SAY NO TO SMART METER INSTALLATIONS - ITS FRAUD « Alternative Technology Assn Forums

Alternative Technology Assn Forums » General

SAY NO TO SMART METER INSTALLATIONS - ITS FRAUD

(243 posts) (57 voices)

Started 11 years ago by syn
Latest reply from petemoss

Tags:

CCTV home security

12…9 Next »

syn
Member

Smart Meters Only benefit the Electricity distributors/retailers and give them
the capacity and tools to increase energy chargers in the near future. There is absolutely not one single piece of evidence that the installation of smart meters will benefit the consumer or reduce energy consumption or greenhouse gases.

The taxpayer is been forced to pay for private business infra-structure and asset improvemet with no benefit to the consumer and no guarantee that energy costs will be lower - infact energy costs have already risen.

SAY NO TO SMART METER INSTALLATION WHEN THE KNOCK ON YOUR DOOR - BY LAY THEY CANNOT FORCE YOU TO ACCEPT THE SMART METER AND ACCORDING TO FAIR BUSINESS TRADING LAWS THEY CANNOT CHARGE YOU ADDED EXPENSES FOR INFRA_STRUCTURE COSTS ASSOCIATED FOR SOMETHING YOU HAVE NOT GOT

WRITE TO YOUR LOCAL AND FEDERAL MINISTERS AND ASK THEM TO LLODGE YOUR PROTEST AGAINST SMART METER ROLL-OUTS - ITS FRAUD!

IF THEY (INSTALLATION CONTRACTORS) SEND YOU A LETTER THAT TELLS YOU THAT SMART METERS WILL BE INSTALLED IN YOUR AREA - SIMPLY RING THE CONTACT NUMBER AND TELL THEM THAT YOU DO NOT WANT A SMART METER INSTALLED - THEY WILL SIMPLY CROSS YOU OFF THEIR LIST!

YOUR ARE NOT LEGALLY OBLIDGED TO HAVE A SMART METER INSTALLED - YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO REFUSE - AND REMEMBER THAT NO ONE CAN ENTER YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT!

SMART METER BYLAW's HAVE BEEN INACTED BUT THEY CANNOT BE ENFORCED UNTILL 2013 - BY THEN IF ENOUGH PEOPLE HAVE VOICE THEY COMPLAINTS THEN IT IS PROBABLE THAT THE BYLAW WILL BE RECEEDED.

ACT NOW -- DO NOT ACCEPT SMART METERS UNTIL THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PRIVATE BUSINESS CAN PROVIDE WRITTEN GUARANTEES OF THEIR BENEFITS TO YOU AND WRITTEN GUARANTEE"S THAT YOUR ENERGY COSTS WILL BE AT LEAST 20% LOWER THAN THEY WERE BEFORE THE ROLL-OUT -- LOWER PRICE GUARANTEE MUST BE FOR A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS with KNOWN INCREASE LEVELS AFTER 5 YEARS.

Posted Tuesday 14 Sep 2010 @ 1:48:13 pm from IP #
Damien
Member

Hi Syn,

The smart meter roll out in Victoria is a Government mandated roll out. Unfortunately, whilst we would agree that there are significant issues with whether or not individual households will benefit from the smart meters, and the time of use pricing structure that will be brought in, consumers do not have the option of not accepting the meters. Legally, our understanding is that the Goverment has directed disribution businesses to install smart meters at all Victorian properites consuming les than 160 MWh per year between Nov 2009 and 2013.

Given that one of the main objectives of the meters is to provide people an incentive (through a price signal) to shift electricity consumption to off-peak times on the network, in time this will prevent the need for distribtuors to build more expensive poles and wires across the network. Grid augmentation is the most expensive part of our electricity bills and if time of use tariffs (delivered thru smart meters) can prevent the need to augment the grid in this way, then electricity consumers will benefit by these avoided distribution costs.

Cheers,

Damien.

Posted Wednesday 15 Sep 2010 @ 4:14:25 am from IP #
Benny
Member

I got a smart meter. Its fine. I like it. I don't worry about conspiracy theories much.
I hope electricity prices do rise - to reflect the true cost of production and hopefully persuade users to be more careful with use.

Posted Wednesday 15 Sep 2010 @ 5:24:58 am from IP #
syn
Member

Benny

The issue is NOT about the smart meter itself - but the FACT that the taypayer is forced to pay for the infrastructure and asset improvemements of PRIVATE BUSINESS to reduce their costs in the "HOPE" that this will provide consumer benefits. Hell these utilities are owned by profit making enterprises, No conspiracy theories here - just plain facts.

What do you like about your new smart meter apart from the fact it is costing your more? You may be able to affort prices hikes but the majority of the public don't. Do you feel you have done something good for the enviroment by paying higher costs to private business. Is it OK that the governments subsidise these utilities at our expense and at the same time increase our costs while expanding the profits of these private enterprises.

Sure increasing electricity prices will force consumers to use less while these private enterprises increase profits by selling us less electricity for higher prices. A far better alternative is to directly rebate the consumer if they consume less energy at existing prices or simply provide all housholds with 2-3kW Solar panels at around th esame costs of this stupid tax-payer funded smart meter roll-out.

A 3kW PV Solar system would reduce public "Peak time" energy demand to almost NILL across Australia. Its time we think seriously about becomming "Grid disconnected"

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 1:41:41 am from IP #
franks
Member

Its a done deal, got a latter from Powercor, will in the next 2 years get a smart meter, hello TOU metering

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 2:06:35 am from IP #
Benny
Member

I had to pay for the smart meter because I wanted a PV system and the ability to record exported power as well as enable a TOU contract (if I wanted it). I see it as a normal part of upgrading equipment. If it means the utility can also remotely collect the meter information ( ie do things cheaper) then thats also good - I don't expect it to result in a lower power cost for me but perhaps a slightly smaller power cost increase. The efficiency gained by getting rid of a few power meter readers will be small and no way would just installing these meters result in a big drop in power costs - when the cost of fuel, wages etc are increasing much faster.
I like the power meter because it enables me to chose TOU metering. I don't like subsidising the profits of any private business, but if I want to use their products I don't have much choice.
I don't think you can provide a 2-3kW PV system at the same price as a smart meter - $10000 vs $150 ?
How can you rebate someone for using less energy ? Don't they just get an advantage by using less power/lower bill ? These nasty private businesses have to make a profit. With Synergy they're only partly a private business anyway - they are closely monitored by parliament who make sure they don't make huge profits because the parliament knows how sensitive the voters are to increasing charges. And there are all sorts of provisions for people who are less well off to protect them from high charges/being cutoff. I'm sure a truly private business would love to dump anyone who doesn't pay their bills and only supply the reliable payers - just like Telstra would love to only have to supply city based customers where they can use high capacity infrastructure with high returns.

When I buy a smart meter I don't see that I am buying a resource for the supplier - I am buying the equipment I need to get the service I want.

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 3:45:17 am from IP #
Karl
Member

Hi Syn,

Smart metering (and smart grids in general) is needed globally for us to be able to move forward with a 'green' economy. As the saying goes, "you can't manage what you don't measure", and that's certainly true with electricity; monthly/quarterly readings are woefully inadequate as a way of effecting behavioural change in people.

Smart meters are also a fundamental component of us being able to switch from fossil fuel to electric vehicles, especially if the vast majority of those vehicles are going to be charged when people get home at night (i.e. when it's dark). Even though EV's use less energy than their ICE counterparts, they still do draw a lot more power than has typically been the case. If companies aren't able to intelligently monitor the usage in near real-time, then there's a good chance capacity limits will be reached; particularly in suburbs with lots of EVs. This is one of the reasons why 'just' putting in solar isn't the whole answer (although it certainly is part of it, and I'm very happy with my 2.4kW system), since it doesn't address paradigm shifts in usage such as EVs will present.

Don't get me wrong; I agree with you that putting in more PV solar would have a large impact on our overall energy usage. The problem though is that PV systems don't usually generate their peak output at the time when people (i.e. society) need/want it, and it also doesn't account for overcast days, etc. The ability to accurately monitor energy usage will allow the electricity companies to interact with customers appliances such as air conditioners during peak load periods (*if they opt in and allow that to occur*) and adjust the thermostats in order to reduce the demand on the grid. Being able to do this allows existing generation capacity to be used more efficiently, and (hopefully) fends of the need to build new base-load generating facilities (more than likely coal or gas) for a bit longer.

Hopefully that extra time will allow renewable base-load technologies to mature, making them a more viable alternative when new capacity *does* need to be built. (I'm a "glass half full" kinda guy )

Karl

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 3:50:29 am from IP #
sandystone
Member

I have had a smart meter for a while now. It came with the PV panels.
What I really like about the smart meter is that I have the ability to reduce my power bill by doing some things when the power is cheap. ( much cheaper than the current general standard tarif)
Overnight I put the dishwasher on, and instead of costing about 40 cents for the KwH of energy it uses, it only costs 9 cents.
Likewise, I bake the bread in the machine, wash the clothes, boost the solar if its cloudy.
By doing this I am likely to save a fortune over time.
The only bummer is the oven is electric, and roasting the vegies or baking cakes is more ex-pensive, but only during the weekdays.
Some poeple with swimming pools I have come across save roughly $200 per quarter using a smart meter.
So all in all a pretty good thing.
something else that would be a good thing is if there was a price incentive for people to use less- by also incorporating a lesser tariff for low household consumption- much like the existing system on some contracts. It would be good to shift the peak load, AND reduce consumption by appropriate pricing structures.

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 4:08:49 am from IP #
syn
Member

Hi Karl & sandystone

Karl:
I agree that we have no control about the time periods that solar PV panels can generate energy but this could be solved by adding battery storage or supercapacitors(with added costs) and re-deliver energy when it is needed the most.

Yes "you can't manage what you don't measure", to effect behavioural patterns but Smart meters are NOT the answer - if and when they actually do begin to provide consumer feedback it will be Delayed feedback, very Course info at > 30min samples. What is needed is "Real-time" in-home feedback that finely segregates where the engery is consumed ( lights, heating, cooling, washing machines and other services) so that the consumer can KNOW take take appropriate actions to reduce energy - The Smart meters will NOT do this and I have actually spoken with some energy distributors about this and can confirm that they "really don't care" it is not their responsibility, they will most like sell access to smart meter data to third party information providers who will then on-sell this information to consumers - and we will be paying even more.
A far better solution would be to install standalone energy monitors at the consumer switchboard like I have seen posted here on these forums at http://www.energymonitors.com.au - these will provide better realtime feedback so that the consumer can change patterns.

sandystone:
I think you are refering to the OFF-PEAK metering system that has been available for many years (ANY WILL BE PHASED OUT)that provide lower tarrif after hours and weekends(about 50% lower) - It is highly unlikely that your new samart meter is providing you with lower tarrifs because the government has halted Time of Use (TOU) tarrifs for smart meters until a review has been conducted (next year) - this review is because there is serious concern that TOU tarrifs will severley increase costs to consumers.

I infact know quite a number of people that had "OFF-PEAK" meters REMOVED when they installed their PV solar systems and have REGRETTED IT EVERY SINCE ! - because they are now charged a HIGHER FLAT tarrif - fully Negating any benefits that their Solar panels produce -- there are numerous posts on this forum from very disappointed consumers after they have installed PV Solar Systems and had their "Off - Peak" tarrifs taken away - completely losing any benefits of a Solar System!

Can you tell us the name of your energy distributor and tarrif rates that you claim - I would gladly switch to a smart meter / distributor who offered me rates as you claim - but I am highly sceptical?

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 5:44:42 am from IP #
Karl
Member

Hi Syn,

Smart meters will provide granular feedback of usage via In Home Displays (IHDs). These will allow the kinds of individual monitoring that you mentioned, as well as a range of other benefits that can be integrated with the electricity providers services. I know this is the case because I work in the industry. We do however first need to get the smart meters in place before these features can be properly explored and implemented.

The electricity companies certainly do care about these things, and while I realise it's always fun to bash faceless corporations, the reality is that it's a highly regulated and controlled industry and they *have* to care or they can be put out of business. There's a lot of work going on globally at the moment regarding the privacy associated with smart meter data; if you're interested in reading some, here's a good document to start with: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistir/ir7628/nistir-7628_vol2.pdf
The Australian Privacy Act also provides good guidance on what constitutes Personally Identifiable Information (PII), as does National Privacy Principle number 4. In short, your information can't be 'sold' without your approval.

With regards to your first comment regarding using batteries and super-caps to re-deliver energy, that's exactly what's being looked at from an Electric Vehicle perspective; using their batteries to feed energy back into the grid, and then intelligently charging them back up again before they're needed for the commute to work the next day. This way you don't need to buy additional battery infrastructure; we'll already have it as part of our electric vehicle fleet. Again though, this kind of capability simply can't be done with out existing electricity meter, but can be done with smart meters and a smart grid.

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 6:08:39 am from IP #
smilty
Member

Hey Syn

I fully agree, the taxpayer should not foot the bill for smart meters. The government sold off the utilities to private business under "commercial secrecy agreements and contracts" so the public cannot examine these secrect contracts to see what they in for?

One thing you can be sure about is they the banks would never finance such public-private buy-outs or partnerships unless they are very profitiable for these private enterprises as greed is king no matter what.

Looks what's happened since privatisation, when it first happened the governments "sold the usual story" that it benefits the comunity and they will regulate "price rises" - which were kept relatively low for the fisrt few years, after that when the public have forgotten these promises the prices started to be progressively increased - look back and you will see we are having massive price increases and this will be getting much worse with the introduction of smart meters (which the taxpayer is paying for).

It wouldn't surprise me that these "secret commercial in-confidence contracts" contain clauses that governments pay for future infra-structure and assets improvements like smart meters and the introduction of TOU tarrifs.

No capitalist government can control or regulate private interprise profits no matter what is written or claimed its utter non-sense to think otherwise. What they have done with these utiliites is to delay these price rises/profits in agreement and to increase their profits by tax-payer subsidized efficiency improvements and assets. There are several ways to increase business profits - a major one is increase efficiency and how you charge your customers (just look at what the banks have done over the years) - in this case the tax-payer is paying for it!

Karl, your comments are understandable because you work in the industry, but still they do not justify the main issue here - that taxpayer dollars pay for private business improvements. Can you show us the contacts? - where are the real benefits that can be analysed publically - shows us the profit/cost projections compared to price increases. There is a whole lot of studies and arguments around the world in USA and UK where they are realising that Smart Meter roll-outs are very questionable!

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 7:30:55 am from IP #
KKKJames
Member

I agree - Taxpayers should not have to pay for smart meter roll-out there's nothing in it for us so why should we pay!

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 9:57:23 am from IP #
sandystone
Member

Syn,
To be clear about this, I am not referring to normal off peak. Normal off peak can co-exist with TOU metering. I have seen it many times- (ie at least 50) in the Central Coast of NSW region.
My 70 yr old house never had off peak, so my bills are divided into 3 sections.
Off peak- 8.8 c/Kwh. from 10 pm to 7 am
Shoulder- 14.96 c/KwH from 8 pm to 10 pm and 7 am to 2 pm weekdays, and all weekends excluding OP.
Peak- 40.26 c/KwH from 2 pm to 8 pm 40.26 c/KwH
If the average power price is calculated over the entire weekly cycle, it comes to 17.2KwH.
These prices include GST

As I purchase 100% green energy from the grid, I am charged 6.6c/kwh loading above the normal power per Kwh. At the end, I still end up with the power company direct depositing money into my account. my last bill I recieved $126 (autumn quarter)-after my purchased was deducted.
I have a 1.5 Kw polar panel system.

The regular cost of power for nortmal meters is 19.085 c/KwH for teh first 1750 Kwh, then the price goes up to 28.05 c/KwH

Those are the facts, of both my actual experience and my actual observations, and if you want to check the EA website, you can see all the tariffs there.

My provider is Energy Australia.
The same rates for AGL too I think
So, so far, so good.

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 11:28:00 am from IP #
Karl
Member

Hi Smilty,

Given that the Victorian government has mandated that smart meters be rolled out, as a business, why *wouldn't* you expect them to be reimbursed for the expense? This is some seriously large infrastucture that's being implemented that's needed for us as a country to be able to make the kind of energy savings we need to. As a business, if you were told to make that investment, wouldn't you expect a return for it? The expense can either be worn by the tax payer up front, or the business can wear it and recoupe the costs from the consumer later. Either way it has to be paid for somehow, and whether its roads, rail, broadband or smart meters, ultimately it's usually the consumer who pays; particularly for things that can be considered national critical infrastructure.

With regards to electricity pricing, the market is managed nationally by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO). All current and historical pricing data is available from their website: http://www.aemo.com.au/data/avg_price/averageprice_main.shtml

Regarding "secret commercial in-confidence contracts": let's be realistic; *all* contracts are typically considered "commercial in-confidence". The mandated functionality requirements and service levels for smart meter deployments in Victoria are publicly available from the Department of Primary Industries website:

http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/energy/projects-research-development/smart-meters/functionality
http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/energy/projects-research-development/smart-meters/service-levels

The benefits and cost justifications are also publicly available via the DPI website (and others):

http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/about-the-smart-meters-program/cost-benefit-analysis
http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/smart-meters/in-the-news/myth-busters

I agree that there's certainly a lot of discussion going on globally about smart meters, and so there should be; we're making a global paradigm shift in how we manage our energy resources so I'd be worried if people *weren't* talking/debating about it. I'd hope though that people can look past some of the more dubious claims and short term thinking and see the larger energy usage transformations that can be achieved.

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 10:33:16 pm from IP #
KKKJames
Member

Karl - sounds like you work for either the government or the power companies?

I got no problem with the SM roll-out if the utilities infra-structure was publicly owned as it was, but it ain't no more! - so why did these crazy governments sell them off if we have to continually build up the same infra-structure time and time again.

We build-up the infrastructure and the profits go to the private business - not good.
The same goes for the railways and Telecomunications (we sold off Telstra and now we're building a new broadband network) - I blame the governments for the mess we are in!

Posted Thursday 16 Sep 2010 @ 11:31:26 pm from IP #
Karl
Member

G'Day KKKJames,

I don't work for either the government or the power companies. I've typically stayed out of the 'public vs private ownership of infrastructure' debate simply because I've seen the good and the bad on both sides and am yet to form a coherent opinion either way. I guess I'd rather just accept that it is the way it is, and try to make the best of the situation at hand.

As far as 'building up the same infrastructure time and time again', that may be a bit harsh. The meter I've got at home is still the same electro-mechanical one that's been in service since the invention of the wheel (well, for at least 25 years). There aren't too many electrical appliances in use today that have been in use for a similar period of time.

Since I'm the eternal optimist I need to ask; what 'mess' are we in that you're referring to?

Posted Friday 17 Sep 2010 @ 12:12:46 am from IP #
KKKJames
Member

Karl,

I think the issues here are not about the Smart meter, no one is saying it shouldn't be replaced but why on earth does the taxpayer have to pay for it? look if you bought a second hand car or a going business and it needed a facelift or asset upgrade do you think the previous owners should pay for it?

"Accepting the way that it is" is the main problem with the public response, too many of us just sit back and let it all happen, it doesn't make it right.

The "mess" I am refering to is why on earth did the governments sell off these very important public utilities, utilities that are the basic fundamental building blocks of our societies, energy, transport and communications? Knowing only too well that these private enterprises are not going to build it up for our society when it needs upgrading, so the public now keeps paying for these "upgrades" while the people they sold it to benefits from the profits and future income is guaranteed - income that should go back to the public because its a public investment!

If the government couldn't manage it then they could easily install "managers" to do the job - they didn't have to sell the very backbones of our society? These public assets which took our nation a hundred years of sweat to build up were sold off by very short sighted (johny come lately) politicians over a few years and we will forever regret it.

Posted Friday 17 Sep 2010 @ 2:47:12 am from IP #
Karl
Member

G'Day KKKJames,

OK, so just so we're clear, the original topic of this post is "SAY NO TO SMART METER INSTALLATIONS - ITS FRAUD", so I'm guessing at least Syn is suggesting they shouldn't be replaced

By saying I accept the way it is, I'm trying to imply that I don't want to see the bigger picture of the benefits that smart meters provide, clouded by the issues associated with the debate over public versus private ownership. I think it'd be a real shame if we stopped the progress of a technology such as this that has the capacity for providing so many environmental benefits 'simply' because we didn't like who was implementing them.

I'd agree that there's been a lot of our infrastructure sold off to private investors (including buildings, rail, energy, roads, etc), and I can't say I'm all together happy about every aspect of it. I'm far from an expert on the matter though and am happy to be educated on how such a situation (in part or full) could ever be reversed.

Posted Friday 17 Sep 2010 @ 3:19:43 am from IP #
ghostgum
Member

KKKJames wrote "I think the issues here are not about the Smart meter, no one is saying it shouldn't be replaced but why on earth does the taxpayer have to pay for it?"

I thought that it was the residential customers who were paying for the meters on the electricity bill, rather than taxpayers.

Posted Friday 17 Sep 2010 @ 4:07:43 am from IP #
KKKJames
Member

ghostgm:

All consumers (read taxpayers)will be forced to pay for smart meters via additional fees on the bills as well as price hikes on electricity charges. They fisrt said this will be about $50 but on average consumers have been charged a $150pa and will probably be paying these additional fees for many years to come as the government has effectively mandated consumers will pay whatever it costs?

Victorian Auditor-General (Des Pearson) slammed the Governments decision for Smart Meters: The Auditor-General said the cost-benefit study used to justify smart meters was "flawed and failed to make an economic case for the project". He also found "significant, discrepencies between the industry's economic estimates and the studies done in Victoria" and nationally that "suggest a high degree of uncertainty about the economic case".

Karl wrote: I am happy to be educated on how such a situation (in part or full) could ever be reversed.
I suppose the Taxpayer would have to buy it back at premium prices because these are now seen as "gold-mines" apart from those "secrecy aggreements" Smilty was talking about? - Again the responsibility for the whole bloody mess lies in the stupidity of our short sighted political leaders and greedy ambitions of the private enterprises!

My prefered option however would be for the governments to inact suitable legislation to forcefully re-accquire these infra-struction assets under national interests at a token price of one dollar.

Posted Friday 17 Sep 2010 @ 1:36:36 pm from IP #
Karl
Member

A more recent Oakley Greenwood report has a different view, although I don't know if this firm has any particular political leanings:

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/energy-smart/smart-meters-to-save-5bn-report-20100902-14rom.html

A lot of the comments associated with the article indicate a fundamental lack of understanding of what smart meters are designed to achieve from a big picture perspective, and I'd agree that there's been precious little consumer education coming from the Government regarding this.

Posted Saturday 18 Sep 2010 @ 3:41:39 am from IP #
sandystone
Member

I just spoke to a person who used to spend $1200 a qtr on electricity bills. He requested a smart meter, started to think about times of energy usage and now his quarterly bill is around $600 / qtr. He is stoked.
I am not sure what you conspiracy people are getting into such a fluster about.

Posted Saturday 18 Sep 2010 @ 4:02:26 am from IP #
sanctuarymiss
Member

Agree with the opening post. I see it as an insult to intelligent people who already manage their power consumption, why do we have to pay the price for those without a clue, and rack up bills of $1200. Why don't they just outlaw cheap nasty power guzzling appliances and only sell those with higher energy ratings? I also see it as an invasion of privacy, who has access to our consumption records, it's not the business of the power companies when I am home and using appliances. Will we get a dividend or payment off the companies involved they make big profits, as we are paying for their infrastructure, doubt it..

Posted Saturday 18 Sep 2010 @ 8:11:05 am from IP #
smilty
Member

Karl:
I think the main issue of this post for not supporting the Smart Meter Roll-out is because at the end of the day the people who benefit the most are the private business enterprises, and the consumer is forced to pay for their infra-structure program in which the private enterprises stand to make enormous profit and secure long term income.

I don't think we would be complaining if these were public utilities because then it would be a public investment and all benefits flow back to the public - not as profits to business. As KKKJames and others have pointed out, this huge monumental blunder was caused by our govermnent(s) when they sold off these utilites to private enterprises. Since then, like many other people, I have lost complete faith in the competency of all politicains no matter what political persuation, our major political institutions are lobbied, bribed (whether they know it or not) and paid for by business interests.

You say that you don't want to see the "big picture" benifits of smart meters fall away, but I say to you that the "much bigger picture" lies in who really benefits here and who really gains control of our countries very important infra-structures (energy, transport, financial, communicatiions etc) and what should be publically owned institutions. I have no doubt that Privatisation of Australian Energy markets will lead us into a similar situation as the California Energy Crisis of 2000, another reason why the public are going to have to pay the hilt to these private companies over the next few years.

You may not care that private business benefits from this exercise or not be worried about ownership interests, or paying an extra few hundered dollars on each electricity bill but I most people are and more importantly there are much bigger issues that need to be considered.

Posted Saturday 18 Sep 2010 @ 12:43:53 pm from IP #
dave lawrence
Member

quote from earlier post "-

"I just spoke to a person who used to spend $1200 a qtr on electricity bills. He requested a smart meter, started to think about times of energy usage and now his quarterly bill is around $600 / qtr. He is stoked."

you do NOT need a smart meter to inform you about how to reduce your energy consumption .
half the problem is too much reliance on gadgets.
why not just turn things off when not in use ,and educate yourself about power consumption of different appliances.
what happens when the smart appliance breaks down ?
and if it is just needed to educate the user for the first month or so , until they understand how to live more efficiently ,then I think that is a terrible worry.

Posted Saturday 18 Sep 2010 @ 10:30:06 pm from IP #
rockabye
Member

Perhaps the most important few words from that last quote are "started to think about energy usage". The meter didn't save the money, the person in charge of the appliances saved the money.

The last issue of ATA had a segment on smart meters and how they need to incorporate much more than TOU metering. Real time display of energy usage on the living room wall so that consumers can actively control their energy use should be the minimum standard of any 'smart meter' rollout. Until that happens I can understand consumer reluctance to pay for something that has a one-sided benefit.

Posted Saturday 18 Sep 2010 @ 11:09:42 pm from IP #
georgey
Member

I agree it fraudulent to force consumers to pay or "buy" something that provides them with little or no benefit and something they don't want. If you want it then OK you can pay for it, but the government should not force consumers to pay for it.

I also fully agree with rockabye here, what we need is an in-home energy monitors that provide real-time information and prompts so that the consumer can actively participate in reducing energy consumption. You don't need Smart meters to do this, and if they offer this 5 years from now then you will still have to pay extra for a in-home monitor anyway.

I had a look at the site that syn posted here http://www.energymonitors.com.au and this seems like what is needed - it don't need a smart meter and energy data remains private and secure. What we need is something that allows consumer participation in real-time not something over the internet that takes an effort to do and probably most people won't bother to take that effort to look at?

Posted Sunday 19 Sep 2010 @ 2:24:44 am from IP #
syn
Member

Hi sandystone:
The samart meter charge rates you have are rather unique possibly because of your unique locality, I have contacted quite a few energy suppliers and can tell you that for the MAJORITY of consumers, and ALL metropolition consumers have a FLAT RATE ONLY (until TOU comes into effect)when on Smart Meters.

I know of many who have had their CRIED when their "off peak" meters were removed after smart meter installations and in every case they have been charged a FLAT RATE and their energy bills have massively increased as a result. The same goes for those who have had PV Solar panels and lost their "Off-Peak" meters - its bloody insane!

Your Peak at 40.26 c/KwH (2 pm to 8 pm) is fraud to say the least - this is a time slot that serves the majority of consumers when family energy is needed the most. So they will slog you twice the price during this period while most hard manufacturing industries have turned off their consumption by 4pm?

Posted Sunday 19 Sep 2010 @ 4:03:32 am from IP #
Karl
Member

"why do we have to pay the price for those without a clue". Hey, I agree, but unfortunately this category makes up a very large majority of the population. Also, it doesn't mean they're Bad People, it just means it's not their focus (yet). I certainly agree that power guzzling applicances should be banned or at least heavily taxed.

I always find the "invasion of privacy" aspect interesting since most people freely give out far more information about themselves to Google than will ever be recorded by their power consumption. Most people are already able to be tracked by their mobile phone usage, their internet banking habits, their IP address, their e-Tag usage, their Facebook/MySpace/LinkedIn profile, their geo-tagged twitter pics, as well as by a plethora of CCTV cameras in most city and urban centers. I'm certainly not saying the privacy aspect isn't important, quite the contrary; I think it's vital and there are smart meter roll-outs that have been halted in at least one European country because of concerns over it. Privacy is a fundamental requirement, and I'd hope people take as much interest in the privacy of the information they're handing over on these other systems as they are with regards to their energy usage data.

Smilty, it's interesting that people continually focus on the benefits that 'big business' will make out of smart meters, but seem to loose sight of the reason for their introduction (by the Government) in the first place; to manage and reduce energy consumption, and to allow for the transformation of our energy production and distribution networks so that they're ready for future technologies such as Electric Vehicles. Isn't that a pretty significant benefit for the consumers (not to mention the environment)?

I'm also not saying I'm not concerned about who owns the infrastructure, I am, but I can't see the point in opposing a technology solely on the basis of who might be owning it.

Rockabe I agree that there needs to be additional components such as real-time displays etc and there will be, but none of those components can be implemented without having the smart meter there in the first place. As I've said previously, there needs to be a heck of a lot more communication with the public as to what the future vision of smart meters and smart grids actually is, because there's so much more than what people seem to realise. Dave's comment regarding it being a terrible worry if all of this was being done just to change some usage habits for a few months highlights this. I'd agree, that *would* be a terrible worry, and I can understand people's concern if that's all they've been told smart meters are being installed for.

Dave I'd also agree that you don't need smart meters to inform you how to reduce your energy consumption. I went through the process of doing an energy audit at my house, and identified the operating and stand-by consumption of all appliances, and proceeded to either turn them off or recycled them and replaced them with more energy efficient versions. The result of this alone allowed me to reduce my energy consumption by around 40%. Trying to get even a large portion of the population to do this though is going to be nigh on impossible without them being led by thr nose. When I tried to explain to a friend how easy it was to reduce consumption without having to spend much at all the response was "yeah whatever, tax me or force me to do it, but don't expect me to care about it".

Posted Sunday 19 Sep 2010 @ 7:08:02 am from IP #
sanctuarymiss
Member

Hi Karl I would hate for information to be sold to third parties, bad enough these jokers ringing night and day to switch electricity companies now, I've had some shocking phone calls, imagine what it would be like with smart meter info on sold, would hate for it to get into the wrong hands, frightening really.
When big companies make millions in profits and are there solely to generate profits for shareholders it's a worry, I don't see why this cost can't be passed on to those that stand to make the money out of it, about as good as our big banks.

Posted Sunday 19 Sep 2010 @ 8:00:01 am from IP #

RSS feed for this topic

12…9 Next »