An energy revolution - Smart meter technology

ani_26

Another article about the privacy risks :-



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

zeupater

ani_26 wrote: »

Maybe you are in the more fortunate position to be able to require heat regardless of cost? There are many people who require heat, but simply cannot afford heat, and have to look for alternative methods of keeping warm. It's freezing here, much of the time, and i require heat but simply can't afford it. Therefore i have already deduced very accurately, that having my heating on for an hour in the morning and for two hours in the evening costs me £1 a day, which is the limit of what i can afford to spend. One quick look at the display, tells me when it's time to switch the heating off. At the moment, i sit here in the evening until i am so cold, i " succumb "and switch the heating on.

Hi

I think that you have missed the point in my post .... A smartmeter remote display will show the cost/Hr at a point in time, my example showed an initial £1.61/Hr before boiler modulation ... however, it's likely that the true cost of heat provision over a heating cycle encompassing many hours will only be £1.61 because the boiler will modulate output and provide power which is balanced to replace the heat delivered by the radiators, when the boiler cannot modulate to a lower setting or the thermostat control temperature is reached it will cut-out for a while.

The way you yourself budget for your own heat provision at £1/day is based on the same principle which was raised, however, I doubt that you would look at turning the heating off if a monitor initially displayed a spot reading of £1/Hr .... I would also 'guess' that your £1/day heating will be controlled by a combination of thermostatic settings (hall thermostat & TRVs ?) and setting the length of the heating cycle rather than watching the monitor ...

Regarding "heat regardless of cost" and relating this to our gas usage .... you're obviously not a regular visitor to the 'green & ethical' boards or you'd be aware of our household's typical energy usage ..... :rotfl:;)

HTH
Z

zeupater

ani_26 wrote: »

.... The loss of meter readers jobs, i'm not too sure about. How many people are sat at home waiting for the meter reader to call, these days? How many people already supply this information, themselves? ...

Hi

Quite funny and appropriate really as not long after posting regarding the cost of meter reading yesterday a meter reader actually called here, and we have an on-line account which we regularly enter our reading into !! .....

I'm pretty sure that our meters are still read twice per year and remember that the energy companies mention that this is not just to take the reading, but also conduct a 'safety check' .... I don't know how much of a 'safety check' you can conduct from a distance of about 3m in around 3 seconds, because that's all it ever takes once the garage has been opened up ...

HTH
Z

Terrylw1

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

Quite funny and appropriate really as not long after posting regarding the cost of meter reading yesterday a meter reader actually called here, and we have an on-line account which we regularly enter our reading into !! .....

I'm pretty sure that our meters are still read twice per year and remember that the energy companies mention that this is not just to take the reading, but also conduct a 'safety check' .... I don't know how much of a 'safety check' you can conduct from a distance of about 3m in around 3 seconds, because that's all it ever takes once the garage has been opened up ...

HTH
Z

Then you might find this interesting.

The gas is a 2 year safety check and the Last Inspection Date (LID) is updated by the supplier into the distributors database. This is to ensure when you switch, the 2 year date isn't reset to the switch date. What updates this LID?...every single visit made that is successful...but the Ofgem SLC's state the safety check is a set of checks...but these wouldn't be done on a standard meter reading visit. So, the 2 year safety check is a farce!

The elec is 2 years from the switch date purely because there is no LID data item in the distributors database. It could be added at a cost. So, if you switch every 12 months...you never get a safety check!

At some point Ofgem might have a "oh, of course it won't work, doh!" moment!

As for meter readings. If you submit them online it won't stop them coming unless the supplier transmits it prior to the visit date coming up, the reading has to be Validated successfully (so set to Valid and not Failed) and the supplier has to have a contract for a customer reading to cancel a reading date.

ani_26

Terrylw1 wrote: »

Then you might find this interesting.

The gas is a 2 year safety check and the Last Inspection Date (LID) is updated by the supplier into the distributors database. This is to ensure when you switch, the 2 year date isn't reset to the switch date. What updates this LID?...every single visit made that is successful...but the Ofgem SLC's state the safety check is a set of checks...but these wouldn't be done on a standard meter reading visit. So, the 2 year safety check is a farce!

The elec is 2 years from the switch date purely because there is no LID data item in the distributors database. It could be added at a cost. So, if you switch every 12 months...you never get a safety check!

At some point Ofgem might have a "oh, of course it won't work, doh!" moment!

As for meter readings. If you submit them online it won't stop them coming unless the supplier transmits it prior to the visit date coming up, the reading has to be Validated successfully (so set to Valid and not Failed) and the supplier has to have a contract for a customer reading to cancel a reading date.

My energy supplier is now completely dependant on technology. Hmmm...........

ani_26

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

I think that you have missed the point in my post .... A smartmeter remote display will show the cost/Hr at a point in time, my example showed an initial £1.61/Hr before boiler modulation ... however, it's likely that the true cost of heat provision over a heating cycle encompassing many hours will only be £1.61 because the boiler will modulate output and provide power which is balanced to replace the heat delivered by the radiators, when the boiler cannot modulate to a lower setting or the thermostat control temperature is reached it will cut-out for a while.

The way you yourself budget for your own heat provision at £1/day is based on the same principle which was raised, however, I doubt that you would look at turning the heating off if a monitor initially displayed a spot reading of £1/Hr .... I would also 'guess' that your £1/day heating will be controlled by a combination of thermostatic settings (hall thermostat & TRVs ?) and setting the length of the heating cycle rather than watching the monitor ...

I still think you are missing the point. There is no need for all these complicated x, y and z calculations or analysis. " Real - Time " displays give you the ability to watch your money being burnt, precisely. You are making it far more complex than it needs to be. The average consumer doesn't want complexity? They want simplicity.

Regarding "heat regardless of cost" and relating this to our gas usage .... you're obviously not a regular visitor to the 'green & ethical' boards or you'd be aware of our household's typical energy usage ..... :rotfl:;)

HTH
Z

No. I'll have a wander. :rotfl: But this is what you said in your post.

victor2

ani_26 wrote: »

I still think you are missing the point. There is no need for all these complicated x, y and z calculations or analysis. " Real - Time " displays give you the ability to watch your money being burnt, precisely. You are making it far more complex than it needs to be. The average consumer doesn't want complexity? They want simplicity.

With respect, I think it is you missing the point many people have made. It's like getting an instant fuel usage (and related cost) from your car. It costs you a lot of money (in terms of pence per minute, say) at the moment you pull away from a standstill, but as you ease off the accelerator, it could say it's costing you nothing, as you're not burning any fuel.
It's only if you look at the total cost for getting between two points that you see the real cost of the journey. Same applies to household energy use.

ani_26

victor2 wrote: »

With respect, I think it is you missing the point many people have made. It's like getting an instant fuel usage (and related cost) from your car. It costs you a lot of money (in terms of pence per minute, say) at the moment you pull away from a standstill, but as you ease off the accelerator, it could say it's costing you nothing, as you're not burning any fuel.
It's only if you look at the total cost for getting between two points that you see the real cost of the journey. Same applies to household energy use.

I must be extremely thick then, as i still think none of it actually matters. :rotfl::rotfl:


Yes, i know there are related costs for having something when you are not using it, but when the product is in use?



All i am interested in is how much money i am parting with at that point in time. Simple, isn't it? ( or maybe i am the one who is simple?)


Isn't that the name of the game?

Cardew

ani_26 wrote: »

I must be extremely thick then, as i still think none of it actually matters. :rotfl::rotfl:


Yes, i know there are related costs for having something when you are not using it, but when the product is in use?



All i am interested in is how much money i am parting with at that point in time. Simple, isn't it? ( or maybe i am the one who is simple?)


Isn't that the name of the game?

The instantaneous consumption is not the important factor in the overall consumption of any appliance.

Two examples:

My fridge compressor is, say, 200watts and yours is 100watts. Our Smart meters indicate that mine uses twice the electricity that yours uses. However my fridge is more efficient and economical than yours because the compressor only runs for a fraction of the time yours needs to run. So my fridge costs, say 60p a week to run and yours 90p a week.

So the fact that your Smart meter shows that it is costing half the cost of mine is meaningless.

You have a small gas CH boiler that the Smart meter indicates costs 80p an hour to run; my larger boiler indicates it costs £1.20 an hour. Yet mine overall could cost a lot less than yours to run.

ani_26

Cardew wrote: »

The instantaneous consumption is not the important factor in the overall consumption of any appliance.

Two examples:

My fridge compressor is, say, 200watts and yours is 100watts. Our Smart meters indicate that mine uses twice the electricity that yours uses. However my fridge is more efficient and economical than yours because the compressor only runs for a fraction of the time yours needs to run. So my fridge costs, say 60p a week to run and yours 90p a week.

So the fact that your Smart meter shows that it is costing half the cost of mine is meaningless.

You have a small gas CH boiler that the Smart meter indicates costs 80p an hour to run; my larger boiler indicates it costs £1.20 an hour. Yet mine overall could cost a lot less than yours to run.

It doesn't matter whose appliances are most cost efficient.

The issue is, how much in terms of hard cash, is coming out of my pocket, ( or anyone elses for that matter.)