Good initiative but making them come together on a national scale will take a lot of political drive coupled with a economic feasibility and innovation and finally the most important loads of $$. But doing them in incremental steps would give a better chance to both technology as well as financial justification.
If you want anyone to take a look at something, you need to at least indicate what the topic is. Otherwise, no one (at least if they're like me) would bother to click on a link. I feel as if I wasted my time reading your post because there's no content, so I assume the link will lead to similar waste of time.
No offense intended... just a suggestion.
The goal should not be to simply do a generational change. At this point it is not enough to do an upgrade. Instead they must create the capability to do future upgrades much more quickly. Take a lesson from the computer network security world, where the infrastructure had to be put in place to respond quickly to the evolution of threats as they are discovered. This is not merely a marathon, it is going to be an ongoing process for the forseeable future. Hopefully they are planning (and budgeting) appropriately for that.
Good comprehensive update on the build out of smart grid. What is often in smart grid discussion is the end goal of full smart grid functionality. In the end, utilities would like to optimize grid operations to generate and distribute electricity at the lowest possible cost without generating surplus electricity. Incentivizing consumers to change their pricing habits is purely to avoid firing up peaking plant or allowing utilities to retire expensive generation assets. Full end-to-end field replacement from analog to digital assets will take tremendous time and money, but with the roll-out of AMI we are one step closer to distribution and full field automation. For more thoughts around distribution optimization please read my blog at www.infosysblogs.com/smart-utilities Ben Edelbrock Infosys