Smart meters?

[ban-all-sheds]

And if you are a person who thinks that a light bulb, or a bathroom extractor fan, or a phone charger, uses enough power to be a concern - how will you discover you are wrong?

By THINKING, not guessing or assuming.

If you want to know if it cheaper to heat a pie, or boil a mug of water, in a microwave, how will you see the evidence with your own eyes?

Well - by seeing the evidence of my own eyes.

I'll disregard the pie question, as if it's got pastry, i.e. not a shepherd's pie/cottage pie/fish pie/chicken parmentier/etc with mashed potato, then microwaved ones are horrible. And by an order of magnitude if you're cooking it rather than heating it. I suggest that if people really need to save money by microwaving instead of baking then they probably can't afford shop-bought pies.

As for the water - my microwave oven consumes 1.55kW, and my kettle 3.

Having returned from making a mug of tea I can report that it takes my microwave 3 minutes to boil a mug of water, and my kettle 55 seconds. Which, when you THINK about it is pretty much spot on - it's a "900W" microwave, so 3kW is 3.33 x 900, and 3 minutes is 3.27 x 55 seconds. Given that you'd probably boil a bit more than literally a mug full (I did) so as not to be squeezing out the last drops, it is scarily consistent.

In real life I'm not anal enough to measure water into the kettle, I do it by eye, and I generally get it to around 70-80 seconds.

Spoiler: Anal? Moi?

Lest that knowledge appears to contradict my claim of not being that anal, I should explain that I did actually time it a few times after Mrs Sheds complained about the wasteful way I like to boil water and use it to warm the mug, then boil more to actually make the tea.

Assuming 12p/unit (as it makes the sums so much easier), a 3kW kettle costs 0.01p/s to run, so well under 1p to boil a mugful. And my microwave a little more than half that per second, but it takes more than twice as long, so costs more. But even if by some magic it did cost less, do I, or would anyone, want to f**t about using a microwave instead of a kettle to save a fraction of 1p per mug?

And do you know, I came by all of that understanding by THINKING about it, not using an energy monitor.

If your family likes to use an electric shower for long periods, how will you demonstrate the cost?

By THINKING about it.

What if you turn into someone who goes down stairs in the dark because she is worried about the cost of a lightbulb?

Then I'd be a fool for not THINKING about the fact that if you need it you use it, and if you don't need it you don't. Once that is your MO then as long as you can afford the bills everything is fine, as you already know that you have, if not minimised, got your consumption down to the point where any further reductions would hurt your lifestyle.

If you see, rather than have an uninformed opinion, what it costs to use a fan heater, it may help you change your habits.

A bit of not-very-hard-THINKING would give you an informed opinion without needing a monitor.

Any numbskull can say "turn it off" and many of them believe the inaccurate nonsense circulating in the media.

See above re "lifestyle minimum". It doesn't matter how rich you are, or how much or how little your roomful of halogen spotlights or 2W LED table lamps does or does not cost to run, leaving them on when the room is empty is not going to make you any happier or more comfortable, and it is not the act of a "numbskull" to THINK about it and say "well then why the hell leave them on?".

If you are the sort of person who doesn't feel the need for looking at a meter, the solution is obvious. Don't buy one, and don't look at one.

I am the sort of person who knows that people do get injured, and do die, because they don't THINK or, worse, because someone else doesn't THINK. I am a passionate believer in the vital importance of both THINKING and of being critical of people who don't THINK.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Matz

So, if I understand correctly, you could have got the relevant information from the supply company on a sheet of paper - stating the cost of various equipment when in use - rather than installing a computer which is costing every household in the country hundreds of pounds individually and eleven billion pounds overall.

 

[JohnD]

ranting again.

you will not bring anyone to your opinion by that.

 

[JohnD]

installing a computer

rest assured I have never purchased or installed a computer in order to look at my energy usage graph.

However I do own a computer.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Not sure of the point you are making but that is what the energy companies are doing on the pretext that people will see how much they are using.

 

[matz]

EFL Ok, yes I can research how much each appliance costs to run either precisely or on average. I then would need to keep a record of how long each appliance is being used for if I am putting this data to best use - am I right is saying this is the method I should use in order to not use a smart meter if I want to know what energy I am consuming on a running total basis?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

ranting again.

I think you don't know what "ranting" actually means.

you will not bring anyone to your opinion by that.

Nor will I, or anyone else, change by reasoning opinions not arrived at by that method in the first place.

 

[EFLImpudence]

EFL Ok, yes I can research how much each appliance costs to run either precisely or on average. I then would need to keep a record of how long each appliance is being used for if I am putting this data to best use - am I right is saying this is the method I should use in order to not use a smart meter if I want to know what energy I am consuming on a running total basis?

Well, in a way, yes.

Every 1000W costs one unit - however much your tariff unit is - per hour.

You may as well use the smart meter if you have one, but they cost a lot, as above.

The point we are making is that, unless you foolishly waste power by using appliances when not needed, the cost is irrelevant as that is what you have to pay to keep warm, have a bath, make tea, whatever.

Your wife has to keep warm therefore you have to pay whatever they charge.

£270 per quarter or £3 per day or 12.5p per hour makes no difference.


Edit - left off a 0 , 1000W

 

[ban-all-sheds]

EFL Ok, yes I can research how much each appliance costs to run either precisely or on average. I then would need to keep a record of how long each appliance is being used for if I am putting this data to best use - am I right is saying this is the method I should use in order to not use a smart meter if I want to know what energy I am consuming on a running total basis?

Or you could not use things you don't need, and if you can afford the bills stop fretting because you know that to reduce them further would hurt your lifestyle.

 

[big-all]

just to add to the boiling water in a 900w micro
thats the output power if you measure the input it will be about 50% more or 1300w
as you have a light a turntable a timer and other electronics to power
indeed i added to a thread about kettle versus microwave
kettle was quicker and cheaper
"
both quicker and cheaper
kettle 39seconds at 2890w
2.20/140seconds at 1450w"

 

[Doggit]

Why would anyone who took the trouble to think ever boil more water than they needed anyway?

You have just descibed my ex partner perfectly. Could never get her to only boil as much as much water as was necessary, nor turn lights off, and never switch her brain on.

 

[SimonH2]

A recent article said that the so called smart meters can overread by 600 percent if you have low energy bulbs, as the way they handle the electriciy affects the meter.

There's a report here
The problem (as I read elsewhere, but can't remember where) is the use of a Rogowski Coil which gives the derivative of the current. This means the signal needs to be integrated to get actual current. The two problems are that a DC offset gets integrated into a steadily increasing value, and the integrator needs to roll off higher frequencies (hence the issue related to dimmers etc). Testing on a lab bench with smooth supply and resistive (or at least non-active) load won't show up the problem.

Note that this isn't actually about smart meters - it's an issue for any electronic meter using a Rogowski coil, and the article mentions that it's been known about since 2009.

There is also another issue that can affect electronic meters regardless of sensing method. Since many (most ? all ?) digitally sample the signal and calculate energy in software, if they don't sample the signal at a sufficiently high sample rate, then the samples may not accurately reflect what's being measured.

Some estimates give the cost for the meter as about £300, but I don't know if it's done on an increase in the stabding charge, or on the unit price ...

Well it falls on the energy company margins - how it works out in terms of split between standing charge and unit charges is going to be different for each supplier and tariff.
But the numbers I've seen are around £200/meter - or £400/house with duel-fuel. With an estimate of a saving of £26/year, that's a 15 year payback (unless I've misremembered something). And given that the life of the meters is supposedly only 10 years, vs 20 years then I don't see that they even pay for themselves.

And I gather that the energy companies don't actually want them. It's costing them a fortune to install, but they get fined if they don't meet targets.

I can't see ANYTHING they do that justifies the big data collection. I get accurate bills, and all it costs me is about a minute a month top read the meters and put the readings in on the suppliers website. It doesn't need expensive new meters, a new communications network, a huge database (government and big IT - we know how well that works ), and no worries about data security etc.
The only thing this solution doesn't do is provide the remote turn off switch, which as pointed out earlier is there to deal with the problems stored up by politicians who cowtowed to the "nothing nucular" brigade, fell for the lies from the wind lobby, and have now left us needing "load side management" to keep the lights on.

 

[JohnD]

an estimate of a saving of £26/year,

I don't accept any savings estimate for a product that doesn't actually save energy, but will tell users (if they choose to look at it) what they're using.

I've already shown that you can get a display to tell you that at far lower cost. I expect it would be even cheaper if somebody placed an order for thirty million of them.

 

[SimonH2]

Exactly. The claimed savings (which reduce with each new official report) are based on people changing behaviour.
And telling you how much you are using can be done for less than the cost of a new meter.

As for the "run appliances at night" stuff - there's a recipe for complaints of statutory nuisance clogging up councils' environmental health units.

 

[Doggit]

Smart meters were never designed to save energy, only to supposedly show you how much eneregy that you were using, and as Matz has demonstrated, make you think about that useage. I was always under the impression that they were being pushed by the energy companies to save on meter readers, give them more control over bad payers, be able to up your prices as and when they wanted, and to surrepitisiously charge more for an item thats supposed to be for your good, but is actualy for theirs.

But I could be wrong of course.