IP everywhere and then it doesn’t matter, you can have them all.  I’m mixing wifi, 802.15.4, moca, ethernet and powerline all in my house just by using routers. ip6 is even better, you get rid of NAT and DHCP.

Proprietary networks like Zigbee are a non-starter. The only real question is IPv4 or IPv6. IPv6 is the better choice but it will be initially harder to deploy.

Everything already sees frequency so why not have an appliance protocol based on frequency? Priority based frequency response could shed or reschedule low priority loads at the end-user instantaneously. i.e. Your refrigerator will kick off or delay starting up momentarily if frequency is 59.7 Hz. Where’s Warwick? Are you guys looking at this?

I agree with Jon. On the networking side, there have been overlays of different, incompatible technologies over the years. The industry either developed bridges so they could co-exist, or in many cases, one technology finally overpowered others. There is no need for a pre-approved standard before progress can be made - in fact, it is healthy for multiple technologies to fight it out - let the best one win. We can sort it out as we go - just as we have done on countless previous occasions…

Good points. Using the OSI Layer Network model, perhaps we can agree on Internet Protocol as the core standard from which to build it all"physical” layers are best. Focus on the high level application layers to insure compatibility of message structures between different systems.

JoeJoe - in a previoius comment I mentioned a pilot we did back in 2006-2007, in which our appliances reacted to grid instabilities by deferring energy consumption. That’s a good first step but really a utility should have the ability to initiate a request for deferred power consumption whenever it needs to (e.g. a part of the grid goes down, an excessive demand situation temporarily arises, etc.). Consumers can be incentized to comply using dynamic pricing schemes. The question that then arises is how is that pricing signal communicated to the appliance within the home? I agree with the article that without an agreed upon standard, it would be difficult for us or any other hardware manufacturer to proceed with commercialization of these smart appliances.

Warwick Stirling, Global Director of Energy and Sustainability, Whirlpool Corporation.

Warwick - I don’t see what the harm is of building appliances that turn themselves off at 59.85 Hz. If frequency has reached this point you can infer something has gone seriously wrong. i.e. You don’t need the utility to tell you. Frequency responsive appliances would add a measure of stability to the grid as soon as they were deployed and they would continue to work no matter what protocol is eventually decided upon. Whirlpool might even gain some know how that could be used when the fancier communication protocols roll out. All that said, I understand these musings are moot considering we’re apparently very close to getting a standard communication protocol. It still puzzles me how frequency responsive appliances aren’t the norm but I’ll get over it. Is this an expensive feature? It seems like it would cost a few bucks at most.

I see the GFA controller costs less than $5 bucks a unit. Jezz, the payback on that is probably under 10 months. I rest my case.

http://www.electricdistribution.ctc.com/pdfs/GFA Fact Sheet.pdf

http://www.electricdistribution.ctc.com/pdfs/GFA Fact Sheet.pdf

Third times a charm? Grid Friendly™ Controller Balances Energy Supply and Demand

http://www.electricdistribution.ctc.com/pdfs/GFA Fact Sheet.pdf

Just stumbled accross this. DC-IN-A-BOX™ Wins Award

http://www.electricdistribution.ctc.com/events.htm#Award
http://www.theinsider.com/news/350397__Dick_In_A_Box_Wins_Creative_Emmy

Coincidence? I think not.