Energy smart meters are a threat to privacy, says watchdog

[Little John]

I think it's like ID cards, a centralised medical records database, and other big systems that store personal data. In an ideal world, where the genuine wellbeing of every citizen is the only objective, it could bring real benefits. But we don't live in that sort of world, and the risks of misuse are too high.

Yep.

[kenneal - lagger]

With smart metering you could disconnect all the "windmill" NIMBYs first when there's a power shortage.

[RenewableCandy]

That would be excellent but (therefore?) extremely unlikely.

[Tarrel]

With smart metering you could disconnect all the "windmill" NIMBYs first when there's a power shortage.

Starting with Donald Trump

[kenneal - lagger]

Good thinking there, Tarrel.

[Mr. Fox]

In the news again...

Public may end up paying for obsolete smart meters that save little, MPs warn

The government's £11bn roll-out of smart gas and electricity meters will cost every home about £215 over the next 15 years – yet households will save at most just 3% a year on the average energy bill by 2030, MPs have warned.

Householders would save an average of just 2% on the typical annual bill of £1,328 until 2020, rising to £43 a year or 3% by 2030, the influential public accounts select committee said.

It said the Department of Energy & Climate Change had estimated the cost of the programme to install smart meters at £10.6bn, with households contributing through their energy bills.

The average impact on bills of the suppliers' net costs was expected to peak at £11 a year in 2017. The £215 represents the capital cost of installing the equipment, which will be borne by consumers between 2015 and 2030.

Technical spec (SMETS2) here.

[Little John]

A simple, cost effective way to limit domestic consumption is to ration. Every household gets a personal energy allowance that costs X based on the number, ages, medical needs etc of that household. After that the price rises per unit of energy used and keeps rising the more a household uses over and above the basic allowance. That way, anyone who wants and can afford to use loads of energy can so so, but will progressively pay through the nose for the privilege. The extra money they pay for their profligate consumption can be used to subsidise the cost of the basic allowance. It's simple, it's progressive and so it is fair.

Oh no, wait, I forget, we don't do "progressive" or "fair" any more in this country. Instead, we let the "market decide".

[Mr. Fox]

If only there were a forum somewhere where such ideas could be discussed...

[vtsnowedin]

A simple, cost effective way to limit domestic consumption is to ration. Every household gets a personal energy allowance that costs X based on the number, ages, medical needs etc of that household. After that the price rises per unit of energy used and keeps rising the more a household uses over and above the basic allowance. That way, anyone who wants and can afford to use loads of energy can so so, but will progressively pay through the nose for the privilege. The extra money they pay for their profligate consumption can be used to subsidise the cost of the basic allowance. It's simple, it's progressive and so it is fair.

Oh no, wait, I forget, we don't do "progressive" or "fair" any more in this country. Instead, we let the "market decide".

My electric co-op (by state rule) charges a lifeline rate of .09/kwh for the first 200 kwhs then .22/kwh after that A person that is thrifty with the lights can get out of it for $30 per month. No smart meters needed.

[Little John]

My electric co-op (by state rule) charges a lifeline rate of .09/kwh for the first 200 kwhs then .22/kwh after that A person that is thrifty with the lights can get out of it for $30 per month. No smart meters needed.

Exactly. Though, as I'm sure you might guess, I would go the whole hog and make it fully progressive. That is to say, instead of a single, blunt charge differential at 200kwh, I would have several such differentials.

[vtsnowedin]

My electric co-op (by state rule) charges a lifeline rate of .09/kwh for the first 200 kwhs then .22/kwh after that A person that is thrifty with the lights can get out of it for $30 per month. No smart meters needed.

Exactly. Though, as I'm sure you might guess, I would go the whole hog and make it fully progressive. That is to say, instead of a single, blunt charge differential at 200kwh, I would have several such differentials.

Ever hear of the KISS advice? Stands for "keep it simple stupid." 200 kwhs is enough to run the fridge and the furnace and a few lights when needed and not much else. Even a chest freezer would put you over a bit. If your over the line, your over. Why should how much over matter?

[Little John]

My electric co-op (by state rule) charges a lifeline rate of .09/kwh for the first 200 kwhs then .22/kwh after that A person that is thrifty with the lights can get out of it for $30 per month. No smart meters needed.

Exactly. Though, as I'm sure you might guess, I would go the whole hog and make it fully progressive. That is to say, instead of a single, blunt charge differential at 200kwh, I would have several such differentials.

Ever hear of the KISS advice? Stands for "keep it simple stupid." 200 kwhs is enough to run the fridge and the furnace and a few lights when needed and not much else. Even a chest freezer would put you over a bit. If your over the line, your over. Why should how much over matter?

Because a progressive scale allows for even lower, [subsidised] prices at the bottom end by applying higher, [over the odds] prices at the top end. Because energy, the basis of everything else, should be part of the commons. Because I do not believe it is culturally, politically or morally sustainable for a nation to exist where there is no limit to how big the difference between the rich and poor can get.

Because I am a socialist.

[vtsnowedin]

Exactly. Though, as I'm sure you might guess, I would go the whole hog and make it fully progressive. That is to say, instead of a single, blunt charge differential at 200kwh, I would have several such differentials.

Ever hear of the KISS advice? Stands for "keep it simple stupid." 200 kwhs is enough to run the fridge and the furnace and a few lights when needed and not much else. Even a chest freezer would put you over a bit. If your over the line, your over. Why should how much over matter?

Because a progressive scale allows for even lower, [subsidised] prices at the bottom end by applying higher, [over the odds] prices at the top end. Because energy, the basis of everything else, should be part of the commons. Because I do not believe it is culturally, politically or morally sustainable for a nation to exist where there is no limit to how big the difference between the rich and poor can get.

Because I am a socialist.

What's that quote? Oh yes "sooner or later you socialist run out of other peoples money." There is a limit to how much you can charge a rich man for his energy. That limit is where he can go provide it for himself by his own means. Of course you would try to tax that to make it fair. Energy a part of the commons ? I don't see how. From Neanderthals gathering wood for the fire on, those who do have and those that don't freeze. There is a limit to how big the difference between rich and poor is. It is brought about by the rich needing to spend their money to derive any pleasure or use from it. The poor should make sure the rich pay dearly for their pleasure.

[Tarrel]

Well I'm not having one (a smart meter). I'd rather go off-grid first.

[PS_RalphW]

200kwh is about what my family of 4 use in a month, all in, cooking, washing, TV, computers etc. Including electric shower at 7kw. We pay higher rates for the first kwh's, about 24p iirc