Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kitz]

Hi
quote Just think how high prices would have been if we had not privatised them?

Probably not as high ! for political reasons and No share holders

I believe this too.... and a lil bit off topic but I dont believe that selling off practically everything in the late 80's went the way it was foreseen. Too much is now owned by too few and most of it foreign.  There is becoming less and less choice as time goes by.

IMHO one of the biggest things to go wrong was selling off accommodation.  Maggies view of everyone being able to own their own home seems to have gone drastically wrong.  Any cheap houses on the market are now snapped up by 'landlords' and a heck of a lot of todays younger generation just dont stand a cat in hells chance of ever getting on the housing ladder. 

[camallison]

I fail to see the point of smart meters being installed nationwide at some cost.
Due to the high cost of energy, I suspect we all use as little as possible, so I don't need a smart meter to tell me how much it is costing at any particular time.

exo

I looked into smart meters some time ago, when British Gas tried to persuade me to accept one.

The 'point' turned out to be buried in the small print.  By accepting the smart meter, consumers are deemed to also be accepting a change to the T&C of the gas supply.  It means that consumers who accept a smart meter give British Gas (or Centrica or whatever name they want to use) permission to remotely disconnect the supply, without consent of the home owner.

The significance of this goes back to the winter of 09/10, when it became apparent that this country does not store nearly as much gas as our European neighbours.  For that reason the supply nearly ran out, at which point supplies to essential industry, hospitals, etc would all just have petered out -it would have been a national disaster. 

With smart meters, if things get that bad again, BG will be able to switch off non essential users - ie householders - without switching off essential industry.  It would be a last resort, but smart meters are basically a cheap alternative to the other way of solving the problem, which would be to provide proper storage facilities to see us through another extreme winter.

It's not just the T&C of course.  Without a smart meter, BG would have to send a man around to every house when the gas was re-enabled to ensure that all pilots etc were lit.  That would cost BG too much of course and, if they were willing to spend big money on the problem, they would simply have improved storage facilities.

If we do have another extreme winter, and the gas storage proves to be inadequate, those with smart meters may live to regret it.  That, at least, was my analysis.  So far, I have avoided my smart meters by refusing to accept the change to T&C.   Whether that tactic will work indefinitely, only time will tell.

Mr Allison (BG director of Smart Metering) still has a long way to go to convince me, at least.

Rant over

BS warning!!!!!!

I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick 7LM - the ability to turn off a customer is ONLY for persistent non-payers and fraudulent usage.  They have no automatic right to turn you off at whim if supplies are dwindling.

Even though Petter Allison (who you flag up) is no relation of mine (same surname), I DID work alongside his team in the specification, design and build of the smart meters.  The principal benefits of such meters are:

1.  No meter readers trudging round;

2.  More accurate billing for fuel actually used;

3.  The ability to profile usage and better predict in the future;

4.  ..... and last of all, the customer has the ability to monitor and choose to turn their system down to save money.

At NO time has BG or any other sought to be able to introduce rolling cuts via this mechanism.  That is evident in that to turn back on a supply, a meter man will have to visit the premises, it can't be turned back on remotely and there is no facility to do so.  That is more to do with safety - imagine turning a supply off and on and not knowing what state the connection is in.

Colin

[oldfogy]

On the subject of S.M.A.R.T. meters.

I was taking part in a trial for a company last and early this year, but eventually dropped out because it was costing too much to be involved.

1. Internet connection (Modem/Router/Switcher) all had to be permanently turned on.
2. Power supply/adapter for the receiver also had to be permanently turned on.
3. Another annoyance was not having a spare outlet on the router so involved buying a switcher to increase the number of RJ45 outlets, which again was another expense which could never be recouped.
4. A set of 4 batteries in the sender unit only lasted roughly 3-4 weeks due to the "units" being faulty.

Although to be honest I thought it was just another government money give-away scheme to the people running the trial, why, basically exactly the same system was and is already being run and operated by various companies, whereas you have a small monitor which can show you what is being consumed, which I had already tried when I had the loan of one of the units and also did not involve Internet connections etc and only the receiver needed to be turned on.

Although even then I stopped using it, not to mention re-named it "The Worry meter"
Simply because every time you looked at what was being consumed you would worry about it, yes you would think what could you turn down or off.

1. I tried turning off or not using the hall and stairs light's, but after my second fall in the dark gave up on that money saving venture.
2. I even tried turning down the heating thermostat, but after suffering from mild hypothermia came to the decision that was not a good idea also.
3. Also tried cutting down on the amount of cooking but after coming out of hospital with suffering from starvation I gave up on that also.
4. Threw the thing in the cupboard and carried on as normal before having a breakdown wondering if I would be able to cut down on anything.

[camallison]

Yes OF - the consumer comes last in my list of benefits!

The unit you had, if it was ever installed on a large roll-out would not have had the hassle of all the connections you speak about.  It will, as you say, have only been a trial unit and hence temporary connection to t'Internet for that trial.

Colin

[oldfogy]

Yes OF - the consumer comes last in my list of benefits!

The unit you had, if it was ever installed on a large roll-out would not have had the hassle of all the connections you speak about.  It will, as you say, have only been a trial unit and hence temporary connection to t'Internet for that trial.

Colin

Sorry but you are wrong there, it was not temporary equipment, that is how it was supposed to work.
Actually I believe the one that BG advertise works on exactly the same method..

Apart from them sorting out the faulty units everything as I described would need to be in-place, unless they could send the signal back down the electric cable to their equipment.

If you did not have a internet connection then the second option is used with just a small monitor and the clamp (sender) attached to the meter cable.


edit:
Text added, The word signal was added.

[camallison]

   I stand corrected, apologies - they weren't originally set up to be installed that way.  Customer service/convenience again last in the list then!   

Colin

[sevenlayermuddle]

I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick 7LM - the ability to turn off a customer is ONLY for persistent non-payers and fraudulent usage.  They have no automatic right to turn you off at whim if supplies are dwindling.

I'm sorry Colin, but I can't accept that. 

BG have always had the right to turn off the supply in these circumstances, so why would they now be seeking a change to the T&C, that specifically grants them the right to remotely turn off the supply for those with smart meters?

But even if there were no intention to use it as a control valve to compensate for lack of storage, having seen for ourselves the competency of BG and it's related companies, I'm just not willing to entrust them with that responsibility.   

[sevenlayermuddle]

PS... Colin,

Sorry it hadn't dawned on me (but probably should have) that you share a surname with the BG man who I named.  It wasn't my intention to suggest there was any connection, and I hope it wasn't interpreted that way. 

[oldfogy]

The problem with turning anything off remotely is the fact they do not know if for arguments sake there are any medical equipment that they did not know about being stopped.

Also, with turning a supply back on they would need to check that nothing has been turned on that could be dangerous when the power was restored, such as gas boilers with faulty thermocoupler. (The thing that turns the gas off when and if the boiler pilot light goes out)

Don't ask me what happens if and when any of these might happen if and when we get a normal power cut because I don't know.

[sevenlayermuddle]

Also, with turning a supply back on they would need to check that nothing has been turned on that could be dangerous when the power was restored, such as gas boilers with faulty thermocoupler. (The thing that turns the gas off when and if the boiler pilot light goes out)

That's where the Smart meters come in, they greatly eases that problem, making it easier for BG to manipulate the supplies, without the overhead of visiting every household. 

Maybe Colin can assist here, but I seem to recall the smart meters that I checked out did have some fail-safe built to identify those installations with problematic pilot lights.  It may just have been a gas-flow detector, which would have detected an unlit pilot?

[razpag]

I fail to see the point of smart meters being installed nationwide at some cost.
Due to the high cost of energy, I suspect we all use as little as possible, so I don't need a smart meter to tell me how much it is costing at any particular time.

exo

I looked into smart meters some time ago, when British Gas tried to persuade me to accept one.

The 'point' turned out to be buried in the small print.  By accepting the smart meter, consumers are deemed to also be accepting a change to the T&C of the gas supply.  It means that consumers who accept a smart meter give British Gas (or Centrica or whatever name they want to use) permission to remotely disconnect the supply, without consent of the home owner.

The significance of this goes back to the winter of 09/10, when it became apparent that this country does not store nearly as much gas as our European neighbours.  For that reason the supply nearly ran out, at which point supplies to essential industry, hospitals, etc would all just have petered out -it would have been a national disaster. 

With smart meters, if things get that bad again, BG will be able to switch off non essential users - ie householders - without switching off essential industry.  It would be a last resort, but smart meters are basically a cheap alternative to the other way of solving the problem, which would be to provide proper storage facilities to see us through another extreme winter.

It's not just the T&C of course.  Without a smart meter, BG would have to send a man around to every house when the gas was re-enabled to ensure that all pilots etc were lit.  That would cost BG too much of course and, if they were willing to spend big money on the problem, they would simply have improved storage facilities.

If we do have another extreme winter, and the gas storage proves to be inadequate, those with smart meters may live to regret it.  That, at least, was my analysis.  So far, I have avoided my smart meters by refusing to accept the change to T&C.   Whether that tactic will work indefinitely, only time will tell.

Mr Allison (BG director of Smart Metering) still has a long way to go to convince me, at least.

Rant over

BS warning!!!!!!

I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick 7LM - the ability to turn off a customer is ONLY for persistent non-payers and fraudulent usage.  They have no automatic right to turn you off at whim if supplies are dwindling.

Even though Petter Allison (who you flag up) is no relation of mine (same surname), I DID work alongside his team in the specification, design and build of the smart meters.  The principal benefits of such meters are:

1.  No meter readers trudging round;

2.  More accurate billing for fuel actually used;

3.  The ability to profile usage and better predict in the future;

4.  ..... and last of all, the customer has the ability to monitor and choose to turn their system down to save money.

At NO time has BG or any other sought to be able to introduce rolling cuts via this mechanism.  That is evident in that to turn back on a supply, a meter man will have to visit the premises, it can't be turned back on remotely and there is no facility to do so.  That is more to do with safety - imagine turning a supply off and on and not knowing what state the connection is in.

Colin

Hi Colin.

You quite rightly sound proud of your involvment in the design of the SMART meters, and obviously will defend it's implementation. But, I find the 4 reasons you list as being advantageous over existing installations not particularly 'mind blowing', if you pardon my poor description ?

I receive dual-fuel from SP and take my own readings every 3 months and e-mail them off. Surely that covers the first 3 reasons given. As regards monitoring usage on a personal level, is it not a case of just use it when needed ??

We are all vastly aware of energy price hikes, greenhouse gasses, the environment etc ....... so I think most folk will be prudent when making judgements on whether it's cost effective to fill the whole kettle with water, or just enough to cover the 2 brews you are making without needing to confer with a SMART meter. 

If we hark back to the good old days of Economy 7 or something similar, whereby particular useage may be cheaper at differing times, then maybe a SMART meter may benefit me. I genuinely can't see a positive for me at the moment though Colin.

[oldfogy]

That's where the Smart meters come in, they greatly eases that problem, making it easier for BG to manipulate the supplies, without the overhead of visiting every household. 

Maybe Colin can assist here, but I seem to recall the smart meters that I checked out did have some fail-safe built to identify those installations with problematic pilot lights.  It may just have been a gas-flow detector, which would have detected an unlit pilot?

There are fail-safes and then there fail-safes.

None of which are any good if for arguments sake I have not informed the energy authority that I now have a dialysis machine or something similar and am dependent on a constant energy supply.

Mmm, no meter reader coming around who also visually inspect the meter, so would that mean not having to tidy up the fix that some people use to fiddle the supply?


Smart meters basically only have one benefit, which is for the supplier to be able to monitor the consumers consumption so as to be able to bill more accurately and also to do away with using a meter reading service therefore cutting costs.

[camallison]

That's where the Smart meters come in, they greatly eases that problem, making it easier for BG to manipulate the supplies, without the overhead of visiting every household. 

Maybe Colin can assist here, but I seem to recall the smart meters that I checked out did have some fail-safe built to identify those installations with problematic pilot lights.  It may just have been a gas-flow detector, which would have detected an unlit pilot?

There are fail-safes and then there fail-safes.

None of which are any good if for arguments sake I have not informed the energy authority that I now have a dialysis machine or something similar and am dependent on a constant energy supply.

Mmm, no meter reader coming around who also visually inspect the meter, so would that mean not having to tidy up the fix that some people use to fiddle the supply?


Smart meters basically only have one benefit, which is for the supplier to be able to monitor the consumers consumption so as to be able to bill more accurately and also to do away with using a meter reading service therefore cutting costs.

Spot on!  All dressed up with a government mandate to use smart to "educate the public" in their energy usage.  Instead, as OF says, it doesn't do anything more than worry the hell out of some and induce complete indifference in others.  The "initiative will roll on for more years yet.

In Italy, in the main cities, they have a superb system for their meter reading with all of the infrastructure supplied as well as the meters - JUST to simplify meter reading and load forecasting.  At least they were honest as to why they were installing.

BTW, 7LM - no, it didn't bother me, just that I know Petter quite well - only through the smart meter work.  As Unky knows, I was well-connected in the utilities sector before I retired.  It paid the mortgage when I had one!

Colin

[CurlyWhirly]

I believe this too.... and a lil bit off topic but I dont believe that selling off practically everything in the late 80's went the way it was foreseen. Too much is now owned by too few and most of it foreign.  There is becoming less and less choice as time goes by.

Yes and in the case of energy companies, before privatisation, there were over 30 energy companies and now this has been reduced to the 'big 6'

That's another reason why I chose the cooperative, I wanted to give my business to one of the new entrants to punish the cartel that we have at the moment 

[renluop]

Just wondering what's the source of the Cooperative's supply; aren't virtual suppliers to personal customers buying from cartel members?