SMETS 1 Meters - No More

EachPenny

Anthorn wrote: »

As I said in my previous post, in that case everyone must be telling lies including OFGEM, DCC, MSE and the government.

I would like to investigate this further so perhaps you can post some evidence which supports what you say.

Do you have evidence that an OTA software upgrade can convert SMETS1 hardware into SMETS2 hardware?

For most people, the NAO report is evidence enough that spurious claims have been made about the smart meter programme, and that claims regarding the adoption of SMETS1 meters onto the DCC are somewhat optimistic.

If you don't believe the NAO, then I'm not sure you'd believe anything that you prefer not to believe.

Anthorn

EachPenny wrote: »

Do you have evidence that an OTA software upgrade can convert SMETS1 hardware into SMETS2 hardware?

For most people, the NAO report is evidence enough that spurious claims have been made about the smart meter programme, and that claims regarding the adoption of SMETS1 meters onto the DCC are somewhat optimistic.

If you don't believe the NAO, then I'm not sure you'd believe anything that you prefer not to believe.

No-one has such evidence because no-one has tried it yet. Along the same lines the NAO report cannot similarly be based on evidence because it hasn't happened yet. It's all speculation.

What we have at this time is proposals from OFGEM and responses from smart meter manufacturers and further that some manufacturers will be able to update their smart meters but a minority won't. That's it.

What we have in opposition is an unproven conspiracy theory in that the government, DCC and OFGEM are telling porkies about the upcoming software upgrade to SMETS1 meters. Personally I don't take notice of conspiracy theories.

EachPenny

Anthorn wrote: »

No-one has such evidence because no-one has tried it yet. Along the same lines the NAO report cannot similarly be based on evidence because it hasn't happened yet. It's all speculation.

What we have at this time is proposals from OFGEM and responses from smart meter manufacturers and further that some manufacturers will be able to update their smart meters but a minority won't. That's it.

What we have in opposition is an unproven conspiracy theory in that the government, DCC and OFGEM are telling porkies about the upcoming software upgrade to SMETS1 meters. Personally I don't take notice of conspiracy theories.

So would you classify it as an "unproven conspiracy theory" if someone claimed it was impossible to carry out an OTA software upgrade to convert a microwave oven into a toaster?

We all (at least I think we do) appreciate that a microwave oven and a toaster are physically different hardware. Theoretically a microwave oven might be able to make toast (although probably only inedible toast). And theoretically a microwave oven could have a software upgrade to make it more efficient at making toast (say reprogramming one of the function buttons to be a 'toast' programme).

But very few people would believe it makes sense to spend lots of money adapting a microwave to become a toaster, especially when the cost of buying a brand new toaster is comparable to the estimated (and somewhat uncertain) cost of converting a microwave.

The experts at the NAO don't need to have experience of actual SMETS1 meter upgrades to be able to project many of the likely costs of a 'sticking plaster' approach of adopting them onto the DCC, and consider that in terms of value for money given the limited lifespan modern meters supposedly have.

The NAO also look at risk. Assuming it was theoretically possible to carry out an OTA software upgrade, each upgrade carries a risk of 'bricking' a meter, potentially with serious consequences. The costs of compensation and meter replacement in the event of 'bricking' is also something to be considered, along with the need to communicate to SMETS1 meter customers that their meter is due to be upgraded on a particular day. None of that actually requires any meters to have been upgraded already in order to make an assessment of possible risks and costs.

Prediction is not the same as 'speculation'.

Anthorn

EachPenny wrote: »

So would you classify it as an "unproven conspiracy theory" if someone claimed it was impossible to carry out an OTA software upgrade to convert a microwave oven into a toaster?

We all (at least I think we do) appreciate that a microwave oven and a toaster are physically different hardware. Theoretically a microwave oven might be able to make toast (although probably only inedible toast). And theoretically a microwave oven could have a software upgrade to make it more efficient at making toast (say reprogramming one of the function buttons to be a 'toast' programme).

But very few people would believe it makes sense to spend lots of money adapting a microwave to become a toaster, especially when the cost of buying a brand new toaster is comparable to the estimated (and somewhat uncertain) cost of converting a microwave.

The experts at the NAO don't need to have experience of actual SMETS1 meter upgrades to be able to project many of the likely costs of a 'sticking plaster' approach of adopting them onto the DCC, and consider that in terms of value for money given the limited lifespan modern meters supposedly have.

The NAO also look at risk. Assuming it was theoretically possible to carry out an OTA software upgrade, each upgrade carries a risk of 'bricking' a meter, potentially with serious consequences. The costs of compensation and meter replacement in the event of 'bricking' is also something to be considered, along with the need to communicate to SMETS1 meter customers that their meter is due to be upgraded on a particular day. None of that actually requires any meters to have been upgraded already in order to make an assessment of possible risks and costs.

Prediction is not the same as 'speculation'.

I don't understand the analogy.

What you appear to be missing is that SMETS1 (and SMETS2) smart meters can already be updated OTA and frequently are. For example they can be switched from credit to pre-pay and vice versa and unit prices can be changed. British Gas meters report on central heating boilers. It seems to me that it's reasonable that smart meters reporting or not reporting to the DCC is a question of software and not a question of hardware. But I'm not fool enough to declare that such a software upgrade OTA will not work when there is no evidence to support it mainly because it hasn't been tried yet or it has been tried but not reported.

thorganby

Anthorn wrote: »

I don't understand the analogy.

What you appear to be missing is that SMETS1 (and SMETS2) smart meters can already be updated OTA and frequently are. For example they can be switched from credit to pre-pay and vice versa and unit prices can be changed. British Gas meters report on central heating boilers. It seems to me that it's reasonable that smart meters reporting or not reporting to the DCC is a question of software and not a question of hardware. But I'm not fool enough to declare that such a software upgrade OTA will not work when there is no evidence to support it mainly because it hasn't been tried yet or it has been tried but not reported.

It is painfully obvious that you don't understand.

Smart meters have always enabled two-way communication with energy suppliers, transmitting data on energy usage and receiving information such as current tariff rates, as only a few bytes of data is required to achieve this but this is certainly not the same as an OTA firmware update.

You keep referring to "new software" that does not exist. This is not speculation and "new software" could never control hardware that does not exist!

It is you who is missing the point that is obvious to others.

Biggus_Dickus

Anthorn wrote: »

No-one has such evidence because no-one has tried it yet. Along the same lines the NAO report cannot similarly be based on evidence because it hasn't happened yet. It's all speculation.

What we have at this time is proposals from OFGEM and responses from smart meter manufacturers and further that some manufacturers will be able to update their smart meters but a minority won't. That's it.

What we have in opposition is an unproven conspiracy theory in that the government, DCC and OFGEM are telling porkies about the upcoming software upgrade to SMETS1 meters. Personally I don't take notice of conspiracy theories.

Perhaps not porkies as such;....if people or organizations are in some way incentivized to be ‘economical with the truth’ many will seize that opportunity and run with it. Covering your own backside is one such incentive.

The much vaunted upgrade path (in whatever form it takes!) from Smets1 > 2 has been bubbling under for quite a while and it’s looking more and more likely that it won’t (or can’t) happen any time soon on a meaningful scale.

The more likely way forward is a ‘start all over again’ scenario with Smets-2 meters;...and then who knows?...perhaps Smets2 meters themselves will deliver us an unforeseen curve-ball in the not too distant future. :eek:

Anthorn

thorganby wrote: »

It is painfully obvious that you don't understand.

Smart meters have always enabled two-way communication with energy suppliers, transmitting data on energy usage and receiving information such as current tariff rates, as only a few bytes of data is required to achieve this but this is certainly not the same as an OTA firmware update.

You keep referring to "new software" that does not exist. This is not speculation and "new software" could never control hardware that does not exist!

It is you who is missing the point that is obvious to others.

But the government, DCC and Ofgem says they will upgrade SMETS1 smart meters OTA with new software to enable interoperability with the DCC and this has been agreed by the majority of smart meter manufacturers but not all of them. That is by now a matter of public record.

So now we are back at the conspiracy theory in that the government, DCC and OFGEM are telling porkies about that upgrade. As I said before I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories mainly because conspiracy theories being theories are not based on fact.

EachPenny

Anthorn wrote: »

So now we are back at the conspiracy theory in that the government, DCC and OFGEM are telling porkies about that upgrade. As I said before I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories mainly because conspiracy theories being theories are not based on fact.

Regrettably you are wrong because your theory about theories is itself not based on fact.

Theory can be absolute fact. I would assume you wouldn't challenge the theory of electromagnetism because it is not based on fact? :think:

Conspiracy theories are based on the misinterpretation of facts, or the unsupportable inclusion of non-factual information within the theory.

A claim that all/some SMETS1 meters will never be adopted onto the DCC is not a 'conspiracy theory', it is an unproven theory, but nevertheless, one which is based on facts.

Anthorn

EachPenny wrote: »

A claim that all/some SMETS1 meters will never be adopted onto the DCC is not a 'conspiracy theory', it is an unproven theory, but nevertheless, one which is based on facts.

"all/some" is two different things: It is a matter of public record that some smart meter manufacturers have responded that they will be able to update their SMETS1 meters but not all of them. That latter fact that some cannot be updated is where uncertainty creeps in.

It's probably uncertain that SMETS1 meters will be exchanged for SMETS2 meters mainly because of the fallacy that exists which is propagated by the likes of First Utility that once we have a smart meter we can't have another one. However in my own personal experience my BG smart meters were changed to Scottish Power Elster smart meters. Now I've switched to EDF's Easy Online Exclusive 2019 tariff and a condition is that EDF fits their own smart meters. Now EDF is saying that "the new generation of smart meters is here". Whether that means EDF's contractors will come and exchange the SP meters remains to be seen. If they do that makes it an exchange of smart meters for the third time.

Anyway, it's more reasonable to speculate that those smart meters which can be upgraded OTA will be upgraded and those smart meters which cannot be upgraded will be exchanged. But there is no evidence whatsoever that no smart meters will be upgraded. That remains a conspiracy theory.

EachPenny

Anthorn wrote: »

Anyway, it's more reasonable to speculate that those smart meters which can be upgraded OTA will be upgraded and those smart meters which cannot be upgraded will be exchanged. But there is no evidence whatsoever that no smart meters will be upgraded.

Equally there is no evidence that an appreciable number of smart meters will be upgraded. There are claims that it can be done, and plans to do it, but as yet it would appear to be a lot of talk and very little action. Unless of course you can point us to published statistics of the number of upgraded SMETS1 meters?

And once again a reminder that no OTA software upgrade can convert SMETS1 hardware into SMETS2 hardware.

Anthorn wrote: »

That remains a conspiracy theory.

**yawn**