PG&E says smart meters aren’t the cause of higher-than-usual energy bills

You’ve probably heard the story by now of the Bakersfield man, Peter Flores, suing PG&E because his energy bill tripled after the company installed a smart meter at his house. Then, as additional plaintiffs joined the suit and learned more about smart metering, their attorney claimed that suit could be brought against the entire supply chain. Well, today, PG&E is claiming that the price increases were related to usage due to warmer weather and rate increases — not faulty equipment or intentional price gouging.
Still, the plaintiff’s lawyer has an analysis of weather data that shows temperature differentials between 2008 (with a $200 energy bill for Flores) and 2009 ($600) are negligible, which suggests there must be something else at play.
The suit claims that meters or components were faulty and that energy usage was largely unchanged. Plaintiff’s Attorney Michael Kelly of Kirtland & Packard in El Segundo says that his plan is “…to run every excuse down until we get at the scientific truth of the matter.”
Though the temperature differential, according to the plaintiff, “appears to be insignificant”, there remains room for doubt. July of 2008 had 6 days at or above a hundred degrees in Bakersfield, CA. July of 2009 had 17 such days. Even if the average temperatures remained the same, July of 2009 would have placed a higher load on heating & cooling systems. In order to maintain similar average temperatures, 2009 must have had many cooler days on which the A/C didn’t work very hard. As a morning proved particularly hot, though, there would be a large draw to rapidly cool down a house in solar oven-like distress. These load spikes are more energy-intensive than steady-state cooling with a more even external temperature.
Response to the case has been varied. The California Public Utilities Commission voted 5-0 in favor of having PG&E meters independently tested for accuracy in the San Joaquin valley, where Bakersfield is located. PG&E maintains that “meter accuracy is not at all an issue here.” At Duke Energy, in North Carolina, spokesman Dave Scanzoni says “I don’t see it [the suit] as a negative to rolling out AMI.” And Entergy’s Michale Burns has said, “These lawsuits will not affect our evaluation of advanced metering technology, which is still ongoing.”
The case could have some impact if found in the plaintiff’s favor. PG&E’s meters are made by Landis & Gyr and General Electric. They use communications technology from Silver Spring. All of the above are considered top of the field in metering. If their hardware is found in court to be inaccurate and responsible for inflated bills, the finding could seriously hurt public perception of advanced metering and the smart grid at large. As with any new technology, product or service, public acceptance is going to be the key to integration and success.