Utility Week, in partnership with Harris Interactive, found that 64 per cent of smart meter customers have enjoyed better visibility of their energy costs since having the meter installed. While the result is lower than Smart Energy GB's finding, it is nonetheless encouraging. Furthermore, when Utility Week probed customer experience of the meter installation process, 97 per cent said they found the process straightforward, suggesting that concern over customer irritation and inconvenience during installation may be significantly overstated. Smart metering technology does have the potential to transform the energy industry, and consumer engagement with their energy use. However, the importance of tackling a low volume of high-impact negative experiences should not be underestimated. The rollout still has a long way to go. IHDs have caused strife "It is vital that the industry gets this critical project right VINCENT DE RIVAZ, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, EDF ENERGY " "