Smart meters have never connected

[Harry Bloomfield]

It seems the smart meter reports every half hour, where the existing system may have a few minutes delay due to server being in China, it is far more rapid to the smart meter so seems a little pointless.

The consumption readings are recorded every 30 minutes, but they only get forwarded once per day, around midnight. Even then they don't always get through, so the system sends them the following day(s).

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

As I keep saying, for many people the potential benefit (and energy/cost saving) of having a 'smart' meter derives from the education it provides as regards what their various loads are using/costing - but, as I've also said, I think there would have been far simpler, quicker, cheaper, and maybe also more effective, ways of achieving that education other than by deployment of these meters!

Meters do get old, did need replacing - why not simply take the opportunity to replace them with a smarter meter, which can directly report back consumption, via the mobile network. While your at it, why not empower customers directly, with a display of their consumption data?

It seems an obvious forward step to me.

 

[EFLImpudence]

"Forward" step being the questionable opinion.

If you like being controlled...

 

[Why Not Indeed]

If you like being controlled...

If you don't want the government to turn off power to your house, then you could make a Faraday cage around your smart meter with tin foil.

Which does make me wonder why the smart meter signalling isn't carried over the supply wiring? If you can get household wiring to carry lots of bandwidth locally, then presumably it's not much of a stretch to send much lower bandwidth meter signalling to the transformer you're connected to.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

If you don't want the government to turn off power to your house, then you could make a Faraday cage around your smart meter with tin foil.

I have very few concerns in respect of that, why would they cut my power? It's been made just a little more easily done, via SM's, but cutting people off was always possible.

Which does make me wonder why the smart meter signalling isn't carried over the supply wiring? If you can get household wiring to carry lots of bandwidth locally, then presumably it's not much of a stretch to send much lower bandwidth meter signalling to the transformer you're connected to.

Simple - capacity, difficulty plus the power needed to get the signals through. Mains signally works fine over short distances, at low power, but network wide needs much higher transmit powers. You home mains signalling, even over such short distances cannot even be relied upon, due to filters in various connected equipment. I tried it out to to my back garden, and could not get any reception at all.

 

[JohnW2]

The consumption readings are recorded every 30 minutes, but they only get forwarded once per day, around midnight. Even then they don't always get through, so the system sends them the following day(s).

As you say, I think that all 'smart'; meters store readings (internally) every 30 minutes.

However, when it comes to sending readings to the supplier, I think that most (maybe all?) suppliers (certainly ones I use) offer the consumer the choice choice of readings being sent to them every 30 minutes, once per day or once per month - although I'm not sure why they offer that choice, or why would opt for any of the options other than half-hourly.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Meters do get old, did need replacing - why not simply take the opportunity to replace them with a smarter meter, which can directly report back consumption, via the mobile network. While your at it, why not empower customers directly, with a display of their consumption data?

I essentially agree. It's just a 'technological advance', just as was the change from electro-mechanical to electronic meters (about which no-one complained).

I'm sure that I'm not alone in having a water meter and LPG tank which have used telemetry for years, from before we had heard of 'smart' electricity/gas meters, and I've never heard anyone complaining about that. The only real difference is that it's one-way communication - so does that mean that concerns about 'smart' meters relate only to the 'remote disconnection' issue?

I wonder if people would be expressing the same concerns if, hypothetically, a 'meter reader' turned up every day (or even every 30 minutes), particularly if that person also had the authority and ability to 'disconnect the supply'?

As I keep saying, I think the unfortunate/'sad' think is that it seems to me that the government have probably been mislead into believing that these meters will achieve something that they probably won't - at least, not for many decades.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

There has been a surcharge on the bills to raise the originally eleven billion pounds (£400 per household). It is, of course, costing more than first thought now.

I think some of what is said about costs, and who pays them, is probably a bit misleading.

As Harry has recently written, electricity meters (I don't know about gas ones) have to be 'routinely replaced', seemingly much more frequently in the case of the electronic ones - I had electronic meters replaced twice within a period of only about 15 years. The cost of that regular meter replacement is presumably built in to what consumers are charged and, although a 'smart' meter probably costs a little more than a 'dumb' one, I doubt that the difference is very great. The 'dumb' one I currently have in my house is pretty sophisticated (with multiple TOU registers etc.), the only thing it really lacks, in comparison with a 'smart' meter, is a communications module.

Since the 'rollout' of 'smart' meters has been so protracted, I suspect that it hasn't happened much more rapidly that would have been the case with the 'routine replacement' (with 'dumb' meters) had 'smart' meters not appeared as part of the equation - so the marginal addition cost of replacing with 'smart',rather than 'dumb', meters is probably considerably less than many (like you?) appear to suggest.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

You would think that the government would say that then, rather than say it is costing (originally) £11 billion - now more.
Replacing all meters in a few years is obviously a far greater cost than because of natural wastage.

Still, I read now that because of the (extortionate) price of power, you will now save more with the smart meters than you would have with the lower tariffs when first introduced.

Is that rose-coloured spectacles or smoke and mirrors?

Update on the rollout of smart meters - National Audit Office (NAO) press release

A National Audit Office (NAO) report updating on government's ambition to rollout smart meters across Great Britain

www.nao.org.uk

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

However, when it comes to sending readings to the supplier, I think that most (maybe all?) suppliers (certainly ones I use) offer the consumer the choice choice of readings being sent to them every 30 minutes, once per day or once per month - although I'm not sure why they offer that choice, or why would opt for any of the options other than half-hourly.

They want/need monthly readings, for billing purposes - more frequent readings are optional for the customer. I opted for 30 minutes, from first getting SM's, so I could track usage better than my own weekly spreadsheet. The 30 minute data, enables me see what my base load is, when my boiler fires up to heat the hot water, how much a bath costs me.

Away from home at the moment, I can even check I have not left anything on that shouldn't be, and that I have no gas leaks. Should the big freeze come, whilst I am away, the boiler will fire up if the house drops below 8C, and that will show on the bill.

 

[JohnW2]

You would think that the government would say that then, rather than say it is costing (originally) £11 billion - now more.

One would think that. They really should have subtracted from that £11 billion (or whatever) what would have been the cost of 'routine replacement' of ('dumb') meters had 'smart' ones not existed.

Replacing all meters in a few years is obviously a far greater cost than because of natural wastage.

As I said, I am far from convinced about that. It seems that the official in-service life of an electronic meter is surprisingly short - as I said, I've had three in the past 15 years (i.e. roughly 7.5 years between replacements), for no reason other than 'routine replacement'.

I suppose it's possible that some of the removed meters get refurbished and re-calibrated and then put back into service (rather than thrown out) but, for what it's worth, all of the one's I've had appear to have been the current model, not a refurbished 'obsolete' one.

I think its about 11 years since the government imposed the requirement to 'roll out' these meters, and that exercise is still far from complete. Hence, if my personal experiences are anything to go by, the great majority of meters would have been replaced (by 'dumb' ones' during gthe period of this 'roll out', even if smart meters had not existed. If that, or anything like it, is the case then, as I said, the marginal additional cost of replacing with 'smart' (rather than 'dumb') meters would probably be pretty small.

Still, I read now that because of the (extortionate) price of power, you will now save more with the smart meters than you would have with the lower tariffs when first introduced. Is that rose-coloured spectacles or smoke and mirrors?

That's an interesting one! It's obviously literally true and, given that it's not the government's fault that energy prices have risen, I suppose it's a reasonably fair observation.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

They want/need monthly readings, for billing purposes - more frequent readings are optional for the customer.

That's not what my supplier says. They are not talking about "options for the customer" but, rather, options as to how frequently the meter sends readings to them. The blurb from my supplier says:

You can opt for your smart meter to send us readings on a monthly basis, daily or half-hourly.

Of course, I suppose they might be lying!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

As I said, I am far from convinced about that. It seems that the official in-service life of an electronic meter is surprisingly short - as I said, I've had three in the past 15 years (i.e. roughly 7.5 years between replacements), for no reason other than 'routine replacement'.

They didn't scrap them, apart from the really old ones - rather they would go for checking and calibration checks. The same will happen with the SM's, back to base for checking, and new batteries fitted to gas meters.

My only issue with SM's has been the stupidity of rolling out the SMETS 1's, where they were simply not compatible with customers shopping around between suppliers.

 

[EFLImpudence]

As I said, I am far from convinced about that. It seems that the official in-service life of an electronic meter is surprisingly short - as I said, I've had three in the past 15 years (i.e. roughly 7.5 years between replacements), for no reason other than 'routine replacement'.

That certainly was not the case with analogue meters which seemed to last 'for ever'.

I think its about 11 years since the government imposed the requirement to 'roll out' these meters, and that exercise is still far from complete. Hence, if my personal experiences are anything to go by, the great majority of meters would have been replaced (by 'dumb' ones' during gthe period of this 'roll out', even if smart meters had not existed. If that, or anything like it, is the case then, as I said, the marginal additional cost of replacing with 'smart' (rather than 'dumb') meters would probably be pretty small.

You can't have it both ways; are you saying the government should not have added the (originally) £11 billion pounds surcharge to the bills?

That's an interesting one! It's obviously literally true and, given that it's not the government's fault that energy prices have risen, I suppose it's a reasonably fair observation.

You are far too understanding. Are you perhaps used to such things in your work life?

How is the Covid inquiry going? Have they found any competence yet?

 

[hllns]

As you say, I think that all 'smart'; meters store readings (internally) every 30 minutes.

However, when it comes to sending readings to the supplier, I think that most (maybe all?) suppliers (certainly ones I use) offer the consumer the choice choice of readings being sent to them every 30 minutes, once per day or once per month - although I'm not sure why they offer that choice, or why would opt for any of the options other than half-hourly.

Kind Regards, John

There'd be a increased processing overhead of making 30 minutes the default, if you make the minority opt-in as required it wouldn't be so much of a hit.