Science!
March 7, 2012 9:12 PM Subscribe
Smart Meters Are Not a Killer Fascist Conspiracy v1.1
BC's best debunker is back on YouTube. Chris Thompson, creator of “A letter to Bill Vander Zalm”, has launched a new video campaign to debunk arguments against smart meters, which will be implemented across British Columbia over the coming year.
Former BC Premier Bill Vander Zalm, fresh from his success defeating the HST, also supports efforts to ban smart meters.
BC's best debunker is back on YouTube. Chris Thompson, creator of “A letter to Bill Vander Zalm”, has launched a new video campaign to debunk arguments against smart meters, which will be implemented across British Columbia over the coming year.
Former BC Premier Bill Vander Zalm, fresh from his success defeating the HST, also supports efforts to ban smart meters.
(But they should be open source.)
posted by bwerdmuller at 9:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by bwerdmuller at 9:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
Personally, I'm guessin' that all the woo about smart meters is being secretly funded by all the bud growers.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 9:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [16 favorites]
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 9:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [16 favorites]
I think he's right in the main, but given some models of the home and home usage, it should be possible to correlate some human activities in the home with a meter of realtime electric use, an endeavor called Power Analysis.
Whether this is worth worrying about, and whether a significant number of people concerned about this have made the mental leap and also divested themselves of: the internet, credit cards, cell phones, home phones, and video on demand services is another question.
posted by zippy at 9:41 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Whether this is worth worrying about, and whether a significant number of people concerned about this have made the mental leap and also divested themselves of: the internet, credit cards, cell phones, home phones, and video on demand services is another question.
posted by zippy at 9:41 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Yeah, the Smart Meters paranoia is flourishing here in Central Coastal California. But then, the utility that is instituting them is the same one that accidentally blew up a neighborhood in San Bruno a couple years ago, so you can expect a lot of skepticism for everything they do.
Still, Smart Meters are the New Fluoridation.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:41 PM on March 7, 2012
Still, Smart Meters are the New Fluoridation.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:41 PM on March 7, 2012
Utilities have been looking for creative ways to increase revenue and smart meters/peak rate programs are an easy way to get it. It's pretty cool technology.
This comment confuses me. How does telling you your current consumption increase revenue for utility companies? Because they can accurately charge you on your consumption, instead of some best guess?
I saw a local (California) presentation from the utility co, who talked about a future where your utilities could communicate with your smart meter, and energy-intense uses would run when the demand for energy (and the price) was lower. Sounds pretty spiffy to me.
The concern from the local alarmist was partially founded (the rush to install smart meters meant contract employees were on the clock for each installation, so there were some shoddy installs that could potentially lead to electrical fires), but mostly alarmist (oh noes, the radio frequency emissions! Data pings sent out every few minutes will make our babies mutants and give us cancer!).
Mother Jones has a nice run-down of the worries and the replies.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:51 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
This comment confuses me. How does telling you your current consumption increase revenue for utility companies? Because they can accurately charge you on your consumption, instead of some best guess?
I saw a local (California) presentation from the utility co, who talked about a future where your utilities could communicate with your smart meter, and energy-intense uses would run when the demand for energy (and the price) was lower. Sounds pretty spiffy to me.
The concern from the local alarmist was partially founded (the rush to install smart meters meant contract employees were on the clock for each installation, so there were some shoddy installs that could potentially lead to electrical fires), but mostly alarmist (oh noes, the radio frequency emissions! Data pings sent out every few minutes will make our babies mutants and give us cancer!).
Mother Jones has a nice run-down of the worries and the replies.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:51 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
My town is currently doing a smart meter trial.
Of course the letters to the editor are full of woo-woo "microwaves will kill us all" nonsense.
Me, I'm not opposed to smart meters in principle, but I'm somewhat annoyed that the real issues regarding their deployment are going to be overshadowed by "The govt will be able to turn off your appliances!".
I'd like to see my utility address the supposed benefits to a deployment of smart meters.
As near as I can tell, it's millions of dollars so we can fire some meter readers.
It's not going to make my electric bill go down (and might even cost me $400 to have the damn thing installed).
The meters themselves are relatively new, and could possibly be prone to fraud or other abuse. Let some other city experiment.
Also, like all things technological, costs are on a downward slope. In the 5 or 10 years we spend doing this, who knows how much cheaper they'll get.
I don't know, I'm not convinced, but the discussion in my town has rapidly polarized around the pseudo-science aspect.
posted by madajb at 9:59 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Of course the letters to the editor are full of woo-woo "microwaves will kill us all" nonsense.
Me, I'm not opposed to smart meters in principle, but I'm somewhat annoyed that the real issues regarding their deployment are going to be overshadowed by "The govt will be able to turn off your appliances!".
I'd like to see my utility address the supposed benefits to a deployment of smart meters.
As near as I can tell, it's millions of dollars so we can fire some meter readers.
It's not going to make my electric bill go down (and might even cost me $400 to have the damn thing installed).
The meters themselves are relatively new, and could possibly be prone to fraud or other abuse. Let some other city experiment.
Also, like all things technological, costs are on a downward slope. In the 5 or 10 years we spend doing this, who knows how much cheaper they'll get.
I don't know, I'm not convinced, but the discussion in my town has rapidly polarized around the pseudo-science aspect.
posted by madajb at 9:59 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
This comment confuses me. How does telling you your current consumption increase revenue for utility companies? Because they can accurately charge you on your consumption, instead of some best guess?
Smart meters are coupled with peak pricing programs that charge higher rates during times like heat waves. They even out usage somewhat and increase revenue. It's a lot easier than lobbying for a across-the-board rate hike.
posted by michaelh at 10:00 PM on March 7, 2012
Smart meters are coupled with peak pricing programs that charge higher rates during times like heat waves. They even out usage somewhat and increase revenue. It's a lot easier than lobbying for a across-the-board rate hike.
posted by michaelh at 10:00 PM on March 7, 2012
It's not going to make my electric bill go down
Not, but you might when you look at the data from your meter and you're like, "Holy shit, why in god's name are we turning the aircon on at 3pm, it wastes so much money!".
Increasing transparency, for producer and consumer, will result in increased efficiencies, and smart meters are a critical component of having a smart grid, which is going to be crucial to deal with both future electricity demand, and climate change. I'm all for em.
posted by smoke at 10:14 PM on March 7, 2012 [15 favorites]
Not, but you might when you look at the data from your meter and you're like, "Holy shit, why in god's name are we turning the aircon on at 3pm, it wastes so much money!".
Increasing transparency, for producer and consumer, will result in increased efficiencies, and smart meters are a critical component of having a smart grid, which is going to be crucial to deal with both future electricity demand, and climate change. I'm all for em.
posted by smoke at 10:14 PM on March 7, 2012 [15 favorites]
We have a similar campaign run by idiots and charlatans in Melbourne. Ours are wirelessly enabled, so on the list of lunacy is something something EMFs.
As our electricity prices are highly regulated, and are entirely transparent, I am absolutely all for them. If I can get cheaper power in the middle of the night, but have to pay through my arse to turn the airconditioning on when it's 38 degrees outside, I'm all for that.
Also, I have a grid connected solar installation, and I fully expect nay demand to be given metric wadloads of cash when it's hot. Yay for capitalism!
posted by wilful at 10:18 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
As our electricity prices are highly regulated, and are entirely transparent, I am absolutely all for them. If I can get cheaper power in the middle of the night, but have to pay through my arse to turn the airconditioning on when it's 38 degrees outside, I'm all for that.
Also, I have a grid connected solar installation, and I fully expect nay demand to be given metric wadloads of cash when it's hot. Yay for capitalism!
posted by wilful at 10:18 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Both Google and Microsoft discontinued their smart meter projects in the same week of June 2011. So, either a) the private sector decided it really wasn't worth the investment or b) <INSERT BIG GUVMENT CONSPIRACY THEORY HERE>.
posted by rh at 10:19 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by rh at 10:19 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
One of the things that has saddened me most about Canada's Green Party is their willingness to climb aboard the anti-smart meter train. It's a bad sign that their regional strategy is transforming them into a regionalist populist party, that is willing to throw out genuinely useful conservation strategies like peak-hour billing in favour of unscientific popular sentiment.
posted by mek at 10:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [18 favorites]
posted by mek at 10:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [18 favorites]
Not, but you might when you look at the data from your meter and you're like, "Holy shit, why in god's name are we turning the aircon on at 3pm, it wastes so much money!".
Which would be completely awesome, except the model they are currently using provides no facility for the consumer to access the data directly, and far as I can tell, the utility has no plans to increase granularity on the billing side.
Another point that is lost in the killler radio waves fight. I'd love to have something I could interface with my home lan. Hell, even one of those models with a standalone receiver that blinks red when your electric use goes over a predetermined threshold.
posted by madajb at 10:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
Which would be completely awesome, except the model they are currently using provides no facility for the consumer to access the data directly, and far as I can tell, the utility has no plans to increase granularity on the billing side.
Another point that is lost in the killler radio waves fight. I'd love to have something I could interface with my home lan. Hell, even one of those models with a standalone receiver that blinks red when your electric use goes over a predetermined threshold.
posted by madajb at 10:21 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
Both Google and Microsoft discontinued their smart meter projects in the same week of June 2011.
It's almost like there was going to be some huge climate change / energy bill initiative which crumbled into nothingness sometime in 2011. I can barely remember anything about it, though.
posted by mek at 10:25 PM on March 7, 2012 [5 favorites]
It's almost like there was going to be some huge climate change / energy bill initiative which crumbled into nothingness sometime in 2011. I can barely remember anything about it, though.
posted by mek at 10:25 PM on March 7, 2012 [5 favorites]
people against smart meters are against markets and informed choices.
posted by wilful at 10:26 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by wilful at 10:26 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Its a good system when implemented properly, I just don't trust the motives for anything the BC Liberals and their pet corporations (no wait, its the other way around) do anymore. I can't believe, even a little, that energy usage was what started the push for these things. Someone's gonna be making a lot more money and it ain't going to be coming out of thin air.
New UPass? A cheaper medium with fewer security features that they charge us more for while conveniently LACKING THE FUCKING MAG STRIPE TO BE USED IN THE NEW FAREGATES.
New Transit Plan? A way of cutting down on the 'under used' routes regardless of time (like fucking rush hour) as they begin wailing about TOO MANY PEOPLE found to be wanting to use transit even with the new and 'improved' transit schedules. Hello?! Is anyone home?! Its your job to move people? You don't want to do your job, I'll vote for a government that takes it away from your bloated corporate hands.
New transit fares? There are more people than ever using transit! How are you running more of a deficit after rearranging service towards the main corridors?! Madness... no wonder the mayors want a complete audit of Translink. Something's damn rotten in there.
Bike lanes. Not BC Liberals or assoc. per se, but goddamn it that was a dangerous waste of time and money.
More tower developments? Lets take a quick peak at the buildings we've allowed to be built first, eh? Perhaps another attempt to fill Olympic Village. Or use that trolley line they've let go to rust after a month of use.
Graaaaaaarg. These people are not 'liberals' as painted by American (and some Canadian) media. They are not progressives in the least.
posted by Slackermagee at 10:31 PM on March 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
New UPass? A cheaper medium with fewer security features that they charge us more for while conveniently LACKING THE FUCKING MAG STRIPE TO BE USED IN THE NEW FAREGATES.
New Transit Plan? A way of cutting down on the 'under used' routes regardless of time (like fucking rush hour) as they begin wailing about TOO MANY PEOPLE found to be wanting to use transit even with the new and 'improved' transit schedules. Hello?! Is anyone home?! Its your job to move people? You don't want to do your job, I'll vote for a government that takes it away from your bloated corporate hands.
New transit fares? There are more people than ever using transit! How are you running more of a deficit after rearranging service towards the main corridors?! Madness... no wonder the mayors want a complete audit of Translink. Something's damn rotten in there.
Bike lanes. Not BC Liberals or assoc. per se, but goddamn it that was a dangerous waste of time and money.
More tower developments? Lets take a quick peak at the buildings we've allowed to be built first, eh? Perhaps another attempt to fill Olympic Village. Or use that trolley line they've let go to rust after a month of use.
Graaaaaaarg. These people are not 'liberals' as painted by American (and some Canadian) media. They are not progressives in the least.
posted by Slackermagee at 10:31 PM on March 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
I've got nothing against the new bike lanes in Vancouver, but they do seem to be a little dangerous for pedestrians.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:35 PM on March 7, 2012
posted by KokuRyu at 10:35 PM on March 7, 2012
Once again, North Americans are in a tither over a technology which has been successfully installed and operated in Europe for years.
Vattenfall in Sweden installed smart meters across Sweden a few years ago - my building has them - and the results have been.... : (pdf).
* 1 July 2009 Sweden will move to monthly billing with actual consumption. Extrapolation will not be allowed.
* The purpose with the meter stipulations is to give the customers a better understanding of their invoice based on real meter values instead of estimated.
* Time to correct the billing and settlement will be shortened from 13 months to 2 months. Lead time for exporting meter readings to suppliers is shortened from 30 days to 5 days.
* Monthly reading instead of once a year
* Power outages - which basically never happen - reported immediately.
The biggest difference I notice is that my monthly bills actually seem to correlate to the past month's use which helps me to moderate my consumption.
posted by three blind mice at 10:43 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
Vattenfall in Sweden installed smart meters across Sweden a few years ago - my building has them - and the results have been.... : (pdf).
* 1 July 2009 Sweden will move to monthly billing with actual consumption. Extrapolation will not be allowed.
* The purpose with the meter stipulations is to give the customers a better understanding of their invoice based on real meter values instead of estimated.
* Time to correct the billing and settlement will be shortened from 13 months to 2 months. Lead time for exporting meter readings to suppliers is shortened from 30 days to 5 days.
* Monthly reading instead of once a year
* Power outages - which basically never happen - reported immediately.
The biggest difference I notice is that my monthly bills actually seem to correlate to the past month's use which helps me to moderate my consumption.
posted by three blind mice at 10:43 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
It kills me - I mean, ROTFLMAO - to think of how many of the anti-smartmeter crowd are also against big oil and large-scale industrialization of energy generation.
Not doing the math, there.
posted by armoir from antproof case at 10:58 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Not doing the math, there.
posted by armoir from antproof case at 10:58 PM on March 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
I wish they'd go over to who.org and enter the following terms for search criteria:
2-b potential carcinogen "smart meter"
posted by armoir from antproof case at 11:08 PM on March 7, 2012
2-b potential carcinogen "smart meter"
posted by armoir from antproof case at 11:08 PM on March 7, 2012
* 1 July 2009 Sweden will move to monthly billing with actual consumption. Extrapolation will not be allowed.
* The purpose with the meter stipulations is to give the customers a better understanding of their invoice based on real meter values instead of estimated.
* Time to correct the billing and settlement will be shortened from 13 months to 2 months. Lead time for exporting meter readings to suppliers is shortened from 30 days to 5 days.
* Monthly reading instead of once a year
* Power outages - which basically never happen - reported immediately.
I get monthly readings and billing from my old-fashioned analog meter. They were only doing it once a year in Sweden?
Yeah, I can see how smart meters would be an improvement over that.
posted by madajb at 11:32 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
* The purpose with the meter stipulations is to give the customers a better understanding of their invoice based on real meter values instead of estimated.
* Time to correct the billing and settlement will be shortened from 13 months to 2 months. Lead time for exporting meter readings to suppliers is shortened from 30 days to 5 days.
* Monthly reading instead of once a year
* Power outages - which basically never happen - reported immediately.
I get monthly readings and billing from my old-fashioned analog meter. They were only doing it once a year in Sweden?
Yeah, I can see how smart meters would be an improvement over that.
posted by madajb at 11:32 PM on March 7, 2012 [3 favorites]
Slackermagee — it sounds like you're living in Vancouver. And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't transit a municipal responsibility? And zoning for development would be the same? That should be on Greg Robertson, not Christy Clark.
I also just absolutely love how this debate appears to have forgotten about estimated bills every second month and how much people love griping about them when they're high.
posted by pengu at 11:40 PM on March 7, 2012
I also just absolutely love how this debate appears to have forgotten about estimated bills every second month and how much people love griping about them when they're high.
posted by pengu at 11:40 PM on March 7, 2012
I'm sending you all tinfoil hats to protect you because clearly your minds are muddled by radio waves and chem trails.
posted by chapps at 12:28 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by chapps at 12:28 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
They were only doing it once a year in Sweden? Yeah, I can see how smart meters would be an improvement over that.
They do it every month since 2009 - even if you have analog meters. It is a punishment for not upgrading customers to the smart meters.
Also as you know madajb, electricity customers here get to choose from a variety of suppliers. Having more accurate and timely measures of use helps alternative energy because they can more accurately estimate next months demand and get paid for last month's use.
In a region where a lot of power is generated from hydroelectric, it helps to know how much water will be needed to release from the dam - and when it makes sense to buy power from traditional sources to pump it back up.
posted by three blind mice at 1:04 AM on March 8, 2012
They do it every month since 2009 - even if you have analog meters. It is a punishment for not upgrading customers to the smart meters.
Also as you know madajb, electricity customers here get to choose from a variety of suppliers. Having more accurate and timely measures of use helps alternative energy because they can more accurately estimate next months demand and get paid for last month's use.
In a region where a lot of power is generated from hydroelectric, it helps to know how much water will be needed to release from the dam - and when it makes sense to buy power from traditional sources to pump it back up.
posted by three blind mice at 1:04 AM on March 8, 2012
Its a good system when implemented properly, I just don't trust the motives for anything the BC Liberals and their pet corporations (no wait, its the other way around) do anymore. I can't believe, even a little, that energy usage was what started the push for these things. Someone's gonna be making a lot more money and it ain't going to be coming out of thin air.
Reducing domestic usage would free up capacity for the unregulated wholesale market, but I'm not sure how that would affect hydro's bottom line.
It's sickening how this sort of issue (and HST, oh my god) gets driven by the local media. I grew up in Vancouver and miss it dearly but every time I visit it reminds me that at least I don't have to watch the news hour any more
posted by Pre-Taped Call In Show at 1:46 AM on March 8, 2012
Reducing domestic usage would free up capacity for the unregulated wholesale market, but I'm not sure how that would affect hydro's bottom line.
It's sickening how this sort of issue (and HST, oh my god) gets driven by the local media. I grew up in Vancouver and miss it dearly but every time I visit it reminds me that at least I don't have to watch the news hour any more
posted by Pre-Taped Call In Show at 1:46 AM on March 8, 2012
I think I would be happy to live in a country with so few problems that the most serious thing people can find to complain about is supposed danger of their electricity meters.
posted by rongorongo at 1:55 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by rongorongo at 1:55 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
The first big chunk of the video is just complaining about people complaining about him, which is not that interesting.
It isn't like these smart meters are really going to help the environment that much. If you hook a solar panelup to your home power connection (using a grid tie inverter), and you have an old analog meter, the meter will actually run backwards if you you're using less electricity then you're generating, without anyone doing anything 'special'
So, using a old analog meter gets you net metering for free, without any special setup from the power company, while a modern one will only do it if the power company sets it up for you.
In the video, the guy calls his meter a "greedy meter", because even though he is sending power back into the grid, he's not getting credit for it. I don't know if there is a 1:1 mapping between greedy meters and "smart meters", since there are probably digital meters which are not "smart"
The fear of microwaves is of course pretty bizarre, the meters would only be giving off a tiny amount. The privacy issues are interesting, though. They concern is apparently that the power companies will be able to tell when you're up and about, and when you're not using power (i.e. asleep) I can see why people would be unnerved by that.
posted by delmoi at 2:07 AM on March 8, 2012
It isn't like these smart meters are really going to help the environment that much. If you hook a solar panelup to your home power connection (using a grid tie inverter), and you have an old analog meter, the meter will actually run backwards if you you're using less electricity then you're generating, without anyone doing anything 'special'
So, using a old analog meter gets you net metering for free, without any special setup from the power company, while a modern one will only do it if the power company sets it up for you.
In the video, the guy calls his meter a "greedy meter", because even though he is sending power back into the grid, he's not getting credit for it. I don't know if there is a 1:1 mapping between greedy meters and "smart meters", since there are probably digital meters which are not "smart"
The fear of microwaves is of course pretty bizarre, the meters would only be giving off a tiny amount. The privacy issues are interesting, though. They concern is apparently that the power companies will be able to tell when you're up and about, and when you're not using power (i.e. asleep) I can see why people would be unnerved by that.
posted by delmoi at 2:07 AM on March 8, 2012
Actually, the privacy concerns are a bit worse than that [pdf].
When you combine a power profile with stories such as this:
- Target learns of teen pregnancy before father
- Credit card companies supposedly predict divorce two years out
It's easy to see why people are concerned. A power profile, coupled with say, a double click profile, or a buying profile would likely reveal far more than people would feel comfortable with. I'm not against smart meters, but the author of this video does not do justice to the legitimate privacy concerns which are documented.
posted by yeahwhatever at 3:25 AM on March 8, 2012 [4 favorites]
When you combine a power profile with stories such as this:
- Target learns of teen pregnancy before father
- Credit card companies supposedly predict divorce two years out
It's easy to see why people are concerned. A power profile, coupled with say, a double click profile, or a buying profile would likely reveal far more than people would feel comfortable with. I'm not against smart meters, but the author of this video does not do justice to the legitimate privacy concerns which are documented.
posted by yeahwhatever at 3:25 AM on March 8, 2012 [4 favorites]
Love ours in Kitchener, Ontario. Accurate usage down to the hour is visible online and our bill has dropped with the time-of-use billing as we no longer use most appliances except off peak. Our distribution utility is city owned.
Also the old meter required them to come inside the house every other month, which was annoying for all concerned.
win!
posted by seanmpuckett at 3:36 AM on March 8, 2012 [2 favorites]
Also the old meter required them to come inside the house every other month, which was annoying for all concerned.
win!
posted by seanmpuckett at 3:36 AM on March 8, 2012 [2 favorites]
the legitimate privacy concerns which are documented.
What? Like people driving by seeing your electric lights on at 2AM and wondering what you're up to? The use of electric power is not a right and your privacy concerns are not my privacy concerns.
Unplug from the grid and any concern you have about privacy disappears. That way the rest of us can enjoy a modernized electric distribution system without interfering with you. Everyone wins.
posted by three blind mice at 3:42 AM on March 8, 2012 [3 favorites]
What? Like people driving by seeing your electric lights on at 2AM and wondering what you're up to? The use of electric power is not a right and your privacy concerns are not my privacy concerns.
Unplug from the grid and any concern you have about privacy disappears. That way the rest of us can enjoy a modernized electric distribution system without interfering with you. Everyone wins.
posted by three blind mice at 3:42 AM on March 8, 2012 [3 favorites]
This comment confuses me. How does telling you your current consumption increase revenue for utility companies? Because they can accurately charge you on your consumption, instead of some best guess?
I would have thought it more likely that revenue doesn't increase but there are more ways to reduce costs for the utilities and that they make more of a profit from the revenue, when in a meaningfully regulated industry some (or most) of these cost reductions should be passed to the consumer. Much of where the costs and savings end up will depend on the model for smart meters where you live. Most of Europe sees them rolled out by the distribution network operators, effectively making them part of the grid management structure, which probably means that the costs are more likely to get passed on since the DNOs are regulated monopolies and are barred from milking improvements for ever. In the UK the supply companies are leading the smart meter roll out (all UK gas and electricity meters to be smart by 2019, most will be done by 2016) and this offers the supply companies the opportunity to milk it good. Does anyone know how this will be set up in the US?
There are lots of other issues with SM, not least the variation in smartness of the meters they are capable of, but also:
Whether your electricity supply industry has meaningful regulation which will (1) allow utilities (new or existing) to bring more energy services to the market (2) allow them to make a profit from doing so. (Energy services might include keeping your house warm rather than just flogging as much energy as possible, giving them an incentive to minimise energy use. they might also include Demand Side Response wherein you might opt to have someone manage when your washing machine runs, electric car charges, etc.)
Whether the public responds to these new services and gets on board, or can't be arsed, in which case, there will be less innovation, less changes to network management, less carbon saving, less energy saving and the grid will be less smart.
I saw a local (California) presentation from the utility co, who talked about a future where your utilities could communicate with your smart meter, and energy-intense uses would run when the demand for energy (and the price) was lower. Sounds pretty spiffy to me.
Highly intensive energy users will already be managing their energy use, have much more in the way of tariffs to incentivise variability and the transmission grid (which they may well connect to directly) is way smarter than the distribution grids in most places, because the transmission people generally already have to worry about power and grid management more than distribution networks.
What smart grids will allow (hopefully with smart meters working as a key part of them) is for all users to manage (or be managed) such that they can minimise their energy costs and provide grid management benefits which will make the system as a whole cheaper. Potentially aggregators will be able to manage demand side response at the local level such that they will switch off things which are non-urgent and then sell this aggregated managed capacity reduction to the grid operator as part of local grid balancing (By balancing I basically mean ensuring available generation matches demand.) this would offer you cost reduction benefits through the aggregator.
What you do have to remember is that all of these things are becoming increasingly necessary as key future energy drivers such as greater levels of intermittent wind and PV, more small-scale energy generation connected at the distribution level, and potentially big jumps in local demand driven by heat pumps and electric cars will make grid management far more challenging than has historically been the case. These drivers will push energy prices up in themselves and require significant infrastructure expenditure which will also cost, so bills are going to be going up. Smart grids are really a way to try and mitigate those costs. How they actually develop over time and what they look like will probably vary depending on national approaches to them, how different publics react, political will and lots of other variables, and notably, what the state of the system is that you start with. Some smart grids will be smarter than others. The whole thing is pretty fascinating but horribly complex. Very definitely spiffy potential.
posted by biffa at 4:15 AM on March 8, 2012 [3 favorites]
I would have thought it more likely that revenue doesn't increase but there are more ways to reduce costs for the utilities and that they make more of a profit from the revenue, when in a meaningfully regulated industry some (or most) of these cost reductions should be passed to the consumer. Much of where the costs and savings end up will depend on the model for smart meters where you live. Most of Europe sees them rolled out by the distribution network operators, effectively making them part of the grid management structure, which probably means that the costs are more likely to get passed on since the DNOs are regulated monopolies and are barred from milking improvements for ever. In the UK the supply companies are leading the smart meter roll out (all UK gas and electricity meters to be smart by 2019, most will be done by 2016) and this offers the supply companies the opportunity to milk it good. Does anyone know how this will be set up in the US?
There are lots of other issues with SM, not least the variation in smartness of the meters they are capable of, but also:
Whether your electricity supply industry has meaningful regulation which will (1) allow utilities (new or existing) to bring more energy services to the market (2) allow them to make a profit from doing so. (Energy services might include keeping your house warm rather than just flogging as much energy as possible, giving them an incentive to minimise energy use. they might also include Demand Side Response wherein you might opt to have someone manage when your washing machine runs, electric car charges, etc.)
Whether the public responds to these new services and gets on board, or can't be arsed, in which case, there will be less innovation, less changes to network management, less carbon saving, less energy saving and the grid will be less smart.
I saw a local (California) presentation from the utility co, who talked about a future where your utilities could communicate with your smart meter, and energy-intense uses would run when the demand for energy (and the price) was lower. Sounds pretty spiffy to me.
Highly intensive energy users will already be managing their energy use, have much more in the way of tariffs to incentivise variability and the transmission grid (which they may well connect to directly) is way smarter than the distribution grids in most places, because the transmission people generally already have to worry about power and grid management more than distribution networks.
What smart grids will allow (hopefully with smart meters working as a key part of them) is for all users to manage (or be managed) such that they can minimise their energy costs and provide grid management benefits which will make the system as a whole cheaper. Potentially aggregators will be able to manage demand side response at the local level such that they will switch off things which are non-urgent and then sell this aggregated managed capacity reduction to the grid operator as part of local grid balancing (By balancing I basically mean ensuring available generation matches demand.) this would offer you cost reduction benefits through the aggregator.
What you do have to remember is that all of these things are becoming increasingly necessary as key future energy drivers such as greater levels of intermittent wind and PV, more small-scale energy generation connected at the distribution level, and potentially big jumps in local demand driven by heat pumps and electric cars will make grid management far more challenging than has historically been the case. These drivers will push energy prices up in themselves and require significant infrastructure expenditure which will also cost, so bills are going to be going up. Smart grids are really a way to try and mitigate those costs. How they actually develop over time and what they look like will probably vary depending on national approaches to them, how different publics react, political will and lots of other variables, and notably, what the state of the system is that you start with. Some smart grids will be smarter than others. The whole thing is pretty fascinating but horribly complex. Very definitely spiffy potential.
posted by biffa at 4:15 AM on March 8, 2012 [3 favorites]
I think I would be happy to live in a country with so few problems that the most serious thing people can find to complain about is supposed danger of their electricity meters.
I would love to live in a country where people are so enlightened that people driving drunk, shooting themselves with "unloaded" firearms and otherwise dying after saying, "Hey y'all, look what I can do." We could have radioactive rabid jackals in the streets and people would still be freaking out about the supposed dangers of their electricity meters and coming up with hypothetical cases where you'd be better off not wearing your seat-belts.
The concern is apparently that the power companies will be able to tell when you're up and about, and when you're not using power (i.e. asleep) I can see why people would be unnerved by that.
If my biggest electricity consuming appliances weren't tied to automatic systems, or if my washer and dryer used different electrons than my kitchen appliances used different electrons that my computer, I could understand their concern. As it is they'll have a fraction of the data as the lady across the street who can watch the lights go on and off IN INDIVIDUAL ROOMS!
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 4:20 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
I would love to live in a country where people are so enlightened that people driving drunk, shooting themselves with "unloaded" firearms and otherwise dying after saying, "Hey y'all, look what I can do." We could have radioactive rabid jackals in the streets and people would still be freaking out about the supposed dangers of their electricity meters and coming up with hypothetical cases where you'd be better off not wearing your seat-belts.
The concern is apparently that the power companies will be able to tell when you're up and about, and when you're not using power (i.e. asleep) I can see why people would be unnerved by that.
If my biggest electricity consuming appliances weren't tied to automatic systems, or if my washer and dryer used different electrons than my kitchen appliances used different electrons that my computer, I could understand their concern. As it is they'll have a fraction of the data as the lady across the street who can watch the lights go on and off IN INDIVIDUAL ROOMS!
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 4:20 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
It isn't like these smart meters are really going to help the environment that much.
Smart grids will enable the rollout of GW scale wind and other technologies. Whether smart meters make a difference to the whole thing depends on getting a pile of things like regulation and policy for demand side response and capacity management right.
If you hook a solar panelup to your home power connection (using a grid tie inverter), and you have an old analog meter, the meter will actually run backwards if you you're using less electricity then you're generating, without anyone doing anything 'special'
But that's not necessarily that desirable since it implies a tariff equal to the retail price of electricity, which means
(1) The general consumer will be providing too much subsidy for some micro-renewables and too little for others.
(2) Its impossible to reduce tariffs over time for new systems in order to pass on cost reductions in the technology.
(3) Price fluctuations for electricity will potentially undermine the economics of the installation.
All of these things are not good practice in renewable energy policy design.
posted by biffa at 4:25 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
Smart grids will enable the rollout of GW scale wind and other technologies. Whether smart meters make a difference to the whole thing depends on getting a pile of things like regulation and policy for demand side response and capacity management right.
If you hook a solar panelup to your home power connection (using a grid tie inverter), and you have an old analog meter, the meter will actually run backwards if you you're using less electricity then you're generating, without anyone doing anything 'special'
But that's not necessarily that desirable since it implies a tariff equal to the retail price of electricity, which means
(1) The general consumer will be providing too much subsidy for some micro-renewables and too little for others.
(2) Its impossible to reduce tariffs over time for new systems in order to pass on cost reductions in the technology.
(3) Price fluctuations for electricity will potentially undermine the economics of the installation.
All of these things are not good practice in renewable energy policy design.
posted by biffa at 4:25 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
I would be much more enthusiastic about smart meters if they weren't being installed and managed by my stupid utility company.
posted by RandlePatrickMcMurphy at 4:40 AM on March 8, 2012
posted by RandlePatrickMcMurphy at 4:40 AM on March 8, 2012
Once again, North Americans are in a tither over a technology which has been successfully installed and operated in Europe for years.
Ah, but you see, the Europeans have been brainwashed over generations to be wretched socialist serfs, to submit to indignities ranging from tax-funded healthcare to having to share high-speed train carriages with strangers. They don't even have their own guns, for God's sake!
posted by acb at 4:51 AM on March 8, 2012 [2 favorites]
Ah, but you see, the Europeans have been brainwashed over generations to be wretched socialist serfs, to submit to indignities ranging from tax-funded healthcare to having to share high-speed train carriages with strangers. They don't even have their own guns, for God's sake!
posted by acb at 4:51 AM on March 8, 2012 [2 favorites]
I'm down for smart meters but Con Ed has trouble even installing a regular meter so
posted by fuq at 4:53 AM on March 8, 2012
posted by fuq at 4:53 AM on March 8, 2012
One more point not covered by biffa above: Suppliers generally buy energy on the wholesale market in advance - e.g. on the day before - based on their estimate of customers' consumption, and the actual cost is settled at a later date, after final data becomes available. Market rules penalize bad estimates (i.e. requesting too much or too little energy), so it's very important to have good data on customer activity for short-term prediction of expected load.
posted by Dr Dracator at 5:03 AM on March 8, 2012
posted by Dr Dracator at 5:03 AM on March 8, 2012
Mother Jones: You may soon be able to automatically program your dryer, for example, to run when electricity is cheapest.
biffa: the meters ... will... allow utilities... to bring more energy services to the market... Energy services might include... Demand Side Response wherein you might opt to have someone manage when your washing machine runs
I'm not getting how this is supposed to work. Does a smart meter come with a robotic household assistant that's going to load my washing machine and fold the dry laundry while I'm not at home or in the middle of the night?
posted by jon1270 at 5:04 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
biffa: the meters ... will... allow utilities... to bring more energy services to the market... Energy services might include... Demand Side Response wherein you might opt to have someone manage when your washing machine runs
I'm not getting how this is supposed to work. Does a smart meter come with a robotic household assistant that's going to load my washing machine and fold the dry laundry while I'm not at home or in the middle of the night?
posted by jon1270 at 5:04 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
One suggestion is that some appliances in your home do not need to sue electricity at particular times. So you might have two buttons on your washing machine, tumble dryer, dish washer, etc and if you press button A then it wahes immediately, and if you press button B then it washes between now and tomorrow. If you do not feel you will ever need button B then you wouldn't sign up for the tariff which might cost less because you have more access to lower prices, plus your utility can sell capacity management to the network operator. So if you object to having your washing stay in the machine for a few hours then fine, but I think many people aren't bothered by that. They mght still not be bothered to sign up for this kind of alternative tariff of course, in which case this element of smart grids will not happen. The degree of public engagement with SM and demand side response (DSR) is a big unknown that will impact on adoption of the technology.
Other examples of DSR are heating your house and running your fridge. Energy efficient fridges don't need power all the time and could be switched off when power is expected to be most costly and then turned on again later. Again, the hope is allowing this to happen could be rewarded with lower prices; getting the regulation and incentives right for this again be crucial in shaping whether and how changes happen (or don't).
posted by biffa at 5:25 AM on March 8, 2012
Other examples of DSR are heating your house and running your fridge. Energy efficient fridges don't need power all the time and could be switched off when power is expected to be most costly and then turned on again later. Again, the hope is allowing this to happen could be rewarded with lower prices; getting the regulation and incentives right for this again be crucial in shaping whether and how changes happen (or don't).
posted by biffa at 5:25 AM on March 8, 2012
I wrote this a few months ago to explain the real reason why the Smart Grid (and smart meters) are such a big thing.
And it does address some of the paranoia.
I'm not getting how this is supposed to work. Does a smart meter come with a robotic household assistant that's going to load my washing machine and fold the dry laundry while I'm not at home or in the middle of the night?
You load your washer. You press a few buttons. And it waits a few hours before starting up. That's all.
posted by ocschwar at 5:39 AM on March 8, 2012 [2 favorites]
And it does address some of the paranoia.
I'm not getting how this is supposed to work. Does a smart meter come with a robotic household assistant that's going to load my washing machine and fold the dry laundry while I'm not at home or in the middle of the night?
You load your washer. You press a few buttons. And it waits a few hours before starting up. That's all.
posted by ocschwar at 5:39 AM on March 8, 2012 [2 favorites]
I would be much more enthusiastic about smart meters if they weren't being installed and managed by my stupid utility company.
I'm surprised to see that people hate Pepco even more than they hate PG&E. I'd have thought that PG&E's blowing up of a town would count for more.
posted by rtha at 5:59 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
I'm surprised to see that people hate Pepco even more than they hate PG&E. I'd have thought that PG&E's blowing up of a town would count for more.
posted by rtha at 5:59 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
Our electricity is 6c/Kwh between 7pm and 7am, and all day on weekends and holidays. Other times It's either 11c or 13c. The smart meter reports hourly usage back to the utility. It doesn't have any robots or controls. It's just a meter.
So we do laundry (electric dryer vented inside in the winter, outside in summer) and bake/roast on the weekends and I run the dishwasher just before bed. We have a bathroom space heater but that's used for showers in the evening or morning so it's off-peak also. We don't fret about cooktop or kettle usage, it's just a few minutes anyway. We don't have AC. Our water and home are heated with natural gas.
And that's how we save money with time-of use billing.
posted by seanmpuckett at 6:01 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
So we do laundry (electric dryer vented inside in the winter, outside in summer) and bake/roast on the weekends and I run the dishwasher just before bed. We have a bathroom space heater but that's used for showers in the evening or morning so it's off-peak also. We don't fret about cooktop or kettle usage, it's just a few minutes anyway. We don't have AC. Our water and home are heated with natural gas.
And that's how we save money with time-of use billing.
posted by seanmpuckett at 6:01 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
My problem with smart meters is not with the meters themselves, but the way that many of them were funded in the US - through the ARRA.
ARRA was supposed to be a program to put people back to work, to create jobs, and to re-build the public infrastructure of America. Instead it became this pork barrel for corporations.
The ARRA funded over $11 billion dollars in smart meters in the US. Electrical meters are not a public infrastructure - they are owned by the electric companies. Companies like Con Edison in New York are hugely profittable, powerful corporations. These meters were installed by existing workers. There is absolutely no evidence of a single job being created by the ARRA grant money.
The power companies can meter their power however they want - BUT US TAXPAYERS SHOULD NOT FUND THE PROGRAM WITH MONEY THAT IS SUPPOSED TO HELP CREATE JOBS.
posted by Flood at 6:32 AM on March 8, 2012
ARRA was supposed to be a program to put people back to work, to create jobs, and to re-build the public infrastructure of America. Instead it became this pork barrel for corporations.
The ARRA funded over $11 billion dollars in smart meters in the US. Electrical meters are not a public infrastructure - they are owned by the electric companies. Companies like Con Edison in New York are hugely profittable, powerful corporations. These meters were installed by existing workers. There is absolutely no evidence of a single job being created by the ARRA grant money.
The power companies can meter their power however they want - BUT US TAXPAYERS SHOULD NOT FUND THE PROGRAM WITH MONEY THAT IS SUPPOSED TO HELP CREATE JOBS.
posted by Flood at 6:32 AM on March 8, 2012
It's good to be reminded now and then that Canadians can be as whacky and neurotic as Americans.
posted by deathpanels at 6:40 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by deathpanels at 6:40 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
yeahwhatever: It's easy to see why people are concerned.
No, it's not. Is it because they know nothing about where their electricity comes from, or about how their local utilities are managed? Or are they just paranoid?
oschwar: (from the linked article) One of the biggest problems we have in this country is a lot of people who think they are "rugged individualists" but are in fact incredibly pampered consumers, and who think their actions do not affect others.
I'm going with this, and a soupcon unreasoning paranoia.
posted by sneebler at 7:07 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
No, it's not. Is it because they know nothing about where their electricity comes from, or about how their local utilities are managed? Or are they just paranoid?
oschwar: (from the linked article) One of the biggest problems we have in this country is a lot of people who think they are "rugged individualists" but are in fact incredibly pampered consumers, and who think their actions do not affect others.
I'm going with this, and a soupcon unreasoning paranoia.
posted by sneebler at 7:07 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
My problem with smart meters is not with the meters themselves, but the way that many of them were funded in the US - through the ARRA.Not only that, they'll actually be getting rid of meter-reading jobs.
ARRA was supposed to be a program to put people back to work, to create jobs, and to re-build the public infrastructure of America. Instead it became this pork barrel for corporations.
What? Like people driving by seeing your electric lights on at 2AM and wondering what you're up to? The use of electric power is not a right and your privacy concerns are not my privacy concerns.What?
First of all, there is a huge difference from driving by and seeing an individuals lights on, and being able to monitor the windows of every single house in the city, all at once, and all the time.
Second of all, you don't need these meters to conserve energy overall, only to save power companies money by letting them charge more for peak hours.
Third of all, as I pointed out, digital meters won't let you feed energy back into the grid "by default", if you have solar panels setup. So they are actually a step backwards in that sense, as far providing incentives for rooftop power. Unless the power companies specifically allow net metering, which they won't do unless you can get the local government to mandate it.
Anyway, I've always thought houses should all have huge batteries installed anyway. That way, they'd be able to draw power at any time, and store it. There wouldn't be any privacy concerns in that case, and they would work with solar panels.
That's probably not at all cost-effective, though.
What you do have to remember is that all of these things are becoming increasingly necessary as key future energy drivers such as greater levels of intermittent wind and PV, more small-scale energy generation connected at the distribution level, and potentially big jumps in local demand driven by heat pumps and electric cars will make grid management far more challenging than has historically been the case.Only if you also have net metering, at least to the point of being able to put energy back into the grid and take it out at night.
Support for coordinating everyone's air conditioners, electric car chargers and so on would be helpful, but a smart meter alone isn't capable of doing that, you need more devices. And those devices could communicate directly with the power company, you wouldn't need a smart meter.
The other thing: I believe (but I'm not sure about) some of these smart meters charge you based on power factor, rather then actual energy consumed. In some cases that means you can get charged more for CFL bulbs then you would with a normal meter. I saw a video of someone showing how a CFL bulb on a dimmer has a higher power factor, so with a smart meter you get charged more, even though the actual energy used is not as high.
If my biggest electricity consuming appliances weren't tied to automatic systems, or if my washer and dryer used different electrons than my kitchen appliances used different electrons that my computer, I could understand their concern. As it is they'll have a fraction of the data as the lady across the street who can watch the lights go on and off IN INDIVIDUAL ROOMS!First of all, I'm pretty sure you could figure out which devices were running on your own power network by carefully analyzing the changes in power draw. People have been able to, for example, extract decryption keys from computers by looking at how much energy they were using, since various CPU instructions used different amounts of energy depending on the parameters.
That isn't to say smart meters are going to do be doing that, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.
Our electricity is 6c/Kwh between 7pm and 7am, and all day on weekends and holidays. Other times It's either 11c or 13c. The smart meter reports hourly usage back to the utility. It doesn't have any robots or controls. It's just a meter.I think part of the resistance that people are putting up is that they just don't want to deal with that. It's just adding more complexity to their lives. Not only will they have to think about what time they call someone, but also what time they'll use various electronic devices. Stuff that handles that for you (i.e. devices that coordinate air conditioners, dryers, etc) makes your life simpler, but simply adding a smart meter by itself makes your life more complex, and those extra features aren't available for people right now anyway.
So we do laundry (electric dryer vented inside in the winter, outside in summer) and bake/roast on the weekends and I run the dishwasher just before bed. We have a bathroom space heater but that's used for showers in the evening or morning so it's off-peak also. We don't fret about cooktop or kettle usage, it's just a few minutes anyway. We don't have AC. Our water and home are heated with natural gas.
As far as I can tell, while there is nothing to be afraid of (and privacy concerns don't seem like that big of a deal) I don't really see how smart meters are much of a benefit to the consumer, people don't want to have to worry about how much electricity is going to cost at every given moment of the day. They just want to plug something in, use it, and pay a flat bill every month.
I also don't see how it helps conserves overall energy use. ocschwar's article says we don't have much natural gas, but from what I understand the reason people are doing fracking now is because newer technology has drastically reduced the price, making it even cheaper then coal, so power companies should be able to use natural gas to regulate supply easily anyway. And having people shift their energy use around during the day won't mean they'll use less in total.
Basically, overall net meters seem like a bit of a wash. For the consumer are some minor benefits, some potential benefits, and some minor downsides.
From an environmental standpoint maybe these will help drive demand for solar since solar comes in during peak hours. On the other hand, "dumb" meters do net metering by default do net metering (at least to the point that your meter will run backwards during the day, and forwards at night. If you put more energy back onto the grid then you use in total, then you do need the power company to pay you)
So I don't really get why you'd get worked up about really wanting power meters. Just because crazy people are against them doesn't make them good. They seem pretty neutral overall, unless you own stock in a power company. Or your wife cheated on you with the meter reader.
posted by delmoi at 7:08 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
I know that he's just trying to be funny, and his feeling were hurt that his last youtube video was unfairly taken down, but I feel like the who first four minutes of the video are a total infantile distraction and shouldn't be there.
posted by crunchland at 7:10 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by crunchland at 7:10 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
I don't have a smart meter but I do have a free induction electricity monitor from e-on. It resulted in about 30% drop in our power usage just because you notice the difference it makes to have certain lights on and certain lights off and it makes you more conscientious about your consumption. Of course it also helps that energy prices in the UK are shocking. For us the yearly difference is in the hundreds of £. In the US and Canada it might just be picking pennies off the floor. For now.
posted by srboisvert at 7:26 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by srboisvert at 7:26 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
I wish they'd go over to who.org and enter the following terms for search criteria: 2-b potential carcinogen "smart meter"
Which results in nothing.
posted by Mo Nickels at 7:32 AM on March 8, 2012
Which results in nothing.
posted by Mo Nickels at 7:32 AM on March 8, 2012
They seem pretty neutral overall, unless you own stock in a power company.
BC Hydro is a Crown corporation. If as detractors argue BC Hydro will start overcharging consumers, as an environmentalist I have to say that I'm not all that bothered by it. If it were a private company, I'd have reservations, but it's not.
posted by smorange at 8:04 AM on March 8, 2012
BC Hydro is a Crown corporation. If as detractors argue BC Hydro will start overcharging consumers, as an environmentalist I have to say that I'm not all that bothered by it. If it were a private company, I'd have reservations, but it's not.
posted by smorange at 8:04 AM on March 8, 2012
people against smart meters are against markets and informed choices.
What market? What choice? BC Hydro is a government utility that has a monopoly on the market and is regulated by ... you guessed it! The government.
On the upside maybe this will stop city bylaw officials and the RC's from invading people's homes for keeping fish ...
posted by squeak at 8:06 AM on March 8, 2012
What market? What choice? BC Hydro is a government utility that has a monopoly on the market and is regulated by ... you guessed it! The government.
On the upside maybe this will stop city bylaw officials and the RC's from invading people's homes for keeping fish ...
posted by squeak at 8:06 AM on March 8, 2012
Anyway, I've always thought houses should all have huge batteries installed anyway. That way, they'd be able to draw power at any time, and store it.
One of my grandfather's childhood chore responsibilities growing up on a fairly prosperous, middle American, rural farm in the 1910's and early 20's was to ensure that the wet cell batteries were full of water and the acetylene lamp tank was full of water and carbide and emptied of lime each day. Between these two the house was able to maintain some power and light during the intermittent blackouts from the primitive electrical grid.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 8:09 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
One of my grandfather's childhood chore responsibilities growing up on a fairly prosperous, middle American, rural farm in the 1910's and early 20's was to ensure that the wet cell batteries were full of water and the acetylene lamp tank was full of water and carbide and emptied of lime each day. Between these two the house was able to maintain some power and light during the intermittent blackouts from the primitive electrical grid.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 8:09 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
Smart meters are coupled with peak pricing programs that charge higher rates during times like heat waves. They even out usage somewhat and increase revenue. It's a lot easier than lobbying for a across-the-board rate hike.
No, that is not necessarily true. In many states utilities’ profits are decoupled from the energy commodities they sell — they are given revenue targets by the regulatory commission and any excess revenue is to be returned to the ratepayers through rate adjustments. The reason peak pricing programs exist is that it costs the utilities more to generate or buy electricity during the peak periods, so they have to charge you more. Without smart meters, you pay an average rate regardless of your usage patterns. With smart meters, you pay for what you actually use and can therefore shift your demand off of peak hours to decrease your bill.
This is all spelled out in all the literature published by utilities and governments advocating smart meters. If you would read that, instead of the FUD spewed by ignorant NIMBYs, you might understand what’s actually going on.
posted by spitefulcrow at 8:10 AM on March 8, 2012
No, that is not necessarily true. In many states utilities’ profits are decoupled from the energy commodities they sell — they are given revenue targets by the regulatory commission and any excess revenue is to be returned to the ratepayers through rate adjustments. The reason peak pricing programs exist is that it costs the utilities more to generate or buy electricity during the peak periods, so they have to charge you more. Without smart meters, you pay an average rate regardless of your usage patterns. With smart meters, you pay for what you actually use and can therefore shift your demand off of peak hours to decrease your bill.
This is all spelled out in all the literature published by utilities and governments advocating smart meters. If you would read that, instead of the FUD spewed by ignorant NIMBYs, you might understand what’s actually going on.
posted by spitefulcrow at 8:10 AM on March 8, 2012
I don't have a smart meter but I do have a free induction electricity monitor from e-on. It resulted in about 30% drop in our power usage just because you notice the difference it makes to have certain lights on and certain lights off and it makes you more conscientious about your consumption. Of course it also helps that energy prices in the UK are shocking. For us the yearly difference is in the hundreds of £. In the US and Canada it might just be picking pennies off the floor. For now.The old meters displayed the same information. The problem is they're outside the house. But the smart meters are also outside the house as well. In theory they could set something up so you can monitor your energy levels in real time with a smartphone.
Without smart meters, you pay an average rate regardless of your usage patterns. With smart meters, you pay for what you actually use and can therefore shift your demand off of peak hours to decrease your bill.Right, but think about it: If you're a customer you benefit from having a dumb meter.
This is all spelled out in all the literature published by utilities and governments advocating smart meters. If you would read that, instead of the FUD spewed by ignorant NIMBYs, you might understand what’s actually going on.
Think about it: With a smart meter you, can save money by shifting around various tasks, But that requires effort. It requires re-arranging your schedule (for example, maybe you like to do laundry in the afternoon, before the kids come home) and it it requires you to, in general think about power use throughout the day. Basically, you have to increase your cognitive load, and add more stuff to the list of things you already have to worry about.
Sure, there are some people who love clipping coupons and using loyalty cards and in general grinding on discounts. But, most people don't do those things. They don't want the extra 'cognitive load'
So, lets look at the situation from someone who doesn't want to deal with those things. The smart meters just mean they are going to pay more for electricity. That's the entire proposition.
So why is it surprising that people would be against these things. The privacy concerns, and certainly the EM concerns are really just an excuse. People can't really just come out and say "I don't want to pay more for power and I don't want to deal with thinking about it all day"
But why is it in any way surprising that consumers would be opposed to something that economically benefits the utility companies, and economically disadvantages them? Especially when most people already resent their electric companies.
You can make an environmental argument for smart meters, but I still feel like that's kind of weak, especially compared to other things power companies could be doing. What's the environmental bang per buck of smart meters vs. implementing net metering across the board? What's the environmental bang per buck of smart metering vs. adding more high voltage capacity to the overall grid, Or building more wind/power/hydroelectric facilities?
posted by delmoi at 8:31 AM on March 8, 2012
Not, but you might when you look at the data from your meter and you're like, "Holy shit, why in god's name are we turning the aircon on at 3pm, it wastes so much money!".
madajb: Which would be completely awesome, except the model they are currently using provides no facility for the consumer to access the data directly, and far as I can tell, the utility has no plans to increase granularity on the billing side.
PG&E's Smart Meter page says that its users can Track energy use online, and see your energy use by month, by day, by the hour. I realize this may not be your utility co, but it's one of the key features touted in most regions that I've heard about.
michaelh: Smart meters are coupled with peak pricing programs that charge higher rates during times like heat waves. They even out usage somewhat and increase revenue. It's a lot easier than lobbying for a across-the-board rate hike.
This all sounds like good things to me. The alternative, as I've seen it in California, is rolling blackouts that aren't planned or optional. Sure, companies that are major power users should already monitor their usage, but residential usage is also a part of the peak heat power shortages.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:04 AM on March 8, 2012
madajb: Which would be completely awesome, except the model they are currently using provides no facility for the consumer to access the data directly, and far as I can tell, the utility has no plans to increase granularity on the billing side.
PG&E's Smart Meter page says that its users can Track energy use online, and see your energy use by month, by day, by the hour. I realize this may not be your utility co, but it's one of the key features touted in most regions that I've heard about.
michaelh: Smart meters are coupled with peak pricing programs that charge higher rates during times like heat waves. They even out usage somewhat and increase revenue. It's a lot easier than lobbying for a across-the-board rate hike.
This all sounds like good things to me. The alternative, as I've seen it in California, is rolling blackouts that aren't planned or optional. Sure, companies that are major power users should already monitor their usage, but residential usage is also a part of the peak heat power shortages.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:04 AM on March 8, 2012
The electric company that I work for has had "smart" meters since 2003. In 2011, they began to roll out even smarter AMI meters. I've worked here for 7 years and not once have I heard any outrage about the use of smart meters, and as far as I know there has been no increase in radiation related illnesses (seriously people?). In fact, people seem to appreciate smart metering. For many years, even with the older smart meters, customers have been able to get an "on demand" read of their meter- meaning that by logging into their web-based account, they can have the system tell them their meter reading as of that moment. Aside from "on demand" reads, customers have been able to log in and see their daily usage every day, which is not only kind of cool, but also immensely helpful in terms of being able to monitor usage.
There is also a misconception that smart metering automatically means peak pricing. This is not so. The utility I work for still offers a flat rate- customers pay the same rate regardless of time of day or day of the week (though the newest meters are coded for peak pricing- the customer is only billed for the cumulative amount if they are on a flat rate). The flat rate is the default- you usually have to choose to switch to peak pricing. However, the governmental regulating body has decided that customers who use over a certain amount in any one month (2,000 kwh) have to move to the time of day on-peak/off-peak rate. Eventually, the utility regulators want to eliminate the flat rate completely, because for the vast majority of customers, peak pricing saves the customer money. This, however, does not stop people from complaining when they're forced off of the flat rate.
And really, people should want meters that register as accurately as possible. I mean, yes, smart meters are a revenue boost for electric companies since meters that are failing pretty much always stop completely or slow down instead of speeding up. But part of my job is that I'm one of the schmucks that monitor meter usage. Our system kicks out any erroneous readings and we have to sift through all of them and decide if there's actually a problem worthy of sending someone out to check the meter. If the meter is failing (or has already failed) then we just end up back billing the customer based on an estimate of what their usage should have been (the amount of time that we can back bill and how long we have to give customers to pay back the estimate is heavily regulated since a failing meter is mostly the utility's fault). Being back billed is really annoying. Having more accurate meters eliminates this annoyance.
Plus, being able to read meters wirelessly decreases the amount of estimated bills due to the fact that getting access to meters if they're not outside can be a hassle. You do not want to receive an estimated bill because the meter reader didn't have access to the basement to get a reading. Smart meters also remove the human error equation while simultaneously making manual meter reading a backup to wireless meter reading. If something seems weird about the wireless meter readings, a person can go out and read it manually. In the past, whatever the meter reader wrote down was what was billed- there was no extra layer of oversight. There are still a few meters that are always read by hand (for various reasons) and even within the small amount of these handheld meters, sometimes the reads that the readers send over are completely wrong.
Not only that, they'll actually be getting rid of meter-reading jobs.
When the company I work for went over to smart meters, no one was laid off (and some specialized jobs were necessarily created). Instead, they were retrained or put into other positions at their same pay grade. This is one of the many [many many] benefits of having a strong union and government regulation.
posted by eunoia at 9:04 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
There is also a misconception that smart metering automatically means peak pricing. This is not so. The utility I work for still offers a flat rate- customers pay the same rate regardless of time of day or day of the week (though the newest meters are coded for peak pricing- the customer is only billed for the cumulative amount if they are on a flat rate). The flat rate is the default- you usually have to choose to switch to peak pricing. However, the governmental regulating body has decided that customers who use over a certain amount in any one month (2,000 kwh) have to move to the time of day on-peak/off-peak rate. Eventually, the utility regulators want to eliminate the flat rate completely, because for the vast majority of customers, peak pricing saves the customer money. This, however, does not stop people from complaining when they're forced off of the flat rate.
And really, people should want meters that register as accurately as possible. I mean, yes, smart meters are a revenue boost for electric companies since meters that are failing pretty much always stop completely or slow down instead of speeding up. But part of my job is that I'm one of the schmucks that monitor meter usage. Our system kicks out any erroneous readings and we have to sift through all of them and decide if there's actually a problem worthy of sending someone out to check the meter. If the meter is failing (or has already failed) then we just end up back billing the customer based on an estimate of what their usage should have been (the amount of time that we can back bill and how long we have to give customers to pay back the estimate is heavily regulated since a failing meter is mostly the utility's fault). Being back billed is really annoying. Having more accurate meters eliminates this annoyance.
Plus, being able to read meters wirelessly decreases the amount of estimated bills due to the fact that getting access to meters if they're not outside can be a hassle. You do not want to receive an estimated bill because the meter reader didn't have access to the basement to get a reading. Smart meters also remove the human error equation while simultaneously making manual meter reading a backup to wireless meter reading. If something seems weird about the wireless meter readings, a person can go out and read it manually. In the past, whatever the meter reader wrote down was what was billed- there was no extra layer of oversight. There are still a few meters that are always read by hand (for various reasons) and even within the small amount of these handheld meters, sometimes the reads that the readers send over are completely wrong.
Not only that, they'll actually be getting rid of meter-reading jobs.
When the company I work for went over to smart meters, no one was laid off (and some specialized jobs were necessarily created). Instead, they were retrained or put into other positions at their same pay grade. This is one of the many [many many] benefits of having a strong union and government regulation.
posted by eunoia at 9:04 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
to something that economically benefits the utility companies, and economically disadvantages them? Especially when most people already resent their electric companies.
A good faith argument would be that smart metering will reduce peak load, which means we need fewer expensive, on-demand peak generation units. These units are necessary to keep the system functioning smoothly and with adequate safety margins, but are needed only a small fraction of the time - therefore they must charge a hefty premium to recover their construction cost, and drive wholesale prices up.
In a perfect world, a reduction in peak load will take these units out of the market, which means your supplier now buys cheaper and can offer you better rates - although you can argue they will just poket the difference while doing an evil mustache twirl.
What's the environmental bang per buck of smart metering vs. adding more high voltage capacity to the overall grid, Or building more wind/power/hydroelectric facilities?
Smart metering and demand side participation are useful in managing the increased uncertainty introduced by more renewables - it's not an either/or proposition. For example, if the network operator knows they can just dial your AC down if wind output is not as high as expected, they will be more comfortable requiring less thermal production in reserve.
posted by Dr Dracator at 9:09 AM on March 8, 2012
A good faith argument would be that smart metering will reduce peak load, which means we need fewer expensive, on-demand peak generation units. These units are necessary to keep the system functioning smoothly and with adequate safety margins, but are needed only a small fraction of the time - therefore they must charge a hefty premium to recover their construction cost, and drive wholesale prices up.
In a perfect world, a reduction in peak load will take these units out of the market, which means your supplier now buys cheaper and can offer you better rates - although you can argue they will just poket the difference while doing an evil mustache twirl.
What's the environmental bang per buck of smart metering vs. adding more high voltage capacity to the overall grid, Or building more wind/power/hydroelectric facilities?
Smart metering and demand side participation are useful in managing the increased uncertainty introduced by more renewables - it's not an either/or proposition. For example, if the network operator knows they can just dial your AC down if wind output is not as high as expected, they will be more comfortable requiring less thermal production in reserve.
posted by Dr Dracator at 9:09 AM on March 8, 2012
What's the environmental bang per buck of smart meters vs. implementing net metering across the board? What's the environmental bang per buck of smart metering vs. adding more high voltage capacity to the overall grid, Or building more wind/power/hydroelectric facilities.
Over 20 US states have deregulated electric utilities meaning that an electric utility can not generate power, they can only deliver it. This was supposed to lower electric bills by adding competition. I say "supposed to" on purpose.
posted by eunoia at 9:10 AM on March 8, 2012
Over 20 US states have deregulated electric utilities meaning that an electric utility can not generate power, they can only deliver it. This was supposed to lower electric bills by adding competition. I say "supposed to" on purpose.
posted by eunoia at 9:10 AM on March 8, 2012
What? Like people driving by seeing your electric lights on at 2AM and wondering what you're up to? The use of electric power is not a right and your privacy concerns are not my privacy concerns.
If the Internet era has taught us anything, it is that marketeers will find some way to use any available information about consumers.
While much of the privacy concerns in my area are "Oh noes, the government", I'm honestly much more concerned about wholesale aggregation by corporations.
Is my utility considering a regulation that prohibits sharing of electric use data to third-parties*? I'm not sure. In the rush to implement this technology, things are bound to be overlooked.
* It may already be covered under existing laws. A quick google search didn't turn up much.
posted by madajb at 9:34 AM on March 8, 2012
If the Internet era has taught us anything, it is that marketeers will find some way to use any available information about consumers.
While much of the privacy concerns in my area are "Oh noes, the government", I'm honestly much more concerned about wholesale aggregation by corporations.
Is my utility considering a regulation that prohibits sharing of electric use data to third-parties*? I'm not sure. In the rush to implement this technology, things are bound to be overlooked.
* It may already be covered under existing laws. A quick google search didn't turn up much.
posted by madajb at 9:34 AM on March 8, 2012
Related:
Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing U.N. Plot
–New York Times, February 3, 2012
posted by blueberry at 10:15 AM on March 8, 2012
Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing U.N. Plot
–New York Times, February 3, 2012
posted by blueberry at 10:15 AM on March 8, 2012
You can make an environmental argument for smart meters, but I still feel like that's kind of weak, especially compared to other things power companies could be doing. What's the environmental bang per buck of smart meters vs. implementing net metering across the board? What's the environmental bang per buck of smart metering vs. adding more high voltage capacity to the overall grid, Or building more wind/power/hydroelectric facilities?
Smart meters are not an environmental technology. They are intended to be a technology which will allow us to deal more cheaply with the changes that will make the system less environmentally damaging. There are scenarios where this might not happen but that is the intention.
Smart meters vs net metering is not really a key issue, the argument over net metering is really whether it would be more economic to have a two way meter rather than a net meter. The fact that a smart meter could do that is kind of a side benefit of the smart meter. Smart metering vs HV capacity is also an economic question. Sometimes it will be cheaper to go for 'intelligence' sometimes it will be cheaper to go for copper.
The environmental side of things comes in to some extent if you have to stop adding wind energy because the grid can't stand up - but if we haven't come up with the best way to do it then largely this will be solved with the second best solution, where the difference is effectively allowing the transmission and distribution networks from throwing their (and by their I mean our) money at the problem. There are many potential smart (smarter, smartest - or smartish) solutions and it may well be that smart meters aren't one of them or that their use is limited by consumer participation, poor incentives, poor levels of smartness or poor regulation that doesn't pass benefits to consumers.
posted by biffa at 10:51 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
Smart meters are not an environmental technology. They are intended to be a technology which will allow us to deal more cheaply with the changes that will make the system less environmentally damaging. There are scenarios where this might not happen but that is the intention.
Smart meters vs net metering is not really a key issue, the argument over net metering is really whether it would be more economic to have a two way meter rather than a net meter. The fact that a smart meter could do that is kind of a side benefit of the smart meter. Smart metering vs HV capacity is also an economic question. Sometimes it will be cheaper to go for 'intelligence' sometimes it will be cheaper to go for copper.
The environmental side of things comes in to some extent if you have to stop adding wind energy because the grid can't stand up - but if we haven't come up with the best way to do it then largely this will be solved with the second best solution, where the difference is effectively allowing the transmission and distribution networks from throwing their (and by their I mean our) money at the problem. There are many potential smart (smarter, smartest - or smartish) solutions and it may well be that smart meters aren't one of them or that their use is limited by consumer participation, poor incentives, poor levels of smartness or poor regulation that doesn't pass benefits to consumers.
posted by biffa at 10:51 AM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
Is my utility considering a regulation that prohibits sharing of electric use data to third-parties*?
I would hope your regulator is. I have to admit to being fascinated by the potential for what is going to happen to all the data that is produced by these things, who has access to it (supplier, distribution network operator, aggregator, price comparison website?) and what they can get up to with it. There's a decent chance that the people running the network may not even be able to manage the data generated to actually run the networks better for some time to come.
posted by biffa at 10:54 AM on March 8, 2012
I would hope your regulator is. I have to admit to being fascinated by the potential for what is going to happen to all the data that is produced by these things, who has access to it (supplier, distribution network operator, aggregator, price comparison website?) and what they can get up to with it. There's a decent chance that the people running the network may not even be able to manage the data generated to actually run the networks better for some time to come.
posted by biffa at 10:54 AM on March 8, 2012
the legitimate privacy concerns which are documented.
What? Like people driving by seeing your electric lights on at 2AM and wondering what you're up to?
The smart meters that I have seen in worked on in Australia (pilot program in NSW) are sophisticated enough to detect and record the power draws of individual appliances. I have been told someone monitoring could concievably determine what appliances you are running at any one time.
Perhaps you don't care who knows your lights are on. But some people would and do care that their service provider would know what medical equipment they were using and when they used it, or when they turned on their their vibrators.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 2:41 PM on March 8, 2012
What? Like people driving by seeing your electric lights on at 2AM and wondering what you're up to?
The smart meters that I have seen in worked on in Australia (pilot program in NSW) are sophisticated enough to detect and record the power draws of individual appliances. I have been told someone monitoring could concievably determine what appliances you are running at any one time.
Perhaps you don't care who knows your lights are on. But some people would and do care that their service provider would know what medical equipment they were using and when they used it, or when they turned on their their vibrators.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 2:41 PM on March 8, 2012
Whenever privacy concerns are answered with something like, "We don't even have the IT infrastructure to handle all that extra data,"* privacy is in trouble.
* PG&E from MJ article
posted by diorist at 2:58 PM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
* PG&E from MJ article
posted by diorist at 2:58 PM on March 8, 2012 [1 favorite]
Whenever privacy concerns are answered with something like, "We don't even have the IT infrastructure to handle all that extra data,"* privacy is in trouble.
Yeah, but that's a significant barrier to implementing that sort of IT infrastructure, which is considerable. You would have to have all devices in a household possess an IP address, and then there would have to be a cheap interface to gather the information to pass on to the meter. While I'm sure this technology already exists, it's going to be a while before it's implemented. And to what end? The local power provider here already is compelled to report power consumption above a certain threshold to local authorities, who can then basically break the door down in search of a Grow Op. More often than not, they don't find a Grow Op, but do leave the hapless resident with a bunch of tickets for code violations.
Anyway, why not just install parabolic antennas to record and monitor conversations in all households? That could be done, too, but cost would be a factor.
Energy monitoring software already exists, and is being implemented by large institutions - the software is being bundled as part of building control technology. Interestingly enough, energy management isn't what is producing the most savings in the short term - energy retrofitting is.
posted by KokuRyu at 3:10 PM on March 8, 2012
Yeah, but that's a significant barrier to implementing that sort of IT infrastructure, which is considerable. You would have to have all devices in a household possess an IP address, and then there would have to be a cheap interface to gather the information to pass on to the meter. While I'm sure this technology already exists, it's going to be a while before it's implemented. And to what end? The local power provider here already is compelled to report power consumption above a certain threshold to local authorities, who can then basically break the door down in search of a Grow Op. More often than not, they don't find a Grow Op, but do leave the hapless resident with a bunch of tickets for code violations.
Anyway, why not just install parabolic antennas to record and monitor conversations in all households? That could be done, too, but cost would be a factor.
Energy monitoring software already exists, and is being implemented by large institutions - the software is being bundled as part of building control technology. Interestingly enough, energy management isn't what is producing the most savings in the short term - energy retrofitting is.
posted by KokuRyu at 3:10 PM on March 8, 2012
Retrofitting includes everything from replacing windows to replacing leaky pipes. Ventilation systems can cause a lot of energy loss.
posted by KokuRyu at 4:08 PM on March 8, 2012
posted by KokuRyu at 4:08 PM on March 8, 2012
I see smart meters as a savings opportunity. We never ever do laundry or run the dishwasher during peak hours--we push it all to evenings and weekends. Not really so hard, and seriously, the more we can do to get people aware of how much energy they consume the better. I am frickin' sick of hearing suburbanites in their gigantic houses bitch about how much more energy costs and blah blah blah. Get a smaller house! Stop running the AC from May to September all day every day! Enough with the damn pot lights! Ahem. Pardon me.
In conclusion, smart meters really aren't very intrusive and they can actually help you reduce your overall costs if you take a moment to prioritize time of use over convenience.
posted by Go Banana at 4:34 PM on March 8, 2012
In conclusion, smart meters really aren't very intrusive and they can actually help you reduce your overall costs if you take a moment to prioritize time of use over convenience.
posted by Go Banana at 4:34 PM on March 8, 2012
@MoNichols : Exactly. So many of those who oppose Smart Meters due to health concerns, quote something that doesn't exist.
posted by armoir from antproof case at 4:34 PM on March 8, 2012
posted by armoir from antproof case at 4:34 PM on March 8, 2012
This all sounds like good things to me. The alternative, as I've seen it in California, is rolling blackouts that aren't planned or optional. Sure, companies that are major power users should already monitor their usage, but residential usage is also a part of the peak heat power shortages.Weren't the rolling blackouts caused by Enron deliberately sabotaging their network in order to raise prices and boost profits? I think you can see why people might be unwilling to trust their energy utility.
When the company I work for went over to smart meters, no one was laid off (and some specialized jobs were necessarily created). Instead, they were retrained or put into other positions at their same pay grade. This is one of the many [many many] benefits of having a strong union and government regulation.Right, but those jobs won't be replaced, and ultimately you're likely to see the number of positions over time reduced. Not that it's a bad thing, I'm just pointing out that it's somewhat ironic.
Smart metering and demand side participation are useful in managing the increased uncertainty introduced by more renewables - it's not an either/or proposition. For example, if the network operator knows they can just dial your AC down if wind output is not as high as expected, they will be more comfortable requiring less thermal production in reserve.I'm not saying they won't help, but the major benefit seems to be for the Utilities. There are clearly something the Utilities want. But I think that it would be more beneficial to upgrade the grid overall, and install solar panels. A smart meter costs $150 to $400 a piece. And $400 could get 400 watts (at peak isolation) of rooftop solar. Even if you assume just 4 hours of average isolation per year, you would end up generating about 576kwatt hours per year. So the panels would pay for themselves in just 5 years. Installation would be more complex then with the meters, though. But that would directly reduce both costs and carbon release.
Smart meters vs net metering is not really a key issue, the argument over net metering is really whether it would be more economic to have a two way meter rather than a net meter. The fact that a smart meter could do that is kind of a side benefit of the smart meter. Smart metering vs HV capacity is also an economic question. Sometimes it will be cheaper to go for 'intelligence' sometimes it will be cheaper to go for copper.Well, it's more like: With smart meters, you have the option of not doing net metering. With dumb meters, you have no choice: You have to do net metering. So for solar panel installation that can generate more power then you use during the day, but not over a month a dumb meter means you save money based on all the power you generate, while a smart meter may allow you to do that, depending on your local regulations.
So basically all a smart meter does here is allow the power company to not do net metering.
Yeah, but that's a significant barrier to implementing that sort of IT infrastructure, which is considerable. You would have to have all devices in a household possess an IP addressWhat are you talking about? You identify devices based on their power use signatures, not "IP addresses". You don't need to add any technology to the devices themselves, just perform analysis on the power draw data. I'm not saying it's at all likely to happen, but as a theoretical concern it's perfectly possible.
The PG&E guy is saying they don't have enough servers on the backend to crunch through that data. But they don't need too. All they would need to do is buy compute time from Amazon, or google, or rackspace, or any other cloud provider and crunch through the data.
Target, for example was able to figure out when women are pregnant by analyzing their shopping data, I'm sure you could determine lots of marketable demographic information by power use
For example, people with a newborn baby might be suddenly spending a lot of time up in the middle of the night. You could even do things like figure out when/if someone was using a popular piece of electronics, like a Playstation or XBox and send them advertising materials for video games (Again, it may be possible determine what devices are being used, just from patterns in power draw, and EM noise generated).
In cryptography Power analysis can be used to figure out what secret keys are being used to encrypt data. That goes far beyond simply identifying a device. That isn't to say it's practical in the real world, but it's theoretically possible.
In conclusion, smart meters really aren't very intrusive and they can actually help you reduce your overall costs if you take a moment to prioritize time of use over convenience.Yes, if you are willing to do that. But it's not clear that it's something that people would find a worthwhile use of cognitive resources. The "opportunity to save money" is not really an opportunity if the amount of money you save is less then the value of the effort you put in to saving it.
posted by delmoi at 7:40 PM on March 8, 2012
I'm not saying they won't help, but the major benefit seems to be for the Utilities. There are clearly something the Utilities want. But I think that it would be more beneficial to upgrade the grid overall, and install solar panels. A smart meter costs $150 to $400 a piece.
Exactly, the estimated cost per meter in the UK SM roll out is looking to be £250. Meters will offer benefits but because the change is supplier driven there is a real chance that they will capture all the savings benefits while (legitimately under the regulation) passing the cost of the SM to the consumer. Part of getting smart grids right is ensuring that the regulation is appropriate to driving innovaton such that the inclusion of meters reduces consumer costs rather than driving them up whle improving the profits of the utilities.
Well, it's more like: With smart meters, you have the option of not doing net metering. With dumb meters, you have no choice: You have to do net metering.
This isn't true, having separate dumb meters to record electricity from the grid and electricity from the PV (or other microgen) installation has been the standard approach in Europe for the last decade. This has enabled the wide range of tariffs for different technologies in diferent places.
posted by biffa at 3:01 AM on March 9, 2012
Exactly, the estimated cost per meter in the UK SM roll out is looking to be £250. Meters will offer benefits but because the change is supplier driven there is a real chance that they will capture all the savings benefits while (legitimately under the regulation) passing the cost of the SM to the consumer. Part of getting smart grids right is ensuring that the regulation is appropriate to driving innovaton such that the inclusion of meters reduces consumer costs rather than driving them up whle improving the profits of the utilities.
Well, it's more like: With smart meters, you have the option of not doing net metering. With dumb meters, you have no choice: You have to do net metering.
This isn't true, having separate dumb meters to record electricity from the grid and electricity from the PV (or other microgen) installation has been the standard approach in Europe for the last decade. This has enabled the wide range of tariffs for different technologies in diferent places.
posted by biffa at 3:01 AM on March 9, 2012
biffa: Well, it depends on if you actually want to get a check back if you generate more power then you take out. If you use $50 worth power a month, and generate $40, you should pay $10, right? But if you use $30 worth of power during the day, when your solar panels are generating power with a 'dumb' meter you would get -10 for the day, with no extra hardware or even notification of the power company, Then you'd use $20 worth at night, and your final bill is $10.
With a "smart" meter and no net metering, you'd pay $20, and the -$10 you generate during the day just gets kept by the power company. Now, someone might pass net metering laws, requiring companies to turn on net metering, but without that a smart meter would be worse for someone with a small solar install if they ever generate more then they use.
On the other hand, though, peak power is also the time when the sun comes out. So that may be a non-issue.
posted by delmoi at 2:27 PM on March 10, 2012
With a "smart" meter and no net metering, you'd pay $20, and the -$10 you generate during the day just gets kept by the power company. Now, someone might pass net metering laws, requiring companies to turn on net metering, but without that a smart meter would be worse for someone with a small solar install if they ever generate more then they use.
On the other hand, though, peak power is also the time when the sun comes out. So that may be a non-issue.
posted by delmoi at 2:27 PM on March 10, 2012
delmoi: Overall net metering is not a particularly good match off of value within the system when you install some form of micro-renewable. From a purely neutral perspective the electricity you deliver to the grid is not of equal value to the electricity you deliver to the grid as the stuff you take has a value attached for generation, supply, transmission and distribution, while the stuff you put into the grid is only the generation cost, and if used elsewhere in the grid the supply company will need to factor in supply and distribution costs as well.
Regardless of this, there is more of a problem. Many of our territories provide a subsidy to new renewable energ technologies to provide a stimulus to bring down the costs of the technology over time, to recognise that renewables provide a caomparative environmental benefit and to achieve some other goals.
For PV the levels of subsidy needed to make the technology attractive for developers has historically been higher than the retail price, and tariffs have been set appropriately. Setting the PV tariff to equal the retail price is arbitrary and would not have (for example) stimulated the expansion of PV seen in Germany in the last 10 years.
The amount the PV system produces in comparison to the house's demand is not relevant, regardless of whether it is more or less then their need, all the matters is that the level of subsidy is sufficient that when the subsidy for energy going into the grid plus the energy savings from not having to take from the grid are totalled they come to a figure which offers a decent rate of return for the installer against the costs of installation.
With a "smart" meter and no net metering, you'd pay $20, and the -$10 you generate during the day just gets kept by the power company.
Absolutely not. The UK has a tariff system in place which offers a subsidy which provides a fixed subsidy for each unit of energy generated by a PV panel and used within the home ('generation' tariff). It then offers a further subsidy for each unit sent to the grid ('export' tariff, adds about 3.1p/kWh for the generation tariff). The total saving to you if you have a PV panel is the generation tariff for every unit you generate, the export tariff plus the generation tariff for the units you sell on, plus your energy savings for not buying from the grid. This kind of tariff would not be possible with net metering and the level of subsidy and many if not all systems would not be economic. Additionally different levels of tariff are usefully set for different size systems reflecting that smaller systems have scaling issues which require more subsidy. This would also not be possible with net metering. The UK actually uses a system of dumb metering to record generation, a new meter comes with the PV installation. The export metering element is 'deemed' (ie estimated) as a fraction of total generation.
Further, the additional risk attached to having a variable rate subsidy (ie varying with the retail price) will tend to mean higher cost of capital than would be the case with a fixed tariff mechanism.
I think its probably notable I haven't said smart at all here, what I am arguing is that net metering is not good practice as regards the support of renewable energy.
posted by biffa at 10:55 AM on March 11, 2012
Regardless of this, there is more of a problem. Many of our territories provide a subsidy to new renewable energ technologies to provide a stimulus to bring down the costs of the technology over time, to recognise that renewables provide a caomparative environmental benefit and to achieve some other goals.
For PV the levels of subsidy needed to make the technology attractive for developers has historically been higher than the retail price, and tariffs have been set appropriately. Setting the PV tariff to equal the retail price is arbitrary and would not have (for example) stimulated the expansion of PV seen in Germany in the last 10 years.
The amount the PV system produces in comparison to the house's demand is not relevant, regardless of whether it is more or less then their need, all the matters is that the level of subsidy is sufficient that when the subsidy for energy going into the grid plus the energy savings from not having to take from the grid are totalled they come to a figure which offers a decent rate of return for the installer against the costs of installation.
With a "smart" meter and no net metering, you'd pay $20, and the -$10 you generate during the day just gets kept by the power company.
Absolutely not. The UK has a tariff system in place which offers a subsidy which provides a fixed subsidy for each unit of energy generated by a PV panel and used within the home ('generation' tariff). It then offers a further subsidy for each unit sent to the grid ('export' tariff, adds about 3.1p/kWh for the generation tariff). The total saving to you if you have a PV panel is the generation tariff for every unit you generate, the export tariff plus the generation tariff for the units you sell on, plus your energy savings for not buying from the grid. This kind of tariff would not be possible with net metering and the level of subsidy and many if not all systems would not be economic. Additionally different levels of tariff are usefully set for different size systems reflecting that smaller systems have scaling issues which require more subsidy. This would also not be possible with net metering. The UK actually uses a system of dumb metering to record generation, a new meter comes with the PV installation. The export metering element is 'deemed' (ie estimated) as a fraction of total generation.
Further, the additional risk attached to having a variable rate subsidy (ie varying with the retail price) will tend to mean higher cost of capital than would be the case with a fixed tariff mechanism.
I think its probably notable I haven't said smart at all here, what I am arguing is that net metering is not good practice as regards the support of renewable energy.
posted by biffa at 10:55 AM on March 11, 2012
« Older Tetsuo's final scene from Akira + Mardi Gras | Douglass v. Fairey - Fair use and credit Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by michaelh at 9:20 PM on March 7, 2012