This is the second part of our talk with the Professor at the Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad and VP Engineering at OBLO living, Istvan Papp. We discussed the legislation, regulation and standards in the Smart Energy Management field, as well as prediction and view of what is the future of Home Energy Management Systems.  If you haven’t read the first part of the interview with Istvan Papp, read it here.

Are there any established legislation and regulation in the Smart Energy Management field?

My opinion comes from a technological standpoint and the challenges we face daily. Let’s first address Smart Home technology. There’s a notable lack of standards and established procedures in this field. The market is highly fragmented with large number of standards, and such a condition defocuses us from our mission, which is providing comfort and tangible values to the user. Instead of focusing on that core value, we spend a significant effort on integrating various devices.
For example, during the development of HEMS, we had a team working on algorithms, presentation of HEMS values to the user in a clear and understandable way, as well as its ability to ultimately deliver precise savings metrics. On the other hand, we spent at least twice as much time connecting to devices and managing data from them.
Ideally, there would be one standard that requires clearly defined norms for each device manufacturer that wants to be a part of this ecosystem.

Are there any standards and are you satisfied with the standards in Smart Energy Management? How do you see the further development of standards in this area?

There is a project in the smart home field that can actually solve the issue of market fragmentation. Major brands such as Google, Apple, Samsung, Amazon, LG, and others, for the past two years have developed a protocol for smart home devices called Matter. Matter seeks to achieve interoperability by defining standardized communication protocols, messages, syntax, and semantics among devices on market. This initiative requires significant effort since various types of devices are supported within this project. To be honest, it’s uncertain if Matter will cover HEMS in the future.

Regarding energy management, regulations set for distribution companies have been there since 2010. After the European Union issued a directive that all EU member states must have at least 80% smart meters by 2020, regulations were set requiring all meter manufacturers to comply. DLMS took on this task, and from there, three standards emerged and spread across Europe.

On some projects we use M-Bus, elsewhere we use P1, and the latest port we’ve worked with is MEP. The question remains whether there is a fourth port. This still causes a lack of focus from crucial matters. There should be a regulation requiring all manufacturers to use one of these ports (protocols).

It is necessary to define regulations for access to the smart meter, so that the users can access and manage all their data. Another major challenge is what to do with the collected data, as it needs to be sent somewhere. Some dominant companies need to sort this out, but there seems to be a lack of willingness, or better to say – interest. On the one side are large companies, like one mentioned in the Matter project, aiming to profit from services. On the other hand, there are equipment manufacturers whose focus is on selling equipment rather than focusing on services. So far they had little incentive to promote interoperability.

To make a conclusion, it’s necessary to further develop existing regulations in this field and create a unified standard.

What organizations should collaborate to further develop legislation and regulation in the Smart Energy Management? Which organizations your organization cooperates with regarding this?

In terms of Smart Home protocols, as I mentioned, Matter is an attractive concept and our current focus is on following its development. For chargers, the focus would be on the OCPP alliance, then ESMIG and DLMS for meters. Collaboration between these organizations could bring results.

When it comes to inverters, solar panels, and batteries, unfortunately, there aren’t significant initiatives yet. There are partial overlaps in some devices, but also many disparities, even among the same devices, for example between an older and a newer model. Let’s say that one of the most commonly used protocols is Modbus. It seems like a protocol that, with further improvements, could be used as a standard, although it is currently not very scalable. Another issue with it is the lack of security, meaning you can only rely on network security itself.

What is the future of Smart Energy Management since some distribution companies implemented pilot projects that were not so successful?

I will try to answer this question using the example of the pilot project in Croatia. The goal of the project was to shave the peak loads at households by managing devices. The biggest consumers in the household were controlled by cloud service with the goal to manage the household energy consumption.
The homeowner sets a goal, the desired temperature scheme in this case. Then the central (cloud) service calculates when it is the cheapest to reach the desired temperature scheme with some tolerance depending on the tariffs and controls the AC device accordingly.
The same can be applied to car charging at home, as well as some other uses cases (water heater, battery).
We noted a couple of issues during the pilot. First, though it gets a little into energy management, but it was still quite an isolated thing. At a given moment, it was managing only a subset of devices in the household, the AC, or charger, no other devices, while there was potential for more. The main reason for that is that homes are different with plenty of different devices, which cannot be handled centrally.
Second, there was interference in commands, like when the user’s overriding the algorithm locally. The pilot required certain technical savviness from the users, which lead to impaired user experience in certain situations when the user expectations were not met.
I think that regulation and legislation have to define some standard for real time control of the consumption, either automatically through a control system or locally, by user. Otherwise, a collision will occur.
The system will certainly evolve, the rationalization of energy use must continue. The technological increment for that is quite small, and the challenge is on the side of those standardizations, because in order to develop it, it is necessary that all companies have an interest.

What is the most important lesson you learnt throughout your career?

Believe it or not, this is the hardest question for me, although it doesn’t seem so.
If I were to meet myself 30 years younger, I would tell myself this: “Don’t make decisions based on what you want to avoid, but rather on what you want to achieve.”

Then, to 20 years younger Istvan, I would say that nothing is black and white, even though this might annoy me, because I enjoy technology that is strict, narrow and precise.

And lastly, the advice I would give to myself a few years younger is – It is finally time to focus on the right things, not just what is on the table in front of you every day.

Conclusion:
Since there is no generally accepted standard for communication with smart home devices, the manufacturers of those devices waste a lot of time on the integration of different protocols instead of focusing on the user and the services that could benefit him.
In order to standardize the protocol for communication with devices in the household, it is necessary for large manufacturers of smart home devices, as well as large companies engaged in providing services based on information from smart home devices to unite and to create a standard together.

Question for the audience
How to encourage collaboration of different companies in order to achieve the standardization in HEMS?