Wireless water meters on the loose in New York City

On the environmental tip, Mayor Bloomberg has announced that New York City will install 826,000 wireless water meters by 2011. Under the new system, readings will be sent to a network of rooftop receivers throughout the city every six hours, enabling the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to bill property owners every month with exact water usage -- with the bill available online. Under the current system, water use is estimated and folks are billed every three months. The system will cost taxpayers $250 million, and installation (free for property owners) is already underway in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Queens. When it is fully installed, New York will be the largest city in the world to use wireless water metering. According to the New York Times, it's estimated that a 5 to 10 percent reduction in water use could save the city up to $90 million annually.

[Via Vos Iz Neias; Thanks, Yossi]

[Rohit Kapur @ Mar 25th 2009 12:30PM]

How long before someone hacks it and

A) Sets his water bill to 10$ ('cause come on, if it was zero, someone'd notice :P)

B) Makes his neighbor pay double

[Ken @ Mar 25th 2009 2:25PM]

Find the antenna, put a signal attenuator on it, spoof communication from false source. Free water!!

[Kiwi616 @ Mar 25th 2009 2:58PM]

FYI:

I live in NYC and not for nothing but not ALL meters are estimated. I have a reader outside my house along with everyone else in my neighborhood. They READ it every 3 months and bill as such. Sewage waste is estimated based on intake of water, they should figure a way to read that instead of estimating.

[TVGenius @ Mar 25th 2009 7:27PM]

There is such a thing as a sewer meter, but it's prohibitively expensive since it has to be able to handle solids and whatever else without backing up. Some restaurants in our town use two meters, one for indoor use and one for the sprinklers etc., since that water won't go down the drain, and don't get billed for sewer on the outdoor use meter.

[Dee @ Mar 25th 2009 12:31PM]

Hopefully it won't be susceptible to spoofing, wouldn't want everyone's water bill to be registering to one person's box. I wonder what would happen when the power in the wireless meters go out?

[Mike @ Mar 25th 2009 1:00PM]

My guess would be that it's powered by the water that flows through it, so it only runs out of power if the water stops flowing (in which case there isn't much to measure...).

[Jake @ Mar 25th 2009 2:18PM]

We already have these installed in New Jersey. The one I have in my house has an FCC ID number. According to FCC filings it operates on a 900MHz spread spectrum system. So spoofing or whatever is not going to be that easy.

The way it works here, the municipality worker drives down the street in a pick up equipped with receiving equipment that logs the usage. I'm not sure how often they do that, but I still get a bill every three months.

[htd @ Mar 25th 2009 12:32PM]

why would 'wireless' meter save water? how much money does this thing cost and how much money it takes to run it?

[Labeeb @ Mar 25th 2009 12:33PM]

I guess its paid by the government( taxes)

[darkmax @ Mar 25th 2009 12:40PM]

i was wondering on that point.... also by installing the wireless gadget, doesn't that mean more power consumption?.....

[alexmueller @ Mar 25th 2009 12:50PM]

I don't get that either, seems like it is only providing a more accurate bill reading.

[Le Big Mac @ Mar 25th 2009 12:52PM]

They don't save water in themselves, but by providing relatively instant feedback on consumption people may realize that they could cut back water usage.

It may also allow people to identify leaks. For example, if you're away for a week but you still used water.

We have these in DC and it's pretty neat to be able to see your daily use and see about how much you used for, e.g., watering the lawn (when you get a spike in daily usage).

[Esat Dedezade @ Mar 25th 2009 1:00PM]

Maybe they think people will be extra careful/ less wasteful with their water usage?

[hernty @ Mar 26th 2009 11:55AM]

You save by not having to hire someone to spend their entire day going around, checking meters, and (hopefully) entering the numbers correctly into some manual system.

The meters themselves dont save water - they save money on the labor

[pizzaz @ Mar 25th 2009 1:40PM]

I get instant feedback by just walking down to my meter checking out he current value and subtracting the previous value from it.

[bernardino @ Mar 25th 2009 2:15PM]

pizzaz is right! And we don't need computers either. All the stuff computers do, we could do ourselves with a little pen and paper!

[Mike @ Mar 25th 2009 9:49PM]

Here are some relevant links with more info:

NYC : http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_release&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2009a%2Fpr140-09.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1

Video: http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/html/2009a/media/pc032409_water.asx

Meter Manufacturer: http://www.aclara.com

[Dan Jacobsen @ Mar 25th 2009 12:33PM]

We just had wireless water meters installed in Coon Rapids, MN. I guess they can be read by a mobile truck up to two blocks away.

[takeos @ Mar 25th 2009 12:37PM]

Where does the meter get its power? I mean, a lithium cell would last about 10 years, wouldn't it? Or does it use the water flow itself to generate the electricity it needs? If so, where does it store it, in a capacitor?

[Jeremy Jones @ Mar 25th 2009 12:37PM]

We have these in the town I live in and are horrible inaccurate. My brother waters his lawn for hours a day and his water bill is the same as in the winter. There was a friend that was on vacation in Arizona for a month. His water bill for that time was over $300, normally $32. They said he must have a leak which he doesn't. While I was building my house we had water on to clean paint brushes and things and it was about $50 a month, now that I live in the house I usually pay the minimum which is $20.

Hopefully it's just the model that our town deployed, otherwise there are going to be a lot of pissed off people when they get their bills. Or happy depending on which way the meter decides to read.

[kjb434 @ Mar 25th 2009 12:40PM]

That just means they are still estimating the charges versus actually reading them.

[Zoli @ Mar 25th 2009 12:39PM]

lol- Vos Iz Neias

Viva Boro Park!

[kjb434 @ Mar 25th 2009 12:39PM]

Here in Houston about 25% of the city will have the meters by next year and the years after that we should be at 100%.

Trucks will still read the meters, but they just have to drive by the homes.

Just like in New York City, each month customers will get exact bills versus estimated bills.

[zioncat @ Mar 25th 2009 12:43PM]

Wow that is a really great idea. They didn't mention that the water department can save anually on using less fuel to actuall go from meter to meter house to house in vehicles.

[itemforty @ Mar 25th 2009 12:45PM]

It seems like it could save money in the long run, but how secure is the signal?

[la @ Mar 25th 2009 12:46PM]

All water meters are wireless.

[Chaos Theory @ Mar 25th 2009 12:48PM]

dun dun tch

[LemSkroob @ Mar 25th 2009 12:50PM]

wait, why did they install those little black boxes on every building (think about 10-15 yrs ago) so they can plug in a reader and get the usage, when they have just kept on estimating anyway?

[Chaos Theory @ Mar 25th 2009 12:51PM]

250 million now to save 90 million eventually? and what about maintenance, and what will the bill be if someone physically tampers with it and there's no signal at all?

[rcappo @ Mar 25th 2009 1:01PM]

annually, not eventually. If they are saving money after 4 years, that is pretty good.

If they are estimating everyone's water usage, some people may be paying for water they aren't actually using. Who knows if that means that they are collecting 90 million more or less than they should, or if some people are paying too little and some are paying too much.

In my town, it would eliminate some jobs for the people who walk around and read them. A better solution is to have people phone in their readings every one-three months. I do this instead of them estimating my electric bill.

[Jonathan @ Mar 25th 2009 12:53PM]

If you are just replacing existing meters with wireless ones, then you are just making billing easier and putting meter-readers out of work.

Where you make a real difference is when you install *new* meters in single-metered buildings. When people have a direct incentive to save water in their apartment, then they will reduce usage. Sub-metering is key (IMHO).

[Thunderbuck @ Mar 25th 2009 4:24PM]

I'm loathe to see people lose jobs, especially in this economy, but I'm not a big fan of keeping people employed in obsolete roles, either. I'm a union member, and even I can see the folly of that.

Assuming the bugs can be ironed out (and I'm betting they can), this is basically a good idea. It reduces costs to the utility, and gives customers near-instant feedback on their usage. I know I'd watch my consumption much more closely if I had a convenient way to monitor it.

Long term, it would be nice to think that this will actually lead to greater conservation.

[Inane_Asylum @ Mar 25th 2009 12:57PM]

...and the meter reader guy refused to believe that his job would eventually be taken over by a computer/robot...

[Agent .25i @ Mar 25th 2009 1:11PM]

Post of LoL

[rcappo @ Mar 25th 2009 1:16PM]

Lots of people think their jobs can't be replaced. When AI and Japanese robots improve to be able to learn (or just remember how to do repetitive tasks) there are plenty of jobs that could be done better by machines that don't sleep or need to take breaks.

It is one good thing about being a computer engineer is that there will be a need to program these robots.

[Brazell @ Mar 25th 2009 2:11PM]

"It is one good thing about being a computer engineer is that there will be a need to program these robots."

"Lots of people think their jobs can't be replaced."

Yeah.

[Inane_Asylum @ Mar 25th 2009 2:28PM]

When Skynet rolls around and robots are programming and building robots, then you're screwed too...you'd better start putting money away now for retirement.

[Vern @ Jun 12th 2009 3:10AM]

Actually the article is inaccurate. There is the option today to be billed for actual usage. The water meter is currently read by the Con Edison meter reader. So the Con Ed person will not be out of work (until the power company becomes part of the network)

[mar2194 @ Mar 25th 2009 1:13PM]

If anyone knows anything about basic shielding and faraday cages, this could easily turn into free water.

Yay.

[Cyclone @ Mar 25th 2009 1:12PM]

I tested one of these a few months back. They are battery powered and are supposed to be good for 15 years. They just broadcast their serial number and meter value every 15 minutes. Its up to someone to "listen" for them. They will ether mount a collector in the area, or have a truck drive around slowly listening for the meters.

Still, its better to be billed on your actual consumption versus an estimate.

[Inane_Asylum @ Mar 25th 2009 2:30PM]

"Under the new system, readings will be sent to a network of rooftop receivers throughout the city every six hours"

?

[Smoke_me_a_Kipper @ Mar 25th 2009 1:17PM]

We've had these for the last year or two. Wireless power meters too.

[yunkles @ Mar 25th 2009 1:20PM]

We have a similar system here, and it's actually quite nice. The meter reader used to have to come in the basement, now he doesn't. In addition we got a call on the cell from the water company saying the meter detected a leak and asked if we'd like to shut the water off. Since we weren't going to be able to get back home for another 4 hours, it was quite helpful. I'm not sure how sensitive the system is, but the water never got more than 1/4" to 1/2" high in the basement, so we had no property damage to speak of.

[Rob @ Mar 25th 2009 1:29PM]

Maybe now we'd start getting more accurate charges rather than the "whatever we want to claim" nonsense spewing out of the utilities companies.

[ananimus3 @ Mar 25th 2009 1:55PM]

Technology: Making you more useless everyday.

[Brazell @ Mar 25th 2009 2:09PM]

1) The "$90mil" will be wasted elsewhere
2) It's just a way to get more money out of people. "LAWL LOOKS LIKE OUR ESTIMATES WERE ALWAYS WRONG, U OWE $80+/month!!!"

[HB @ Mar 25th 2009 2:11PM]

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Here in the UK only a very limited number of people have water meters installed (no wireless ones as far as I'm aware). In practice this seems to mean that most people treat water as an almost valueless resource they can squander on any crap they want. With a system like this people will be forced to use less or pay more. Thumbs up all round.

[NoAndThen @ Mar 25th 2009 2:19PM]

We have these remote meter reading things on a lot of houses here in Boston. I really don't see where they think they're going to save money. But hey if it works, great.

[acme @ Mar 25th 2009 2:20PM]

once accurate bills start coming every property owner is going to raise rent to compensate, thus screwing over the populous....fantastic

[csnoke @ Mar 25th 2009 5:19PM]

So by 'screwing over the populous' you mean 'making them pay their own way'?

Why should l pay for my renters' water usage?