1. “Best Value/Risk Ratio” The Case for End-to-end Standards Bill Vogel Trilliant Networks, Inc. August 21, 2007

2. Trilliant Networks Summary Major AMI Company Largest Project in North America – Hydro One One of the Largest R&D organizations Over $50m in AMI revenues Over 40 AMI Customers Over 300 employees Leader in Standard-based AMI Industry Standards-based Development Tool Over 90 percent use Trilliant to develop and test AMI First-to-market – end-to-end, standards AMI Introduced ANSI Standards AMI over 6 years ago First Open Cellular Solutions for C&I First Standard-based Mesh Network End-to-end, international standards

3. Market Context: AMI Interoperability 1.Demand is strong and Broad-based Large, international market Economic and political forces Shift to AMI from AMR 2.Central to a vibrant energy economy Reflect true cost of supply in retail service Sustainable resources and improved service Promises of demand and grid management 3.Industry leaders focused on standards Networks, advanced metering and integrators Market are focused on clean/green technology Integrate applications and devices 4.Standards optimize value/risk Affordable, consumer-friendly demand response Integration of AMI and Demand Response Platform for enterprise-level integration Proprietary Suppliers Major Players InternetCommunications EnergyTechnologySystemsIntegration Innovators AMI Demand Response Smart Grid Suppliers Meter Suppliers AMR Suppliers 1 st Gen Networks AMI

4. AMI Interoperability: Vibrant Energy Markets Holistic resource management… Differentiated/critical peak prices Measuring 2-way energy flow Turn off delinquent accounts Real-time demand control Managing grid assets Consumer messaging Monitor the environment Control distributed generation Transparent consumer services Catalyst for sustainable resources; Value beyond metering

5. Perspective on Standards Investment… Risk Mitigation Supplier Technology Project Choice Devices Networks Software Solutions Service Providers Costs Curves Productivity Technology… Agreement Interoperability Networks Applications Data Interconnectivity Networks Devices (peer-to-peer) Productivity Suppliers per problem Learning curves Integration, Without Lock In… (=) (≠)?(≠)? Applications Exchange Media Networks “End-to-End”

6. Which Standard?  The wrong question…  Which standard is common? Exchange SOA, Web Services, XMLSOA, Web Services, XML Applications SpecificApplications Specific Applications ANSI, IECANSI, IEC Java, J2MEEJava, J2MEE SOASOA Networks Internet ProtocolInternet Protocol Media Bluetooth IEEE 802.15.1 Bluetooth IEEE 802.15.1 HomePlug HomePlug WiFi IEEE 802.11 WiFi IEEE 802.11 WiMax IEEE 802.16 WiMax IEEE 802.16 Zigbee IEEE 802.15.4 Zigbee IEEE 802.15.4 AppsX∆Media Net AppsX∆Media Net Compatibility Connectivity Interoperability Collaboration

7. Investment Impact 1.Functionality [Options] 2.Performance [Competition] 3.Capacity [Bandwidth and efficiency] 4.Cost [Competition]  ? Today Future

8. Standards Strategic Value Supplier Collaboration Indirect Direct Providers Focus On Solution Improvements Component element improvement via competition Features & functions via leveraging components Broader Solution Provides a More Holistic Benefits Components leveraged in delivery of complete offerings Competition spurs functional improvements

9. Beware of The Hype Convergence  History Does Not Support a Single Standard Future  Single Standard Do Not Support True Interoperability Chip Centric  Bluetooth Scenario  Act one of two  Zigbee 1.0  Act one of two

10. Supplier Choices Influence 1.Forge Alliances Like-minded Parties Future Acquisitions 2.Protect Install Base Deflect to future standards Compartmentalize customers and technology segments Use patents to protect 3.Adapt Proprietary Plans Ensure proprietary participation Upgrade remotely Add Functions Collaborate 1.Solution Interoperability Advanced Metering Demand Response Customer Communication Grid and Asset Management 2.Partner On New Requirements Service Levels Customer Devices Feature & Functions 3.Partner to Adapt Services Service Levels Customer Devices Feature & Functions Plug ‘n Play Network Solutions…

11. Flexible Architectures Enterprise Backbone Neighborhood Home/Personal

12. Conclusions  The Requirements of the Energy Market are vast and growing  Dynamic Markets Require Interoperable Infrastructure  End-to-end Standards Support Interoperability and Therefore Broader Solution Strategies  End-to-end Standards Do Not Imply a Single Element, Rather They Require Multi-layered Standards  True Interoperability Requires Supplier Collaboration to Solve Participant-driven Project Market Requirements