How to benefit from smart meters?

[Sporky McGuffin]

One positive report (it just happened to be the last report he commissioned) out of three was enough to impose billions in costs upon the energy customers of the UK for nothing in return (Centrica estimated that the smart meter rollout would add £40 to the bill for each of their customers).

How did you go from £40 per customer to "billions"? How many households do you think there are in the UK?

Even if each of us lived alone it'd add up to £268M, an order of magnitude lower than the lowest reasonable definition of "billions".

I hate to interrupt someone when they're ranting, but if your anger is based on bad maths then it might be worth thinking again.

 

[Cabinetman]

I don’t know what he was thinking but possibly

How did you go from £40 per customer to "billions"? How many households do you think there are in the UK?

Even if each of us lived alone it'd add up to £268M, an order of magnitude lower than the lowest reasonable definition of "billions".

I hate to interrupt someone when they're ranting, but if your anger is based on bad maths then it might be worth thinking again.

I don’t know what he was thinking but possibly the difference in the maths is based on what this whole ridiculous exercise must be costing, I’m sure they’ve spent a great deal more than £40 trying to persuade me just up to now before it actually gets to fitting one and then replacing it a couple of times. Ian

 

[John Brown]

I don’t know what he was thinking but possibly

I don’t know what he was thinking but possibly the difference in the maths is based on what this whole ridiculous exercise must be costing, I’m sure they’ve spent a great deal more than £40 trying to persuade me just up to now before it actually gets to fitting one and then replacing it a couple of times. Ian

It's your fault then! If you'd simply rolled over in the beginning, it would have saved a lot of money!

 

[sploo]

I get where you're coming from but I respectfully disagree. Despite the companies insistence it's for the good of all it's all about maximising profits. Saving money and selling exported data.

Literally anything almost all private enterprise does is about maximising profits; so the problem is that if the industry wasn't installing smart meters it would likely be accused of doing so only in order to reduce costs and maximising profits.

The grid already knows what a 'green period is', even the most uninformed person can take a reasonable guess at what a 'peak time' is, companies already know what peak usage is in my locality, it doesn't need such fine granularity, if it's really to help me..why is it 2 way?

I think you overestimate the knowledge/awareness/thought of the average human being!

'don't need to send people out to read meters..'

This in my humble opinion is a very very bad idea where is the consideration of the human cost and balance? How much would 1 paid meter reader contribute in taxes? I'd rather pay a bit more on my bills and keep people in a job than generate higher and higher profits for companies (might moderate that a bit if most of them were actually UK companies). And yes, I'm aware of all the arguements for profits so shareholders invest, so companies can invest, etc etc - that's partly cobblers too.

That's a broadly fair argument, but somewhat unrelated to the specifics of smart meters. Besides; if such meter readers were still employed I'm sure that companies would have them on zero hour zero benefits below minimum wage contracts anyway - so it's not like the existence of that job positively contributes to society.

 

[AlanY]

If you want a laugh, have a read of this (an article penned by a journalist who is also a passionate proponent of renewable energy):

https://theswitch.co.uk/blog/technology/smart-meter-disadvantages#smart-meters-a-comedy-of-errors
Other than that, I am finished with this thread. Do have a good weekend.

 

[Billy_wizz]

I guess you need to weigh the costs against that of meter readers.

True although not had a meter reader round for 2-3 years lol

 

[ivan]

No doubt we'll all have electric cars one day, but for me, not now, not yet. Early Vauxhall Leafs (leaves?) now have dying batteries, car virtually worthless. The batteries are getting better, but a 250 mile claimed range necesitates 30mph, just try 70 on a motorway in winter, heater on, wipers going and see how for you get. The UK would need 6 large nuclears to replace all the fossil fuel sold for transport. Not enough raw material to make lithium batteries for the world's cars, either. Hydrogen fuel cell might work, with hydrogen from photovoltaic electrolysis in the Gulf states.

 

[Sporky McGuffin]

No doubt we'll all have electric cars one day, but for me, not now, not yet. Early Vauxhall Leafs (leaves?) now have dying batteries, car virtually worthless. The batteries are getting better, but a 250 mile claimed range necesitates 30mph, just try 70 on a motorway in winter, heater on, wipers going and see how for you get. The UK would need 6 large nuclears to replace all the fossil fuel sold for transport. Not enough raw material to make lithium batteries for the world's cars, either. Hydrogen fuel cell might work, with hydrogen from photovoltaic electrolysis in the Gulf states.

Perhaps you should do some basic fact checking before posting.

The Leaf is a Nissan, not a Vauxhall. No Leaf model has a claimed or official range of 250 miles. The first ones are ten years old now; the 2010 and 2011 models are all around £6.5k - £7.5k on Autotrader. That's significantly more than a same-age Ford Focus.

 

[Ozi]

And what, exactly, is that? Just accept what the 'experts' tell us to do, without question, I suppose?

Well I tend to listen to experts - don't you

 

[Ollie78]

Well I tend to listen to experts - don't you

Depends who`s paying them.
A bit like "follow the science" or "statistics indicate".

Ollie

 

[Spectric]

Initially electric vehicles will be like the first cordless tools, not much use when the battery is knackered due to cost of new battery but also with the EV you have the labour involved as well.

 

[HamsterJam]

The real reason energy companies are so keen to install smart meters is the government have set ambitious targets to roll them out and OFGEM are imposing substantial fines for not achieving them.

 

[Sporky McGuffin]

Initially electric vehicles will be like the first cordless tools, not much use when the battery is knackered due to cost of new battery but also with the EV you have the labour involved as well.

The technology will inevitably get better and better, but there are first generation Tesla Model S that are still trundling around happily with 6-figure mileages. The batteries do deteriorate, but nothing like old NiCads did, and even when they're effectively fine for car use they can go into storage or be recycled.

 

[D_W]

No doubt we'll all have electric cars one day, but for me, not now, not yet. Early Vauxhall Leafs (leaves?) now have dying batteries, car virtually worthless. The batteries are getting better, but a 250 mile claimed range necesitates 30mph, just try 70 on a motorway in winter, heater on, wipers going and see how for you get. The UK would need 6 large nuclears to replace all the fossil fuel sold for transport. Not enough raw material to make lithium batteries for the world's cars, either. Hydrogen fuel cell might work, with hydrogen from photovoltaic electrolysis in the Gulf states.

There'd plenty of raw materials to make batteries. They probably won't have cobalt that much longer, and maybe not even lithium.

The issue with the leaf here in the states where it gets truly cold is they had a short range to start with and then didn't thermally condition the batteries. That was an error of thrift that Tesla didn't make.

I don't have a plug in car either and no immediate plans for one, but my bil drives a Tesla 3 90 miles round trip to commute 3 years so far and no issues. His work is across from a township building that charges for free, so on the odd one or two times he forgets to plug his car in overnight he just charges for free and crosses the street. The garage under my building charges up to 10 kWh free each day, which would move a model 3 30 miles or more. If I had one, it would leave me at a 15 mile surplus on a daily basis.

But the thing that is coming is autonomous taxis.

 

[D_W]

The technology will inevitably get better and better, but there are first generation Tesla Model S that are still trundling around happily with 6-figure mileages. The batteries do deteriorate, but nothing like old NiCads did, and even when they're effectively fine for car use they can go into storage or be recycled.

I think the current extended range 3 is to get to about 300k miles before it loses 10 percent of battery capacity. I don't think the batteries will be the thing that takes the cars off of the road. What I gather about the older hybrids, it's not the battery that gives up, it's the charging system and the cost to replace it.

 

[Spectric]

The other important thing not mentioned in the mileage claims is the terrain, you will get more miles per charge in Norfolk than in places like Cumbria and the Pennines where the roads have more gradients, and the power taken out on the climb is not put back through regenerative braking going down.

 

[John Brown]

The other important thing not mentioned in the mileage claims is the terrain, you will get more miles per charge in Norfolk than in places like Cumbria and the Pennines where the roads have more gradients, and the power taken out on the climb is not put back through regenerative braking going down.

It's certainly true that you get worse mileage in hilly terrain(we have a PHEV, and live in a hilly region, so I speak from experience) but to be fair, at least some of the energy is recovered through regenerative braking. With an ICE car, none of the energy is recovered, and with conventional braking you produce more harmful brake disc dust.

But if course the mileage claims are overblown. Just like they are for ICE vehicles. Surely we all knew that....

 

[D_W]

It's certainly true that you get worse mileage in hilly terrain(we have a PHEV, and live in a hilly region, so I speak from experience) but to be fair, at least some of the energy is recovered through regenerative braking. With an ICE car, none of the energy is recovered, and with conventional braking you produce more harmful brake disc dust.

But if course the mileage claims are overblown. Just like they are for ICE vehicles. Surely we all knew that....

I don't know what the mileage claims are over there, but do recall some guests telling us of 60mpg cars over there. The testing methodology here in the states is prescribed, so the results are more realistic. For example, a 2 ton SUV might have ratings like 19/27 mpg (city/highway) with a combined rating of 22 or23.

People living in rural areas will better the rating, and people in urban will have trouble matching the low side if they live somewhere that there are hills. Spouse's car (similar to above) is 18/25 rated. On highway trips (vacation, visit relatives), it gets about 27mpg at a little above 70mph. In the hills here where all stoplights are at the bottoms of hills (terrible place for efficiency, but stoplights at the tops of hills are death traps due to no view of traffic coming over the hill), the mrs. gets about 16 mpg. We live in a retail corridor (the development is just off of it), so any trip is generally met with stop lights and only a small number get to the highway.

It' be easy to complain about mileage, but it's a product of the area and use and driving more on the highway to improve the mileage doesn't make much sense (we don't drive many miles).

hybrids get close to their rated mileage here, even in the hills. Former boss of mine had a slightly smaller SUV in the same traffic conditions - hybrid. based on its rating, the gas version would've gotten about 18 mpg - he was averaging 29. The cost for hybrid at the time was $8k as an option, so it would've never paid off, but the difference in city conditions for a hybrid is stark.

 

[John Brown]

Well, my old diesel Mercedes easily managed over 60mpg on a run. Unlike most transatlantic comparisons, our gallons are bigger than yours, but we also tend towards smaller engines.
I believe that in America, no-one would admit to having a car that averaged more than 30mpg, in case their masculinity came under suspicion.

 

[Sporky McGuffin]

But if course the mileage claims are overblown. Just like they are for ICE vehicles. Surely we all knew that....

I think it's worth remembering that they aren't manufacturer claims - they're all measured according to a standardised test, so "Official" is probably a better term than "claimed". I'm not disputing that the test isn't perfect, but it firms a basis for comparison. My AWD diesel estate doesn't hit the official numbers, but my little lightweight sports car beats its - they end up at pretty much the same fuel cost per mile.