Smart Meters

zeupater

Michaelw wrote: »

Three-quarters of smart meter owners recommend one

Around 82% of people with smart meters say they now have a better idea of what they are spending on energy, with the same proportion saying they have taken steps to reduce energy waste.

http://www.energylivenews.com/2018/04/04/three-quarters-of-smart-meter-owners-recommend-one/

Hi

Surprise, a poll conducted by the organisation responsible for promoting smart-meters claims that there's support for smart-meters ... odd really because the poll I mentioned was also conducted by a large player in the sector and the results are almost completely diametrically opposed!

Anyway, the really worrying statistic is that they're now crowing that 11million have now been installed, so if the DCC information given to parliament in February (as per previous post #257 on this thread referenced below) was correct (and why wouldn't it be!) then 'only' somewhere well over 99.99% of those meters will need rectification or replacement! ...

zeupater wrote: »

Hi All

Apparently questions have been asked in parliamentary committees and in house debates regarding smart-metering leading to the revelation that as of ....

... the end of January 2018 somewhere between 8 & 10 million smart-meters had been installed in the UK of which, according to the DCC, only around 250 conforming to the SMETS2 standard had been supplied for testing. Questions raised in Parliament related to the Smart Meters Bill on 5th February 2018 <Hansard v635 c1288> suggested that only 80 of the 250 supplied units had been installed to that date even though SMETS2 units should have been installed in volume from 2014 onwards ...

Smart-Metering: A clever green solution rapidly becoming a white elephant?

The article goes on to highlight & question the reason for extending project timescales by delaying the date ...

... by which licensable activities will have ceased from 2018 to 2023 is likely the first official recognition that the project is seriously behind schedule and unlikely to meet the 2020 deadline as specified by the EU ...

... also highlighting an inconsistency between the 80 SMETS2 linked to the DCC by January 2018 & previous (January 2017) claims made by the DCC that they had attained ...

... SMWAN coverage of 97% to in excess of 99% for installations in various areas ..

... apparently a test conducted before any of the 240 SMETS2 compliant meters had been made available for testing.


There's also an interesting take on the validity of the BEIS project cost/benefit analysis with respect to delays and duplication ...

Interesting .... :think:

HTH
Z

In my book, if they're not fully compliant with the SMETS2 specification, which should have been the case since 2014, they shouldn't be counted, so the real figure isn't around 11million ... it's less than 500 !! :eek:

.... now that's what I'd classify as those responsible for maintaining a positive media presence simply spinning a story on a failing project, but at least their 'Gaz & Leccy' cartoons aren't quite as frequent, so that may be saying something ...

HTH
Z

EachPenny

I'm now getting emails from National Grid badgering me to get a smart meter fitted. Not a single word in the email says anything about it being optional.

Near the bottom of the message is a huge orange button saying "BOOK INSTALLATION NOW".

There is no button allowing me to say "No thanks (I don't want one of your useless meters)".

Perturbed there was no apparent (legally required?) opt-out facility I was about to email them to complain. I double checked before risking making a fool of myself and noticed something at the very bottom right hand side of the screen. Zooming in, the word "Unsubscribe" appears - in tiny grey text - which all but disappears when viewed at normal resolution. Something like this:- Unsubscribe - although MSE sensibly doesn't have a light enough grey nor small enough font to accurately represent the original.

Whatever your views on the benefits of smart meters it is an absolute scandal that this campaign is being carried out using some of the dodgiest marketing tricks going. The companies involved, and the Government, should hang their heads in shame for adopting the kind of tactics normally reserved to the shadiest of characters. It makes an absolute mockery of efforts to make people more aware of fraud and consumer rights.

mbmonty

My biggest issue is that the public is paying for the industry to obtain a huge benefit.

The programme costs seem to vary between £7bn and £13bn, which we will all pay for in the long run.

It has been poorly implemented, loads of misleading people, giving them bricks that do not work when they switch supplier, I know they will do a firmware upgrade but honestly what a shambles.

If this had not been mandated by Gov and given deadlines I very much doubt it would have passed the business case test that sit within large programmes and are supposed to be reviewed along the way.

The so called consumer benefits are just rubbish, unless you count them not stealing your money with direct debits that they punish you not to take.

Now if they had a consumer unit that was smart, devices you put all around your home that taught you how to reduce energy or did it for you then maybe that is something consumers could buy into if they wanted it, not be forced into it.

However, look at the bigger picture, the large energy companies are making more money from gambling in the energy market than they are from supplying energy, they would not be able to profit in that gambling without our buying power, yet they continue to rob us blind.

Now we have two of the big 6 wanting to merge and you can bet it will be allowed despite the fact that it ruins competition and makes it even harder for new entrants or existing ones that are struggling to grow because of that gambling.

At the Tory conference in October, the Prime Minister announced legislation to rein in !!!8220;rip-off!!!8221; bills in her speech.



Business and Energy Secretary Greg Clark said the savings from the new law would chip at the £1.4bn over-payments. CHIP away, just give people their money back NOW!



After 2020, Ofgem will recommend to the Government whether the caps should be extended on an annual basis to 2023. WHY should this take years, when we all know we are being ripped off.


Last month Theresa May said the bill would !!!8220;force energy companies to change their ways!!!8221; With the price cap.

So we all know they are a bunch of C&£(""&££'s

There was of course one loophole, the cap allowed for supplier costs, so all they are doing is artificially increasing their costs by gambling in the energy market.

It is bad enough we give them billions for these dumb meters only to be shafted in our bills.

The more I see of how this market functions the more I think we need to go back to the drawing board, maybe even nationalise if that is what it takes.

It is clear the balance between consumers and shareholders is too conflicted.

MeterMan

mbmonty wrote: »

After 2020, Ofgem will recommend to the Government whether the caps should be extended on an annual basis to 2023. WHY should this take years, when we all know we are being ripped off.

How would you propose a price cap works?

mbmonty

MeterMan wrote: »

How would you propose a price cap works?

In a normal market I would not have a price cap at all, but this market is messed up.

I am not sure it can be fixed without nationalising and starting over, then banning this gambling, but as that is not going to happen I would screw down the companies so that their gambling pays us.

I would limit the amount of profit they can earn to a ridiculously low amount, I would limit what they can pay in dividends until all the sensible money sold their shares, then I would break them up and buy them on the cheap.

The idea of doing this cap then waiting x years then see what happens just shows they do not have a clue what they are doing.

The cap has been cut back so much it is hardly going to be worth it and meanwhile the energy companies are tweaking the market to make even more profit at our expense.

People need to be able to afford to heat, the price of energy is ridiculously high.

If you give them an inch they will take a mile.

System

mbmonty wrote: »

In a normal market I would not have a price cap at all, but this market is messed up.

I am not sure it can be fixed without nationalising and starting over, then banning this gambling, but as that is not going to happen I would screw down the companies so that their gambling pays us.

I would limit the amount of profit they can earn to a ridiculously low amount, I would limit what they can pay in dividends until all the sensible money sold their shares, then I would break them up and buy them on the cheap.

The idea of doing this cap then waiting x years then see what happens just shows they do not have a clue what they are doing.

The cap has been cut back so much it is hardly going to be worth it and meanwhile the energy companies are tweaking the market to make even more profit at our expense.

People need to be able to afford to heat, the price of energy is ridiculously high.

If you give them an inch they will take a mile.

The facts do not back up your argument that the price of energy in the UK is 'ridiculously high'. I suspect that you are too young to know how bad many Nationalised industries were in the UK.

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/10186/8482435/Q12017_electricity_prices_graphics.pdf

quiet_advisor

Hengus wrote: »

The facts do not back up your argument that the price of energy in the UK is 'ridiculously high'. I suspect that you are too young to know how bad many Nationalised industries were in the UK.

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/10186/8482435/Q12017_electricity_prices_graphics.pdf

Totally agree re nationalised industries, having worked for one and subsequently in both large and small private companies. The Nat Ind was primarily run to benefit managers and staff by allowing an easy time and generous benefits, with low expectations of customer service as it didn't really matter as there was no competition. In addition, Nat Ind was used as one of the economic levers by sucessive governments, either starved of capital or forced to spend money to pump prime the economy - this lead to inefficient investment and generated a culture that it didn't really matter as the Nat Ind was not allowed to fail like a private company.

My experience is that competition does improve customer service and prices . However, enhanced competition needs to be accompanied by adequate customer protection (e.g. regulation) to prevent market abuse.
QA

Michaelw

I've noticed the standing charge daily has risen to 30.400p on british gas smart meter prepayment for electricity, there does appear to be also increases in both gas and electricity prices.

These tariff menues are of more use then daily use and need to be kept an eye on.

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/02/prepay-and-vulnerable-energy-customers-to-see-gas-and-electricity-bills-increase/

gf24

I live in shared accommodation. Would a smart meter show which room in the house is using the most electric & save this information?

System

gf24 wrote: »

I live in shared accommodation. Would a smart meter show which room in the house is using the most electric & save this information?

Welcome to forum. No - it is nothing more than a meter that records usage which it sends to the supplier.