State of Smart Grid Current Activities and Information Resources

1. State of Smart GridCurrent Activities and Information Resources

2. Headlines • Deployments • Policy and Standards • Consumer Issues • Investments

3. ARRA: Smart Grid Investment Grants (100 projects: $3.4B Federal; $4.7B non-Federal) 3

4. US Smart Grid Investment Grants http://www.smartgrid.gov/ 4

5. Smart Grid Investment Expectations 5

6. SmartGrid.Gov Portal Users choose a site that meets their needs: Basic information on the Smart Grid Information and Data from the Recovery Act Smart Grid Programs Information on government sponsored Smart Grid projects. A repository of documents and information on the Smart Grid

7. Other US Smart Grid Projects http://www.sgiclearinghouse.org/

8. Policy and Standards • Standards • NIST SGIP process a resounding success • Standards efforts accelerated many times over “normal” • Action plans march toward completion • Major impacts this year • OpenADR and OpenADE – consumer side • Plug-Ins / Plug-Fests – Clearing demonstrating the value • Issues – ZigBee SEP 1.x / 2.0

9. SEP 2.0 - Technical Issue in ZigBee Alliance Proposed SEP 2.0 Stacks Application SEP 2.0 Presentation XML or EXI Transport HTTP/TCP or CoAP/UDP Network RPL IPv6 MAC 802.15.4 PHY 802.15.4 • Transport layer • Current impasse is rehashing debate from June 2010 where decision was made to proceed with HTTP/TCP • HTTP/TCP • Widely deployed (i.e., billions of browsers and devices) • Mature (ratified in 1997) • Designed for reliable communication links (e.g., Ethernet, DSL/cable, Wi-Fi) • Offers end-to-end security from SCE to HAN devices • Integrates much more easily with consumer technologies (e.g., browsers, tablets, smart phones) • CoAP/UDP • Not deployed • Not mature (at least 8-12 months from ratification) • Designed for constrained devices (e.g., ZigBee, smart grid T&D sensors) • Requires terminating and bridging security (i.e., potential exploits) • Would require consumer technologies to adapt to support • Some don’t care which transport is used • Engineering analysis indicates both will fit on SCE meters • SCE wants the functionality in SEP 2.0 • Transport is analogous to choosing between PVC or copper pipes • Both transports can run the SEP 2.0 Application Layer • Vision is the SEP 2.0 information model is transport/technology agnostic (Can run on, WiFi, Homeplug and ZigBee)

10. Multiple customer communication channels • Multiple Communications Capability complications • Needs to be seamless to operator • System needs to route/takes fastest path to applications • Registration and security coordination is more complicated (peer to peer secure connections) • Security issues particularly of trust (trusting consumer devices and public networks • Utilitiescannot keep pace with fast cycle technology using slow cycle infrastructure • Utilitiesneed capabilities to develop secure connections to theircustomers using public and private networks (the utility industry is not typically staffed for this type of work) • It’s unclear how utility role in controlling non-utility owned devices needs to evolve to ensure grid reliability • Utilities need to decouple standards development from deployment and design to evolve implementations as standards evolve

11. Policy and Standards • Policy • Consumer right to opt out of metering technology • Question comes to mind – what else can I opt out of? • Consumer education and especially listening needs to become a focus

12. Show Highlights on Smart Grid • Boot Camps - Monday • Introduction to Utility Infrastructure and SG Apps • Introduction to NIST SGIP • Consumer Symposium - Monday • Benefits - Tuesday • Investments - Wednesday • Implementing SG Standards Now - Thursday • Demand Response – All week

13. Agenda