Your Opinions On "Smart Meters"

[Way Back Jack]

in terms of energy savings, privacy, fire risk, and, most importantly,
health ramifications. Thank You.

 

[Home Guy]

in terms of energy savings, privacy, fire risk, and, most
importantly, health ramifications. Thank You.

The only purpose of smart meters for residential customers is to reduce
the meter-reading costs of electric utilities.

The exhorbitant up-front cost of the meters themselves, the
communications network and billing software will be paid for by
customers in the form of additional surcharges.

All other aspects of smart meters represents a false economy, because
residential customers don't use enough electricity (individually) to
warrant the use of time-of-day billing, as opposed to large commercial,
retail or industrial customers.

Residential customers don't consume enough electricity on an individual
level such that any decision they make in changing (or time-shifting)
their electricity usage will only affect their monthly bill by pennies
or at most a few dollars. That level of expenditure is on par with
other forms of discretionary spending (daily coffee, snack, etc) and
people will not sacrifice their home comfort (using their
air-conditioner less) if the savings are on par with
pocket-change-per-day.

As for heath and safety issues related to smart meters - totally
bullshit.

Your own cell phone, cordless phone, iSlave device
(pad/phone/pod/tablet), laptop or home wifi network will easily emit far
more EM radiation (and will also be closer to you) than your
outside-mounted smart meter.

You should focus your efforts on the measurement accuracy of these
meters, and the rights (or lack thereof) that consumers have to dispute
bills generated by these meters.

 

[trader4]

The only purpose of smart meters for residential customers is to reduce
the meter-reading costs of electric utilities.

The exhorbitant up-front cost of the meters themselves, the
communications network and billing software will be paid for by
customers in the form of additional surcharges.

All other aspects of smart meters represents a false economy, because
residential customers don't use enough electricity (individually) to
warrant the use of time-of-day billing, as opposed to large commercial,
retail or industrial customers.

They may not warrant doing it, but utilities are doing
it and offering different rates at different times of the
day to residential customers. That is nothing new.
Here in NJ the utility was doing that 50 years ago.
The offered a substantially lower rate at night for water heaters.

Residential customers don't consume enough electricity on an individual
level such that any decision they make in changing (or time-shifting)
their electricity usage will only affect their monthly bill by pennies
or at most a few dollars.

And how would you know what rates all the utilities
in the country are charging?

 That level of expenditure is on par with
other forms of discretionary spending (daily coffee, snack, etc) and
people will not sacrifice their home comfort (using their
air-conditioner less) if the savings are on par with
pocket-change-per-day.

Maybe they won't, but then those that are using electricity
at peak rates, will be paying for it. And those that can
and will switch some of their demand to other hours
will pay less.

As for heath and safety issues related to smart meters - totally
bullshit.

Now that I agreee with.

 

[Robert Macy]

in terms of energy savings, privacy, fire risk, and, most importantly,
health ramifications.  Thank You.

It is my understanding that there were a substantial number of
'accuracy' complaints in California.

 

[Robert Macy]

...snip...
All other aspects of smart meters represents a false economy, because
residential customers don't use enough electricity (individually) to
warrant the use of time-of-day billing, as opposed to large commercial,
retail or industrial customers.

After we switched from normal meter to Time of Day meter where the
rate OFF peak hours was half the cost of ON peak hours, our monthly
electric bill dropped $60. To me, that was NOT false economy.

I have NO idea where all the power went either. We live frugally, one
fridge, [gas heating & hot water], no freezer, electric dryer [rarely
used]. only lights and TV and a few computers. Can't believe the
cooking was THAT expensive. But perhaps it was, because we did tend
to cook more outside peak hours after switching.

 

[Home Guy]

They may not warrant doing it, but utilities are doing
it and offering different rates at different times of the
day to residential customers.

I'm not saying anything to the contrary of what you just said.

Yes, it's not warranted, yes they are doing it (anyways) and yes - they
are charging different rates at different times of the day (if they
didn't, they wouldn't have any basis or reason for implimenting smart
meters now would they?).

That is nothing new.

Smart meters are new (in terms of the historical time-line of equipment
and schemes used to measure residential electricity use which goes back
decades).

Here in NJ the utility was doing that 50 years ago.
The offered a substantially lower rate at night for
water heaters.

I wasn't aware that NJ had time-of-use billing for residential customers
50 years ago.

Those meters must have had mechanical clocks back then (any time-of-use
metering system needs to know the current time-of-day, and even date if
week-end rates are in effect). How accurate were those clocks 50 years
ago?

And how would you know what rates all the utilities
in the country are charging?

I would venture a guess that the difference in rates is minimal - in
terms of the percentage of load that consumers can realistically be
expected to time-shift.

The biggest factor that is under EASY control of home owners is always
going to be their air conditioning temperature setting, and that is also
going to be the last usage they are willing to sacrifice because it
involves their own comfort level (how hot and sticky are you willing to
be in your own home - if it means you'll save a measely $1 or $2 today,
and again tommorrow, and again the next day, etc).

Every day, that $1 or $2 bargain they make with themselves is worth it.
The fact that it might (or will) end up being $30 at the end of the
month is irrelavent. That's if they even know that setting the temp. to
77f vs 74f is going to cost them an extra $1.24 today.

Maybe they won't, but then those that are using electricity
at peak rates, will be paying for it.

Just like everyone is still paying $4 a gallon for gas. People are not
going to cheap-out on their thermostat setting and feel like shit in
their own house to save a measely buck a day.

Maybe they won't, but then those that are using electricity
at peak rates, will be paying for it.

And the crock of the whole situation is that the meters cost anywhere
from $500 to $1500 each, and over the lifespan of the meter it will
probably not result in home-owner cutback in electricity usage to
justify the cost of the meter in the first place.

 

[Home Guy]

After we switched from normal meter to Time of Day meter where
the rate OFF peak hours was half the cost of ON peak hours, our
monthly electric bill dropped $60. To me, that was NOT false
economy.

Have you had it long enough for the meter to bill your air-conditioner
use yet?

I understand it can get hot in Arizona in the summer...

electric dryer [rarely used].

People with young families are (I'm told) constantly using their
washer/dryer.

Having an electric (vs gas) dryer can be a real drag given the price
difference for electricity vs nat-gas.

 

[Mr. Austerity]

in terms of energy savings, privacy, fire risk, and, most importantly,
health ramifications. Thank You.

Do the math... some customers can get a smart thermostat that
evidently works with the smart meter and bumps the temp setting up a few
degrees. Future smart appliances coming, maybe the fridge will shut
down and the door locks during peak hours. Who knows?
http://www.ogepet.com/programs/smarthours.aspx

Me? I put duct tape around the outer 18 inches of the screen on my
big screen TV. The smaller picture size ought to save a bunch.

 

[dpb]

The only purpose of smart meters for residential customers is to reduce
the meter-reading costs of electric utilities.

The exhorbitant up-front cost of the meters themselves, the
communications network and billing software will be paid for by
customers in the form of additional surcharges.

All other aspects of smart meters represents a false economy, because
residential customers don't use enough electricity (individually) to
warrant the use of time-of-day billing, as opposed to large commercial,
retail or industrial customers.

Residential customers don't consume enough electricity on an individual
level such that any decision they make in changing (or time-shifting)
their electricity usage will only affect their monthly bill by pennies
or at most a few dollars....

Overall, just nonsense.

If there weren't a payback, they certainly wouldn't be doing it just for
the funsies of having something to do.

Shifting usage of a _single_ residence slightly from peak to off-peak
hours won't make an impact, sure, but when 10s or 100s of thousands do a
little it can (and will) add up to a lot. That will translate back into
not having to expand/upgrade transmission lines, substations, etc.,
etc., etc., and perhaps even over time at least delaying addition of
generation.

All that will add up to significant savings that eventually will impact
the consumer by at least limiting rate increases over what they would
otherwise be (and unless there's a change in administration and rollback
of recent EPA directives "you ain't see'ed nuttin' yet" on what's going
to happen to rates.

If the current CSAPR rule that were to go into effect Jan 1 but was
stayed by a Federal Court at the last minute (almost literally) in
December ends up being implemented, there _will_ be rolling blackouts as
there simply won't be enough generation to satisfy demand and your
hypothetical folks will be turning the thermostat A/C off (not by
choice) intermittently, not up.

--

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Do the math... some customers can get a smart thermostat that
evidently works with the smart meter and bumps the temp setting up a few
degrees. Future smart appliances coming, maybe the fridge will shut
down and the door locks during peak hours. Who knows?
http://www.ogepet.com/programs/smarthours.aspx

Me? I put duct tape around the outer 18 inches of the screen on my
big screen TV. The smaller picture size ought to save a bunch.

I've been doing that for years but I've used this tape instead. I
think it works better.

http://www.walmart.com/ip/15140648?...&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=&wl3=13690287910&wl4=&wl5=pla

 

[harryagain]

in terms of energy savings, privacy, fire risk, and, most importantly,
health ramifications. Thank You.

Smart meters is a term that covers a multitude of sins.
At the moment they are being portayed as fairly innocuous and helpful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_meter

However, this is a thin edge of the wedge scenario.
In the future,they will be able to cut you off and increase charges
remotely.
They will be used for "load shedding" ie if ther eis a power shortage, they
can cut selective people off.
They are the precursor to the the "Smart Grid"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

 

[mike]

The only purpose of smart meters for residential customers is to reduce
the meter-reading costs of electric utilities.

I disagree. The camel's nose is in the tent.
The door is open to charging you MORE for electricity.
We won't be paying LESS for off-peak usage.
We'll be paying MORE for peak usage.

Every month, my utility sends me an invitation to sign up
for time-of-use metering. There's a surcharge for the privilege.
If I switched ALL my use to the minimum-rate hours, I still wouldn't
break even. It's gonna get worse.

The exhorbitant up-front cost of the meters themselves, the
communications network and billing software will be paid for by
customers in the form of additional surcharges.

Yep. There can be benefits as the smart grid evolves. Everything
I've read suggests that the current crop of meters can't support
what's needed. So, we'll be paying for yet another upgrade in the
future.

 

[Duesenberg]

The biggest factor that is under EASY control of home owners is always
going to be their air conditioning temperature setting, and that is also
going to be the last usage they are willing to sacrifice because it
involves their own comfort level (how hot and sticky are you willing to
be in your own home - if it means you'll save a measely $1 or $2 today,
and again tommorrow, and again the next day, etc).

Every day, that $1 or $2 bargain they make with themselves is worth it.
The fact that it might (or will) end up being $30 at the end of the
month is irrelavent. That's if they even know that setting the temp. to
77f vs 74f is going to cost them an extra $1.24 today.

$1 a day invested for 5 years at 7% compounded interest is $2 148.

$1 a day invested for 25 years a 7% compounded interest is $23 624.

Hopefully somebody will doublecheck my math.

Invest that dollar a day in a tax shelter of course to maximize returns.

Some people don't care about $365 a year in simple savings and others
do. Some people try to sacrifice and decide it's not worth it and others
stick with it.

Your point about the air conditioning is what we do at home. We like
our house cool at night and are willing to pay for it.

 

[Duesenberg]

After we switched from normal meter to Time of Day meter where
the rate OFF peak hours was half the cost of ON peak hours, our
monthly electric bill dropped $60. To me, that was NOT false
economy.

Have you had it long enough for the meter to bill your air-conditioner
use yet?

I understand it can get hot in Arizona in the summer...

electric dryer [rarely used].

People with young families are (I'm told) constantly using their
washer/dryer.

Having an electric (vs gas) dryer can be a real drag given the price
difference for electricity vs nat-gas.

I have a 5 month old baby at home and we have an Energy star 4 cubic
foot front load washing machine.

I was stunned at how little electricity the machine used. And we use
cold water strictly.

Average load takes 58 to 104 minutes. Average electrical use as
measured by a Kill-a-watt device was .16 kwhr to .19kwhr. Average
electrical cost (before all hidden fees) was 1.7 cents a load peak time
and 1.1 cents per cheapest time.

We have a gas dryer that averages about 40 minutes per 4 cubic foot load
of laundry. That thing uses between .21 kwhr and .4 kwhr per load
DEPENDING on the type of laundry. Work jeans requiring more drying,
fleece requiring less. We leave it to the sensors.

I get drying loads between 1.4 cents to 5 cents of electrical use (dunno
about gas use but I can measure in summer when furnace and water heater
off) a load measured by the kill-a-watt. Remember it's a gas dryer.

I'm thinking since I'm the stay at home parent, of disregarding the time
of use for laundry because of the seemingly low cost and very marginal
savings of waiting till 7 at night for cheap rates.

I'm still going to measure electrical use of those appliances to make
sure those numbers are legit.

 

[Duesenberg]

I disagree. The camel's nose is in the tent.
The door is open to charging you MORE for electricity.
We won't be paying LESS for off-peak usage.
We'll be paying MORE for peak usage.

Every month, my utility sends me an invitation to sign up
for time-of-use metering. There's a surcharge for the privilege.
If I switched ALL my use to the minimum-rate hours, I still wouldn't
break even. It's gonna get worse.


Yep. There can be benefits as the smart grid evolves. Everything
I've read suggests that the current crop of meters can't support
what's needed. So, we'll be paying for yet another upgrade in the
future.

Cheap energy has caused some negative issues int he past. There may (or
may not) be benefits to charging more to customers and FORCING
conservation on customers.

Those who do not wish to conserve can simply pay more. I think that's fair.

 

[Duesenberg]

in terms of energy savings, privacy, fire risk, and, most importantly,
health ramifications. Thank You.

I do enjoy the chance to log on to the interent and monitor my
electrical usage per hour. I do not know if it's worth having these
meters, but that's one feature I use and approve of.

 

[Tomsic]

I'm not saying anything to the contrary of what you just said.

Yes, it's not warranted, yes they are doing it (anyways) and yes - they
are charging different rates at different times of the day (if they
didn't, they wouldn't have any basis or reason for implimenting smart
meters now would they?).


Smart meters are new (in terms of the historical time-line of equipment
and schemes used to measure residential electricity use which goes back
decades).


I wasn't aware that NJ had time-of-use billing for residential customers
50 years ago.

Those meters must have had mechanical clocks back then (any time-of-use
metering system needs to know the current time-of-day, and even date if
week-end rates are in effect). How accurate were those clocks 50 years
ago?


I would venture a guess that the difference in rates is minimal - in
terms of the percentage of load that consumers can realistically be
expected to time-shift.

The biggest factor that is under EASY control of home owners is always
going to be their air conditioning temperature setting, and that is also
going to be the last usage they are willing to sacrifice because it
involves their own comfort level (how hot and sticky are you willing to
be in your own home - if it means you'll save a measely $1 or $2 today,
and again tommorrow, and again the next day, etc).

Every day, that $1 or $2 bargain they make with themselves is worth it.
The fact that it might (or will) end up being $30 at the end of the
month is irrelavent. That's if they even know that setting the temp. to
77f vs 74f is going to cost them an extra $1.24 today.


Just like everyone is still paying $4 a gallon for gas. People are not
going to cheap-out on their thermostat setting and feel like shit in
their own house to save a measely buck a day.


And the crock of the whole situation is that the meters cost anywhere
from $500 to $1500 each, and over the lifespan of the meter it will
probably not result in home-owner cutback in electricity usage to
justify the cost of the meter in the first place.

The electric utilities are not the only ones driving the installation of
smart meters. Energy advocates like them too. The smart meters offer a way
to reduce electric utility peak loads and that means building fewer power
plants. Saving money with time-of-day metering is one thing, but the
utility's ability to shed load when they're at capacity is something that
they will pay for -- and already do -- too.

Tomsic

 

[hr(bob) hofmann]

Someone posted

"They may not warrant doing it, but utilities are doing
it and offering different rates at different times of the
day to residential customers. That is nothing new.
Here in NJ the utility was doing that 50 years ago.
The offered a substantially lower rate at night for water heaters."


We lived in NJ 50 years ago, and had a clocked water heater meter.
Only trouble was, we had so many power outages that the clock was
rarely set to the correct time and so we always had to go outside and
look at the meter to see when we could heat hot water. We didn't
complain to the power company because there was nothing they could do
except set it right and pray fopr no more power failures.

 

[clare]

$1 a day invested for 5 years at 7% compounded interest is $2 148.

$1 a day invested for 25 years a 7% compounded interest is $23 624.

Hopefully somebody will doublecheck my math.

Invest that dollar a day in a tax shelter of course to maximize returns.

Some people don't care about $365 a year in simple savings and others
do. Some people try to sacrifice and decide it's not worth it and others
stick with it.

Your point about the air conditioning is what we do at home. We like
our house cool at night and are willing to pay for it.

But WHERE do you get 7% today??? 0.7% is more realistic.

 

[Home Guy]

Overall, just nonsense.

It's a fact.

Industry experts and consumer advocates have said exactly the same
thing.

If there weren't a payback, they certainly wouldn't be doing it
just for the funsies of having something to do.

It's political.

Many utilities got grants to do it.

Like I said - they wanted to reduce their cost to read residential
meters. In the vast majority of situations, analog wheel-meters were
replaced by electronic time-of-use meters with telemetry capability.
This gave them the automation they were looking for (no more meter
readers) under the cover of the green / ecological movement (be good to
the environment and use energy responsibly and all that jazz).

Shifting usage of a _single_ residence slightly from peak to
off-peak hours won't make an impact, sure, but when 10s or 100s
of thousands do a little it can (and will) add up to a lot.

I'm telling you that if it means the difference between being
uncomfortable in your home by setting your thermostat higher in the
summer (and suffering when it's 76 degrees and 55 percent humidity) vs
setting it so you're comfortable (74 degrees and 40 percent humidity) ->
guess what people are gonna do. Even if it costs them a buck extra a
day.

People won't opt to save chump change when it means they'll be
comfortable in their homes.

All that will add up to significant savings that eventually will
impact the consumer

The whole point of time-of-use billing was to go hand-in-hand with a
competitive marketplace for electricity, but someone forgot that we
don't really have a competitive marketplace in electrical generation or
distribution.

You and I can decide whether to buy gasoline at one station or another,
on one day or another, at one price or another. Gasoline has a flexible
distribution system in that the gas refined at one plant doesn't have to
be retailed by a specific gas station nor consumed by a specific
end-customer. We don't have that when it comes to electricity, and
hence the idea that time-of-use billing completes the picture of a true
competitive marketplace for electricity is a farce.