Externally located electric meters

[EFLImpudence]

INHI if this is the case, but on a scale of 1 to utterly gobsmacked, how surprised would you be if you learned that they've just assumed ubiquitous mobile phone coverage?

2.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

 

[JohnW2]

2. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

I don't really understand. We are not talking about how much, if any, benefit smart meters might bring to customers, but, rather are answering the question about "how surprised we would you be if we learned that they've just assumed ubiquitous mobile phone coverage".

In addition to the generic material I've posted, I've now looked at the websites of several supplies. and every one acknowledges that there is a potential problem of inadequate mobile network communications. I would therefore be very surprised (if not "gobsmacked") to 'learn' (incorrectly) that "they've just assumed ubiquitous mobile phone coverage", wouldn't you?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So EFLI would not be very surprised, because that report says "Up to 10% of smart meters don't work, because they are in areas where mobile phone signals are not strong enough".

And you wouldn't be surprised because you have read of widespread acknowledgement of inadequate mobile network communications.

So what you are both saying is that you are not surprised to learn that they decided to roll out this project in the full and certain knowledge that it wouldn't work properly.

 

[JohnW2]

I suppose one can debate what "working properly" means, but if the quoted figures are correct in implying that smart meters will 'work' in around 90% of customer's premises, they might regard that as a system "working reasonably well".

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I wonder if "they" would regard, say, only being charged the right amount at supermarket checkouts 90% of the time as acceptable?

 

[JohnW2]

If, as many seem to fear, smart meters will result in financial disadvantage for customers, hence financial advantage for suppliers, I reckon that suppliers would probably be pretty satisfied with having that financial advantage in relation to 90% of their customers.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Don't forget it was not the suppliers' idea. They are not paying for it.

 

[JohnW2]

Don't forget it was not the suppliers' idea. They are not paying for it.

If the suppliers are not paying for it, and if people's fears are right that the result will eventually be greater electricity costs (paid to the supplier), then surely the suppliers would be more than happy with receiving higher payments for electricity from 'only' 90% of their customers, wouldn't they?

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

Customers who get smart meters installed are expected to save just £11 a year off their energy bills, a group of MPs has found.

It was originally thought that the new meters would save consumers at least £26.

In one of the most critical reports yet on the £11bn programme, the MPs also said the government was now likely to miss its own deadline

Full report at

http://www.britishinfrastructuregroup.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/BIG-Not-So-Smart-Full-Report.pdf

 

[EFLImpudence]

If the suppliers are not paying for it, and if people's fears are right that the result will eventually be greater electricity costs (paid to the supplier), then surely the suppliers would be more than happy with receiving higher payments for electricity from 'only' 90% of their customers, wouldn't they?

That would hardly seem fair if one house has the necessary coverage for a smart meter and next door doesn't.
I expect the actual suppliers would prefer an unregulated market where they could just increase the price when they wanted.

I haven't read the report in Bernard's link, but

as you might buy your electricity from a company which does not actually have any and another company from whom you could buy your electricity but do not has to maintain the infrastructure apart from the meter, I don't really know who will decide the actual rates when the time comes - the generators or the Government?

Will there be adverts saying "If you have your dinner at 6pm, come to XYZlectric for cheaper rates from 5 til 6pm"? Probably not; that would defeat the objective.
So will the Government mandate that the price at peak times must be 150% of whatever rate you are paying from your paper 'supplier' - which is 1p per unit cheaper than another.

 

[bernardgreen]

It has been suggested that meters will ( when legally allowed to ) enable the suppliers to charge more per kWH if the power ( amperes ) being used exceeds an agreed maximum.

At least one design of meter uses a counter set for the standard 1000 counts per kWH when the current is less than 20 amps ( 4.6 Kw ) and 1200 counts per kWH at any time when the current exceeds 20 amps. ( these figures are an example )

The supplier charges their unit price for every 1000 counts. In this example electricity would be 20% more expensive if more than 4.6 kW was being used without any processing of dual readings in the suppliers billing department.

This form of dual ( even triple ) rate charging does happen in some commecial and industrial supplies using meters with two or three separate counters.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Yes, that doesn't need a smart meter.

Half hourly variable rates (remotely set and changeable) will not depend on how much you are using at a particular time.
It will be up to you to avoid usage at the expensive times if you wish.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The French have had multi-tier standing charges for different capacities for years, and, AIUI, "colour coded" days when limits are higher/lower which they can use to even out the load across large groups of consumers.

 

[bernardgreen]

Half hourly variable rates

are as you say fixed in time. The variable counts system will increase the cost when ever the amperage exceeds the agreed maximum no matter what time it happens.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Yes but the idea of smart meters is so that you pay a higher rate at certain times - no matter how much or little you use.

E.g. at your usual dinner time you pay 150%