IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v103y2019icp320-327.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method

Author

Listed:
  • van de Kaa, G.
  • Fens, T.
  • Rezaei, J.
  • Kaynak, D.
  • Hatun, Z.
  • Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A.

Abstract

The world is faced with various societal challenges related to e.g. climate change and energy scarcity. To address these issues, complex innovative systems may be developed such as smart grids. When these systems are realized challenges pertaining to renewable energy and sustainability may, in part, be solved. To implement them, generally accepted common standards should be developed and used by firms and society so that the technological components can be connected and quality and safety requirements of smart grids and their governance can be guaranteed. This paper studies a subcomponent of the smart grid. Specifically, the paper studies competing technologies for a standard means of interface between the smart meter and the concentration point for collecting meter data. Three types of communication technologies for the interface are currently battling for standard dominance: Power line communication, Mobile telephony, and Radio frequency. Nine relevant standard dominance factors were found: operational supremacy, technological superiority, compatibility, flexibility, pricing strategy, timing of entry, current installed base, regulator, and suppliers. The Best-Worst Method was applied to calculate the factors’ relative weights. The results show that experts believe that Power line communication has a high chance of becoming dominant and that the most important factor affecting standard success is technological superiority. The relative weights per factor are explained and theoretical and practical contributions, limitations, and areas for further research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • van de Kaa, G. & Fens, T. & Rezaei, J. & Kaynak, D. & Hatun, Z. & Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A., 2019. "Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 320-327.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:103:y:2019:i:c:p:320-327
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.12.035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032118308311
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2018.12.035?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sharon Adler, 1992. "The birth of a standard," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(8), pages 556-558, September.
    2. Gupta, Himanshu, 2018. "Evaluating service quality of airline industry using hybrid best worst method and VIKOR," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 35-47.
    3. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    4. Anda, Martin & Temmen, Justin, 2014. "Smart metering for residential energy efficiency: The use of community based social marketing for behavioural change and smart grid introduction," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 119-127.
    5. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    6. Gupta, Himanshu & Barua, Mukesh Kumar, 2016. "Identifying enablers of technological innovation for Indian MSMEs using best–worst multi criteria decision making method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 69-79.
    7. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    8. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    9. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Vries, Henk J., 2015. "Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 222-235.
    10. Sharma, Konark & Mohan Saini, Lalit, 2015. "Performance analysis of smart metering for smart grid: An overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 720-735.
    11. Bayram, Islam Safak & Ustun, Taha Selim, 2017. "A survey on behind the meter energy management systems in smart grid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1208-1232.
    12. Erlinghagen, Sabine & Lichtensteiger, Bill & Markard, Jochen, 2015. "Smart meter communication standards in Europe – a comparison," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 1249-1262.
    13. Gunjan Yadav & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Sunil Luthra & Suresh Jakhar, 2018. "Hybrid BWM-ELECTRE-based decision framework for effective offshore outsourcing adoption: a case study," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(18), pages 6259-6278, September.
    14. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    15. Leiva, Javier & Palacios, Alfonso & Aguado, José A., 2016. "Smart metering trends, implications and necessities: A policy review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 227-233.
    16. Kabalci, Yasin, 2016. "A survey on smart metering and smart grid communication," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 302-318.
    17. Depuru, Soma Shekara Sreenadh Reddy & Wang, Lingfeng & Devabhaktuni, Vijay, 2011. "Smart meters for power grid: Challenges, issues, advantages and status," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 2736-2742, August.
    18. Marvin B. Lieberman & David B. Montgomery, 1988. "First‐mover advantages," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(S1), pages 41-58, June.
    19. Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1995. "Dominant designs and the survival of firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 415-430.
    20. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    21. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    22. Jongseok Lee & Jeho Lee & Habin Lee, 2003. "Exploration and Exploitation in the Presence of Network Externalities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 553-570, April.
    23. Nikoleta Andreadou & Miguel Olariaga Guardiola & Gianluca Fulli, 2016. "Telecommunication Technologies for Smart Grid Projects with Focus on Smart Metering Applications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-35, May.
    24. Cusumano, Michael A. & Mylonadis, Yiorgos & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1992. "Strategic Maneuvering and Mass-Market Dynamics: The Triumph of VHS over Beta," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(1), pages 51-94, April.
    25. Tuballa, Maria Lorena & Abundo, Michael Lochinvar, 2016. "A review of the development of Smart Grid technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 710-725.
    26. Reddy, K.S. & Kumar, Madhusudan & Mallick, T.K. & Sharon, H. & Lokeswaran, S., 2014. "A review of Integration, Control, Communication and Metering (ICCM) of renewable energy based smart grid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 180-192.
    27. van de Kaa, Geerten & Rezaei, Jafar & Kamp, Linda & de Winter, Allard, 2014. "Photovoltaic technology selection: A fuzzy MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 662-670.
    28. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    29. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Gupta, Himanshu & Okwu, Modestus, 2019. "Evaluating challenges to implementing eco-innovation for freight logistics sustainability in Nigeria," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 288-305.
    2. Dragan Pamučar & Fatih Ecer & Goran Cirovic & Melfi A. Arlasheedi, 2020. "Application of Improved Best Worst Method (BWM) in Real-World Problems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-19, August.
    3. David S. Ching & Cosmin Safta & Thomas A. Reichardt, 2021. "Sensitivity-Informed Bayesian Inference for Home PLC Network Models with Unknown Parameters," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Serra, Daniele & Mardero, Daniele & Di Stefano, Luca & Grillo, Samuele, 2021. "Post-metering value-added services for low voltage electricity users: Lessons learned from the Italian experience of CHAIN 2," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    5. Silke van der Burg & Maarten F. M. Jurg & Flore M. Tadema & Linda M. Kamp & Geerten van de Kaa, 2022. "Dominant Designs for Wings of Airborne Wind Energy Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-11, October.
    6. Hoogerbrugge, Coen & van de Kaa, Geerten & Chappin, Emile, 2023. "Adoption of quality standards for corporate greenhouse gas inventories: The importance of other stakeholders," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    7. van de Kaa, Geerten & van Ek, Martijn & Kamp, Linda M. & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Wind turbine technology battles: Gearbox versus direct drive - opening up the black box of technology characteristics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    8. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    9. Yousaf Murtaza Rind & Muhammad Haseeb Raza & Muhammad Zubair & Muhammad Qasim Mehmood & Yehia Massoud, 2023. "Smart Energy Meters for Smart Grids, an Internet of Things Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-35, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van de Kaa, Geerten & Janssen, Marijn & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Standards battles for business-to-government data exchange: Identifying success factors for standard dominance using the Best Worst Method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 182-189.
    2. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    3. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Vries, Henk J., 2015. "Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 222-235.
    4. van de Kaa, Geerten & van Ek, Martijn & Kamp, Linda M. & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Wind turbine technology battles: Gearbox versus direct drive - opening up the black box of technology characteristics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    5. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    6. G. Kaa & M. J. Greeven, 2017. "Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 181-192, May.
    7. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    8. van de Kaa, Geerten & Papachristos, George & de Bruijn, Hans, 2019. "The governance of platform development processes: A metaphor and a simulation model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 190-203.
    9. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    10. van de Kaa, Geerten & Rezaei, Jafar & Kamp, Linda & de Winter, Allard, 2014. "Photovoltaic technology selection: A fuzzy MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 662-670.
    11. van de Kaa, Geerten & Greeven, Mark, 2017. "LED standardization in China and South East Asia: Stakeholders, infrastructure and institutional regimes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 863-870.
    12. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    13. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    14. Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing with Network Externalities and Price Discrimination," CEPR Discussion Papers 2883, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    16. den Hartigh, E. & Langerak, F. & Commandeur, H.R., 2002. "The Effects of Self-Reinforcing Mechanisms on Firm Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2002-46-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    17. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    18. de Vries, H.J. & de Ruijter, J.P.M. & Argam, N., 2009. "Dominant Design or Multiple Designs: The Flash Memory Card Case," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-032-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    19. S. J. Liebowitz & Stephen E. Margolis, 1994. "Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 133-150, Spring.
    20. A. Bassanini & G. Dosi, 1998. "Competing Technologies, International Diffusion and the Rate of Convergence to a Stable Market Structure," Working Papers ir98012, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:103:y:2019:i:c:p:320-327. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.