Streetlight Controls on AMI Networks: Can you Pull a Train with a Pickup?

Utility companies are increasingly facing budget constraints and growing competition for available resources due to a changing operating environment. As a result, when discussing the addition of street lighting controls, leveraging an existing Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) network may seem like an attractive option.

However, in practice, this approach can introduce several challenges when implementing networked lighting controls (also known as smart controls). It is similar to the idea of a pickup truck towing a railway train—it may be possible, but it is not necessarily the most practical or efficient solution.

While some vendors claim that street lighting controls can be integrated into existing AMI networks, there are several considerations that may lead to increased costs, deployment delays, and added operational complexity.

Key Considerations

A common argument in favor of using an existing AMI network is that it allows utilities to leverage existing infrastructure, potentially reducing deployment costs and minimizing additional strain on network resources. Since the network is already in place and operational, utilities may expect to avoid the cost of deploying new gateways for street lighting.

However, AMI networks serve a critical function—they are essentially the “cash register” for utilities. Any change that could impact meter reading or billing processes must undergo extensive testing to ensure there is no effect on revenue collection. As a result, AMI networks are typically not optimized for managing street lighting control systems.

Cost Considerations

Does deploying a dedicated street lighting control network require additional capital investment? Possibly—but not necessarily to a significant extent.

There may be costs associated with modifying an existing AMI network, depending on its structure and topology. However, the cost of deploying a dedicated street lighting control network is often relatively low—typically in the range of $2.00 to $3.00 per light fixture as a one-time investment. This represents a small fraction of the total cost of a full lighting control system.

In contrast, adapting an AMI network to support street lighting may require costly upgrades to gateways and endpoints, potentially resulting in total costs equal to—or even exceeding—those of a dedicated network.

Operational Priorities

AMI providers specialize in delivering metering solutions. Metering, rather than street lighting, is their core business.

This means that when utilities require updates, expansion, or changes related to street lighting systems, these needs may not be prioritized by either the AMI vendor or the internal AMI management team. As a result, street lighting operations may experience delays or reduced responsiveness.

Network Performance

When multiple applications share the same network, performance can be affected.

If an AMI network is already operating near capacity, adding street lighting devices may result in increased latency or require additional infrastructure investment. Utilities may be faced with the choice of upgrading the network or accepting reduced performance.

Future Scalability

A dedicated street lighting network offers greater flexibility for future expansion.

Such a network can support additional smart city applications—such as sensors and monitoring systems—without impacting AMI operations. This separation allows each system to evolve independently and more efficiently.

Integration and Operational Control

When street lighting controls are managed over an AMI network, operational dependencies can arise.

In many cases, street lighting operators must coordinate with AMI system administrators to perform actions such as adjusting brightness levels or updating system configurations. This can reduce operational flexibility and slow response times.

With a dedicated street lighting network, operators can independently manage, monitor, and optimize the system without relying on other teams.

Conclusion

Utilities that choose a dedicated street lighting control network often achieve a more robust and efficient solution—without significantly increasing overall costs.

Such systems can typically be deployed more quickly, avoid interference with existing AMI operations, and provide a better experience for operators and end users alike.

About Timothy Freeman

Timothy Freeman has over 23 years of experience in the electric utility sector, with expertise in Meter Data Management, Engineering, Training, and Outdoor Lighting.

He holds a degree in Business Administration and Computer Science and began his career as an analyst more than two decades ago.

Tim is a subject matter expert in metering systems, including interval data billing, register-read billing, and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) integration.

Most recently, at Georgia Power Company, Tim serves as the Networked Lighting Controls (NLC) Technical Team Supervisor. He is responsible for managing two-way communication and ensuring data availability between the NLC system and the Southern Company network.