Utility meters last for decades. Making them reliant on a cell network that's constantly changing wasn't such a good idea. They should have licensed some low band UHF frequencies and set up their own network. It doesn't take much bandwidth to read some meters.
post
And it's going to be necessary again in 2040.
However, this is sufficiently far in the future that it is unlikely to trouble policymakers anytime soon.
Lol.
I can't tell if the numbers are bloated for pushing an interest, but with having to spend those billions every 15-20 years, it would probably be cheaper to hire meter readers or pay to keep the 2G available.
My 1950s meter still works fine.
The smart meters were never about reading meters, it's for load shedding. They can turn them off remotely.
But think of the short term profits and dividends for the shareholders!
modular designs prevent this, but nowadays everything must be evil
We're having the same issue in the Netherlands, although the grid managers have started replacing them a while ago. They're being replaced with 4G though, which of course also won't be supported forever.
I think a better solution might be to make a local mesh network on the meters, and one base station nearby that has the internet connection.
Most meters are in areas with plenty of others nearby, and there is already a box thing the grid manager owns somewhere near an electricity connection.
People in remote places could just keep using their existing (or new) meters with 4G.
Then the only reason to replace meters will be because the grid manager themselves wants something changed, for network updates you just replace the base stations.
I would think this is a perfect job for lorawan?
How much does it cost to keep the 2G and 3G networks running? Assume the cost of running the network is borne by the telecoms companies, whereas the smart meter replacements are a problem for the taxpayer.
I'd assume that part of the problem is them tying up frequency that could be used for more-valuable things.
The taxpayer gets a bit back when the freed frequencies are auctioned off.
The telecom companies just charge their customers for it, who are basically "taxpayers" too. You pay either way, so a better question is what action is expected to offer best benefit-cost ratio?
Wasn't 2G switched off a year or two ago?
According to the article, 3G was switched off, while 2G is mandated to be shut down in 2033; but the telcos are preemptively planning to do this in 2029/30.
Nah, I think networks have until 2030-something to turn it off
Consumer phone use will probably get cut off before then, but as the article indicates, there're a lot of non-phone devices that make use of 2G networks too.
I'm probably running on out of date knowledge, but I think I remember reading that some rail signals depend(ed?) on 2G networks, similarly some alarm systems
I think rail uses GSM-R, which is not the same as the general public GSM aka 2G.
Oh really, I thought GSM-R was very much based on 2G, and is/was subject to the same switch off dates
I'm not gonna pretend I know loads about that though
Ah ok some mobile networks have already switched it off for consumers, but maybe not all of them are offline to everyone.
all 18 comments