Latest Trends in U.S. Water Utility Automation and Digital Connectivity

Differences and Challenges Across Utility Types

Not all utilities are adopting digital tech at the same pace or scale – differences in size, location, and resources shape their challenges and opportunities:

• Urban vs. Rural: Large urban utilities often have more capital and in-house expertise to deploy cutting-edge solutions (like city-wide sensor networks or advanced analytics). In contrast, water utility automation in many rural and small systems face constraints in funding, staffing, and even basic internet access. Broadband connectivity is a notable hurdle – in some rural areas, insufficient internet or cell coverage can impede IoT and SCADA deployments. While some intelligent devices can use radio or cellular networks, reliable broadband becomes crucial as data needs grow1. Federal programs are trying to bridge this gap (e.g. the USDA and BroadbandUSA grants for rural and tribal broadband), and State Revolving Fund loans can even cover the up-front installation of connectivity equipment for smart water systems2. Nonetheless, rural utilities often proceed cautiously, piloting small-scale tech improvements first. The good news is that new solutions (like cloud-based SCADA and low-power IoT sensors) are making automation attainable for small systems at lower cost3. Still, many small and underserved communities need targeted funding and technical help to adopt digital solutions – policy experts urge more “equity-oriented funding” to help scale up smart water tech in these locales4.

  
  

• Large vs. Small Utilities: Size brings different priorities. Big utilities (serving hundreds of thousands or millions) must manage vast, complex networks – here, advanced analytics and digital twins can yield huge efficiency gains, but integrating legacy systems and managing cybersecurity for a large digital footprint is challenging. Small utilities (serving a few thousand or less) often lack dedicated IT staff or data scientists; their focus is on affordable, user-friendly tools that solve immediate operational issues. Training and workforce capacity are concerns – an aging workforce in water means many operators are near retirement5, and new tech requires new skills. Digital literacy and training programs are vital so that veteran operators can comfortably adopt things like mobile SCADA apps or cloud dashboards6. Peer networking and technical assistance (through Rural Water Associations, AWWA small systems committees, etc.) are playing a role in spreading know-how to smaller utilities. Another challenge is funding maintenance: while grants/loans can buy sensors or software, small systems worry about ongoing costs (software subscriptions, cellular fees). Indeed, programs like the SRF cover capital costs but not ongoing connectivity fees, leaving small utilities to budget for those long-term7. Planning for the life-cycle costs of digital projects is thus critical, especially for cash-strapped systems.

  
  

• Public vs. Private Operators: Public municipal utilities and private investor-owned utilities sometimes differ in their approach to innovation. Investor-owned utilities (which serve about 15% of U.S. population) have access to private capital and often a mandate to improve efficiency – they may be quicker to invest in automation if it promises cost savings and can be recovered through rates. For example, American Water (private) aggressively rolled out AMI and IoT monitoring across its systems8. Public utilities, governed by city or county authorities, may have to navigate public procurement rules and political oversight, which can slow adoption. They often rely on public financing or grants for large tech upgrades. On the flip side, public utilities can tap federal/state programs more directly (like the recent infrastructure funding) and may prioritize equity outcomes (ensuring all customers benefit from digital upgrades). Both sectors face common challenges – e.g. integrating new tech with decades-old infrastructure, and guarding against cyber threats – but smaller municipals and rural co-ops particularly report needing additional support to implement and maintain advanced technologies9. Collaboration is growing: we see public-public and public-private partnerships where a larger entity or a tech provider helps a smaller utility deploy smart solutions it couldn’t on its own10.

  
  

Challenges Across all Sized Water Utility Automation

Critically, cybersecurity and resilience pose challenges across all types. Highly connected systems can be targets for cyber attacks, yet many utilities – especially smaller ones – have lagged in cybersecurity practices. A 2024 EPA review warned that over 70% of inspected water utilities had cybersecurity deficiencies (e.g. shared passwords, outdated access controls), leaving them vulnerable to hackers11. This underscores that digital adoption must go hand-in-hand with robust cyber hygiene, training, and backup plans regardless of utility size or ownership.

Endnotes

1. https://epa.gov ↩

2. https://epa.gov ↩

3. https://water.elynxtech.com ↩

4. https://uswateralliance.org ↩

5. https://badgermeter.com ↩

6. https://uswateralliance.org ↩

7. https://epa.gov ↩

8. https://business.att.com ↩

9. https://uswateralliance.org ↩

10. https://smartwatermagazine.com ↩

11. https://cybersecuritydive.com ↩