The last Utility Information Pipeline dealt with factors to consider when conducting a Return on Investment (ROI) analysis for implementing an automated meter reading system. In that article, I asked readers who have implemented AMR or AMI systems to share their experiences.
The general manager of a rural water utility, a long-time newsletter subscriber, emailed me and relayed some of the issues his utility has faced in implementing a drive-by automated meter reading system. This issue highlights some of the points he raised, along with issues I’ve heard from other utilities that could be considered potential weaknesses of an automated meter reading system.
Here are some of the potential downsides to implementing an automated meter reading system…
Damage to meters
The utility manager I mentioned above reports that, on average, between .7% and 1.0% of their meters are damaged each month. Damaged meters means incurring repair or replacement costs (which, for some utilities, may be charged to the customer if the customer’s negligence caused the damage). Damaged or malfunctioning meters won’t communicate with the radio receiver, requiring them to be read manually. Of course, this negates any labor savings achieved by automating the process for reading these meters.
A frequent complaint of utilities using radio read meters is these meters can become overgrown by grass, weeds, or nearby bushes and shrubs. This poses a problem when the meter must be visited, either for a routine turn-on or turn-off or for disconnection for non-payment.
Many utilities report receiving defective meters from the meter manufacturer. If this is a manufacturing defect, it can affect many meters received in a single shipment. Defective meters require troubleshooting and, once it has been determined the meter is at fault, replacement. This requires additional time from the utility’s field service personnel, mitigating some of the labor cost savings of not reading manually.
Not “lifting the lid” each month
One of the misgivings I hear most often from utilities about moving to either an AMR or AMI system is each meter is no longer visited each billing period. When reading meters manually or with handhelds, the meter reader must visit every meter (and lift the lid for water meters) each month. This allows the meter reader to visually inspect each meter on the route and note any issues or possible damage to the meter. To mitigate this impact, I know of utilities with a policy of reading a portion of their meters manually each billing period to insure each meter is visited once a year.
Resistance from customers
Some utilities have experienced pushback from customers who consider a meter that measures their usage at frequent intervals to be an invasion of privacy. Others have concerns about the potential health impact of being subjected to additional radio waves. Even though these concerns may be easily dismissed by those who are knowledgeable about radio read systems, they can be very real to your customers. So real that some states require utilities to allow reluctant customers to opt out of having a radio read meter installed at their home.
I’d love to hear your experience
If you’ve upgraded to an automated meter reading system, whether AMR or AMI, I’d love to hear your version of the pros and cons of implementing the system. Please give me a call at 919-232-2320 or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I’d like to schedule a time to talk with you about your experience.
Is an AMR or AMI system for you?
Are you trying to determine if moving to an automated meter reading system is the right decision for your utility? If so, please give me a call at 919-232-2320 or e-mail me at email@example.com to learn how a customized ROI analysis or business review could help.
© 2018 Gary Sanders