Do We Really Need Water Meters?

27

Do We Really Need Water Meters?
By: Brad Linzy

HYPOTHESIS:
Water metering is not needed in Evansville. A Flat Rate scheme might be preferable.

ARGUMENTS:
A lot has been said already about the Evansville/Johnson Controls (JCI) Smart City 2.0 deal in fiscal terms, but little has been said about the technology itself and how a smart meter that measures water actually works. Anyone who has experienced the frustration with digital device running out of battery power can attest to the fact that sometimes flashy, feature-laden devices aren’t always superior in long term reliability or build quality.

In the last 30 or 40 years everything from clocks, barometers, hygrometers, thermometers, odometers – basically anything with “meter” at the end of it – has been given an electronic makeover. While economies of scale have generally made these devices cheaper and sometimes easier to use, they also have suffered from designs that rely on batteries to operate and are considered disposable in nature.

The idea of making water meters “smart” obviously has its advantages. Some of those include remote reading, elimination of data entry, real time monitoring by consumers, remote control of valves, early leak detection, to name a few. In fact, they seem like a great idea on the face of it. But not so fast…

There are three aspects of this deal to which I object – the timing of it, the long term reliability of the technology, and finally the assumed need for meters in the first place. Enough has already been said about the timing of the JCI deal, so I will focus instead on the latter two of my three complaints.

The major downfall of smart water meters lies in the fact they need batteries to operate, and not just any batteries, they need expensive Lithium Thionyl Chloride batteries, which according to a Silicon Labortories report add $10-$15 to the cost of each meter (compare that with the average $20 cost of old mechanical meters), and they also happen to be regulated as “dangerous” for transit and require a qualified technician to change. (1)

Furthermore, according to my research and a phone conversation I had with a technician at Elster, one of the largest manufacturers of smart meters in the US, any smart water meter sold in the US will not be field serviceable due to OSHA regulations, i.e. the batteries cannot simply be changed while the meter is connected to the pipe. The meter will have to be taken out of service and a replacement meter installed. The lifespan of Lithium Thionyl Chloride batteries under optimal conditions is 20 years, but the industry standard for smart meter manufacturer warranty is 15 years of service life. (1)(2)(3)

I have not read the full contract for the JCI deal, but I do know there is a service and replacement agreement for up to…you guessed it…20 years. This raises a couple of pressing questions. What are the exact terms of the service and replacement portion of the contract? And what happens after the contract is up and the meters start dying one by one because of the inherent limitations of their power source? Are we going to be right back in a similar boat in 20 years? (4)

My guess is, yes. In 20 years’ time, the next generation of Evansville leaders will experience the wages of our ill-conceived plans. They will look back with 20/20 hindsight, analyze the long term return on investment and realize throwing away all our old, boring yet reliable mechanical meters was a mistake. But hidden away beneath the blanket of our assumptions is a larger question about water in the “River City”. Why are we metering our water at all?

Meterless water billing is quite common in most parts of the world, and even in some developed nations like the UK. Water departments in these places use different schemes, but flat rates and “assessed volume” charges, based on the size and characteristics of a property, are the most common. (5)

This might sound alien to some of us, but think about it: are there any among us whose actions change because of our water bill? Do any of us really open up our bill and think, “if only I hadn’t washed so many dishes and clothes last month, I could have cut this bill in half,” or, “man, if only I would stop showering and flushing the toilet, this bill would go down”? The truth is, we use the amounts of water we use because that is the amount we need to use for whatever lifestyle we’ve carved out.

These visions of a future where residents conserve water diligently because they can view their real time usage are just utopian dreams. We all know the truth, and the truth is these meters will raise revenues for the water dept. because, at least for the service life of the meters, they will be slightly more accurate. It’s only about raising revenues. JCI’s own website uses this argument of raising revenues in their sales pitch. Even if this plan fell on its face, the water dept. is already asking state regulators for a rate hike because they have a shortfall of revenue. So the bottom line is they need X dollars to operate and they are bringing in less than X. The rates will rise whether we like it or not, so the real question is, do we need state of the art, battery-powered meters that will fail within 20 years’ time, or is there another way?

CONCLUSIONS:

The JCI deal is wasteful. It will add to the debt burden of the people of Evansville with very little perceivable reward. There are some good aspects of smart meter technology, particularly if you live in places where water conservation is paramount, but the “River City” can hardly be called such a place. Furthermore, the design limitations, namely the limitations on power supply and OSHA regulations against changing the Lithium Thionyl Chloride batteries, poses a serious future liability in 20 years’ time when the service and replacement contract runs out.

A water pricing structure based on a tiered system with flat rates and assessed volume billing would work better than the current volumetric pricing system. Such a system would save the people of Evansville a $46 million debt, would be cheaper on average for residents, and would have minimal effect on actual water usage. After the first month or so, everyone would get over what little thrill there was in leaving on a faucet or garden hose and things would be normal. The water dept. operations and billing would be streamlined, passing the savings (of both meter reading and the JCI deal) on to customers. The old residential meters could remain in place to aid in leak detection, but would not be used for billing. Our rates will rise for water no matter what path we take. The cheapest path for all is to rethink the system from the ground up, not move to “smart” meters with a limited service life.

SOURCES:
(1) Silicon Labs “How to Design Smart Gas and Water Utility Meters for the Utmost in Power Efficiency”
http://www.silabs.com/Support%20Documents/TechnicalDocs/Low-Power-MCU-Metering.pdf

(2) MSDS FOR LITHIUM THIONYL CHLORIDE BATTERY
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/cg432/docs/msds/MSDS_IceBatteries.pdf

(3) Elster Metering Model SM700 Data Sheet
http://www.elstermetering.com/downloads/SM700_4pp_090311.pdf

(4) IURC Joint Petition
http://www.in.gov/iurc/files/44123order_081512.pdf

(5) Overview of Meterless Water Billing Schemes in the UK
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_energy_and_water_supply_e/consumer_water_supply_e/consumer_paying_your_water_bill_e/paying_for_water_without_a_meter.htm

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

27 COMMENTS

  1. I must say you make a Very Good case, and path, out of the “Woods” of stagnant thought that permeates the ranks of Evansville’s Rulers.
    Unfortunately, Common Sense is the commodity in shortest supply in their Gene Pool. That said, I commend you for stepping up to the Plate on this issue. Thank you.

  2. Americans believe in paying for what they use. It is ingrained into us. That is why we have a penny coin in our money system, so we can pay a debt right down to the last red cent.

    I do not wish to pay the same for my water as my neighbor who waters his garden, and sometimes his yard, and washes his cars every week. Another neighbor bought a big collapsible pool for his kids and I can just imagine how many gallons of water it takes to fill that thing.

    No thanks on the flat rate idea. I will keep my meter.

    ___

    • I understand that, but think outside the box a moment… You will still be paying for what you use, you will just be bypassing all the fluff of $46 million water meters and wasteful third parties finding their way into your bill every month, which is what we’re poised to get now.

      How about this… We leave the old meter system in place and users can choose to go to a flat rate or use their old meter until it wears out and pay a service fee for replacement and reading? This will give the consumer CHOICE. The system we have now offers no such choice.

      The advantages to a flat rate system would be you’d always know what your bill’s gonna be and you can budget your household budget accordingly, while pooling your liability with all other users in Evansville to prevent unnecessary fees.

    • Think about it this way… You pay a flat rate for cable and internet service and don’t bat an eye. You would probably be up in arms, as would most of us, at the thought of paying for TV by the hour or internet by the megabyte of data you’ve downloaded. Why is it the opposite with water?

      • Let’s look at this a bit more closely: Electricity is metered. Gas is metered. Some phone service is metered (per-minute charges). Some Internet service is metered (remember “throttling”?). Personally, I’d be thrilled to have my cable TV service metered, though less so to have my cable Internet metered.

        I prefer to pay based on my individual usage for all these utilities, since I try to minimize usage and be aware of when I’m wasting them. I’d even like to see my trash collection charged by weight or volume. I don’t need minute-by-minute (“real-time”) usage feedback: Monthly totals are just fine.

        I still haven’t seen any clear need or justification for blowing $46 million to have the latest technology, which also appears to incur high continuing maintenance costs. If EWSU has identified problem areas in water distribution, then let’s address those areas. One opportunity for alternate uses of this money would be to reduce leakage or known measuring inaccuracies throughout the distribution system under EWSU’s control. Another might be to add it to the resources needed to upgrade the sewers as mandated by EPA.

        • I agree with most of that, but again, your concerns could be solved by giving customers the CHOICE – just like the UK does – of metered billing (with service fee for meter reading and maintenance) or meterless billing at a flat rate based on the type of property you own.

          If you google “unmetered water charges”, you will see a host of provincial UK websites explaining to customers that they can choose from metered or unmetered billing and they can switch anytime they like!

          Why do we not have this kind of flexibility and choice? It’s worth it to the water dept. to make unmetered billing attractive. It would save on staffing and administration. Meter readers could be kept to a minimum while the billing dept could be likewise streamlined.

          Here’s one example: https://www.ofwat.gov.uk/consumerissues/chargesbills/unmetered/

  3. The flat rate idea is very interesting. The Johnson Controls deal sounds worse each day.

  4. I am wondering were these meters are manufactured. Are they made in the USA or are they imported?

  5. In my research, which granted only lasted a full day of reading and searching, turned up only a handful of smart water meter manufacturers around the world. I do not believe Johnson Controls is one of them. After clicking on every link on their website, including their “products” section, leads me to believe they only buy the water meters from one of these handful of manufacturers and repackage and resell them to municipalities with the install and service agreement. Kinda like how the cable or satellite companies rarely make their own boxes or dishes, they just sell the service and do the installs and agreements to the end user. All the more reason to reconsider the deal… After the service agreement is up, Evansville will be right back to square one.

  6. I’m surprised that in all the talk of the JCI deal no one has mentioned the 800lb gorilla sitting in the corner of the room…..that being old water lines and WHO is responsible when changing the meter causes them to leak!

    I believe in Evansville the home owner is responsible for every inch of piping from the shutoff to your house (the meter is in-between these two points) we all know that the infrastructure here has been neglected to the point of it being prone to failures from nothing more than seasonal changes in the ground. (freeze/thaw)

    In neighborhoods like mine (2nd ward)(no I didn’t vote for Mosby!)the housing stock is old, the water lines are brittle and in all likelihood going to leak when the meter is replaced. So the question is…..WHO is going to pay for the repairs if my water line or your water line is damaged in the process of a contractor changing out the meter?

    I know when I did a little research on the JCI deal last year in one of the cities that had opted for the water meters there was a huge public outcry because this exact thing had happen, if my memory serves me correctly they stated the average cost to the home owner was in the $1300 range.

    So if I get a new “Smart Meter” I don’t want, didn’t request, and don’t approve of and in the course of installing it my water line is damaged and leaks (they will shut off your water till repaired) just WHO is going to pay the repair bill?

    I already know the answer…but I’m surprised this hasn’t been mentioned.

    JMHO

    • I live in the 4th Ward. My house was built in the 30’s. I had my main water line replaced recently all the way into my house. The EWSU department replaced everything from my meter to the street main, including the shutoff valve. I was not responsible for the meter costs unless I ordered up a larger meter. A 5/8″ meter was the largest that I could get without additional costs to me.

      Are you sure that Evansville’s citizens are on the hook for replacement costs all the way to the shutoff? I thought the meter itself was the DMARC point.

      Brent

      BTW, good article Brad!

  7. Great report and suggestions.
    Does anyone in City leadership care to open their minds?
    If we go forward with the Johnson Controls deal, Weinzapfel’s poor choices will cost us yet again. …

  9. Well done, Mr. Linzy. I for one would welcome a flat rate billing (even with a Summer kicker for lawn watering).

    The fundamental flaw of the Johnson Controls proposal lies in the fact that JCI has dealt themselves a contract whereby JCI gets to incorporate rate changes into its calculation of “Guaranteed Savings”. So the recent 3 year phase in, 35 % water increase, gets to be used by JCI in calculating the savings of the new meters (which makes no sense intellectually: the City would have had the additional 35 % rate increase whether we had new meters or not). will the forthcoming CSO rate increases also be picked up by Johnson Controls in assuring that the “guaranteed savings” are met ? If so, then bottom line: Johnson Controls is guaranteeing NOTHING AT ALL–by incorporating future rate increases, JCI is assured of never having to reach for the checkbook.

  10. With all of the consultants, accountants and anyone second guessing a council decision why hasn’t another company been asked to review this? There are a number of engineering and controls companies in evansville that could research this. A small price to pay if the findings are negative to shut this down. If they agree to Johnson’s meter upgrades improving our current ones then residents get a little reassurance. This is not the only company that is capable of this technology. Many of them could build on existing technology like Johnson seems to be doing.

  11. “throwing away all our old, boring yet reliable mechanical meters was a mistake” This was actually done twice already. Up until the late seventies we had a water meter repair staff. The meters were all brass clockwork like mechanisms. The dept was eliminated an all the old meters were replaced with digital read out meters. Then in the late eighties they were all replaced again with touchread meters. Each time a few jobs were eliminated. Usually at a high equipment cost. Always with the promise of long term pay back. Originally we had sixteen meter readers with a pencil an book. Now we have eight readers.

  12. So you want water and sewer consumption based on the honor system? With no way to verify consumption, the utility would be taking someone’s word on how they use water. No thanks, I’d rather pay for what I use, especially since we are a 2-person household.
    As far as the cost of meters and maintenance, how much do you think it would cost over the next 15-20 years to pay for meter readers and their associated equipment? With smart meters, the need for meter readers is eliminated. Seems to be a much more efficient way.
    Your header of being concerned with “the progress of Evansville and Vanderburgh County” is only hype. This rag is regressive in its thinking.

    • One can be progressive by exercising the discipline not to buy every shiny object that some huckster is peddling.

    • Did you even read the article and comments? The water rate you would pay would be based on the type of property you own. This has the advantage of streamlining the billing department and passing on any savings to all customers.

      Furthermore, if you choose to keep your current meter and be billed that way, you could! That’s what they do in the UK. They give customers a choice, which we don’t have here. They also allow people to switch any time they like so long as they pay for any installation of a voluntary meter and a small fee for reading it.

      This article was meant to be a challenge to the people and politicians of Evansville to think outside the box and find solutions to problems in places other than the accepted line that we need to spend more of the people’s money solving nonexistent problems. I happen to think there is nothing more “progressive” than that.

  13. The number 1 reason for scrapping the whole JCI project is that it does not pass the smell test.

    The project was hatched by Jonathan Weinzapfel and Mark S. Moore, a hired gun from Baker & Daniels, now Faegre Baker Daniels, the firm that currently provides employment to Jonathan Weinzapfel, and launched just prior to Weinzapfel leaving office. Faegre Baker Daniels no doubt hopes to get the bond business for this project.

    Then there is another troubling aspect to this drama that concerns Weinzapfel creating a new job, Financial Officer, at the Water Department for his city controller Jenny Collins, also just prior to his leaving office.

    2008 Study: Ethical breaches becoming common in government

    http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2008/01/study-ethical-breaches-becoming-common-in-government/26192/

    ___

  14. In all of your ‘research’ you failed to discover that water meters do not last into perpetuity? The useful life of most residential meters is 15 years or less. The batteries usually outlast the meter. The accuracy of old meters degrades significantly at the end of their life. Utilities are ‘encouraged’ by regulators to have a 10 year meter replacement program in which 10% of meters are replaced each year. However, changing over to an automatic read system is best done at one time in order to realize the benefits.

    You’re flat rate billing idea only encourages waste and will never happen.

Comments are closed.