Smartmeter: Anyone knows how to get detailed info on them?
in [Design]
|
From: Joerg on 30 Apr 2010 11:49 D Yuniskis wrote: > Hi Jan, > > Jan Panteltje wrote: >> On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis >> <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com> wrote in <hra52o$pc0$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>: > > [overly ambitious snipping?] > >> That is what they do here, once a year. > > presumably, a response to my comment: > "Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the > consumption during the summer months (highest rates, > typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!" > > If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt, > are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't > opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round > usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in > the summer, etc. > Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a "small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. That's why I'd be squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to you. And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us a "minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next month. I ended that practice right in the tracks. [...] -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Jim Thompson on 30 Apr 2010 12:07 On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:49:08 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >D Yuniskis wrote: >> Hi Jan, >> >> Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis >>> <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com> wrote in <hra52o$pc0$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>: >> >> [overly ambitious snipping?] >> >>> That is what they do here, once a year. >> >> presumably, a response to my comment: >> "Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the >> consumption during the summer months (highest rates, >> typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!" >> >> If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt, >> are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't >> opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round >> usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in >> the summer, etc. >> > >Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a >"small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather >modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. Californica :-) >That's why I'd be >squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to you. >And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us a >"minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next >month. I ended that practice right in the tracks. > >[...] The year I had my hip replacement my propane company got snotty that I didn't use the minimum... and tried to charge me for it. I told them, GFY, and put a heat pump on my spa :-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | The only thing bipartisan in this country is hypocrisy
From: D Yuniskis on 30 Apr 2010 17:49 Hi Joerg, Joerg wrote: > D Yuniskis wrote: >> Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis >>> <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com> wrote in <hra52o$pc0$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>: >> >> [overly ambitious snipping?] >> >>> That is what they do here, once a year. >> >> presumably, a response to my comment: >> "Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the >> consumption during the summer months (highest rates, >> typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!" >> >> If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt, >> are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't >> opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round >> usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in >> the summer, etc. > > Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a > "small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather > modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. That's why I'd be > squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to you. > And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us a > "minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next > month. I ended that practice right in the tracks. That's why the only *fair* way of dealing with "estimates" is to average the estimated period into the adjacent "measured" periods. This ends up dinging the utility (on average) for their decision *not* to read the meter (instead of dinging the user) Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence, KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in* that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time" but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but on a *continuous* (i.e., 100%) basis. This has led to all sorts of bizarre schemes -- most of which increase the *total* energy used -- to shift the load or average it out. E.g., some firms "make ice" at night (when the business is closed and there is *no* significant energy demand) and then use the ice in lieu of running their ACbrrr's during the following day (when the *added* load of the ACbrrr would dramatically increase their "peak demand"). The goal of the utility (besides making money :> ) is to have a nice *steady* load (since variations in load require power plants that have quick response times -- like coal and gas fired -- which tend to be more expensive to operate).
From: D Yuniskis on 30 Apr 2010 18:36 D Yuniskis wrote: > Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence, > KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for > the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in* > that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time" > but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity > pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but Grrr... s.b.: "pays *more* than a business that uses electricity at half that rate but" > on a *continuous* (i.e., 100%) basis.
From: Joerg on 30 Apr 2010 18:44
D Yuniskis wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > Joerg wrote: >> D Yuniskis wrote: >>> Jan Panteltje wrote: >>>> On a sunny day (Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:21:49 -0700) it happened D Yuniskis >>>> <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com> wrote in <hra52o$pc0$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>: >>> >>> [overly ambitious snipping?] >>> >>>> That is what they do here, once a year. >>> >>> presumably, a response to my comment: >>> "Why not read it once a *year*? Estimate ALL of the >>> consumption during the summer months (highest rates, >>> typically) and bilk the user accordingly?!" >>> >>> If that is standard practice, then your tariffs, no doubt, >>> are designed for "year round average usage" -- they aren't >>> opting to charge you "summer rates" for your year round >>> usage just because they *happened* to read the meter in >>> the summer, etc. >> >> Much worse where we live, in Northern California. Here we must pay a >> "small-business-punisher-rate". The millisecond you exceed a rather >> modest baseline usage the cost per kWh skyrockets. That's why I'd be >> squarely against estimates because then they can really sock it to >> you. And probably will. The propane company tried it once, charging us >> a "minimum usage fee" for zero gallons and then the full amount next >> month. I ended that practice right in the tracks. > > That's why the only *fair* way of dealing with "estimates" is > to average the estimated period into the adjacent "measured" > periods. This ends up dinging the utility (on average) for > their decision *not* to read the meter (instead of dinging the > user) > > Some business tariffs are based on "peak demand" (hence, > KWh meters called "demand registers"). I.e., what you pay for > the billing cycle is based on your *largest* demand *in* > that cycle. I.e., a business that is "closed 99% of the time" > but, when open (in that remaining 1%) uses a *lot* of electricity > pays *more* than a business that uses "half" as much but > on a *continuous* (i.e., 100%) basis. > > This has led to all sorts of bizarre schemes -- most of which > increase the *total* energy used -- to shift the load or > average it out. E.g., some firms "make ice" at night (when the > business is closed and there is *no* significant energy demand) > and then use the ice in lieu of running their ACbrrr's > during the following day (when the *added* load of the ACbrrr > would dramatically increase their "peak demand"). > > The goal of the utility (besides making money :> ) is to have > a nice *steady* load (since variations in load require > power plants that have quick response times -- like coal > and gas fired -- which tend to be more expensive to operate). It can lead to even more bizarre results: I once spoke to a business owner who couldn't avoid peaks because of the way their machines worked. During a planned outage they rented a big Diesel and found out that their cost for electrical energy _dropped_, even when factoring in the daily costs of the generator. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. |