a problem with electric meters?

Page 3 of 9  
On May 31, 8:30 pm, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Is that how they design electrical systems and pass inspection in Canada? You choose service conductors not based on the load, breaker, etc. but on the probability that the conductors will be overloaded? What's an acceptable probability? 5%? 1%, .1%? How lucky do you feel today?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 06:09:23 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

You are being obtuse again - something (one thing) you are very good at.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jun 1, 1:24 pm, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Perhaps you'd like to explain. If you connect both hots in a house to one service conductor, then that conductor and the neutral can wind up with twice the current that they are rated for. A house with a 100 amp service that normally could not put more than 100 amps on the conductors can now put 200 amps on one hot and the neutral. You say that's OK because it's not very likely to happen. Is that the new way circuits are designed to code and safety?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/1/2012 2:12 PM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote: ...

The breaker is 2-pole and will still trip at 100 A (or whatever it's rating is). I got this wrong earlier, too.
And, since there would be no 240 V loads at all, all the circuits of 120V would be unlikely to have the draw even if fully loaded (granted, that's not a Code thingie but it is certainly unlikely to be able to draw that much load on the lighting and outlet circuits only).
I still don't see that that's what the brochure indicates is what GE is doing, though, is the question I'd like to see actually resolved.
Load shedding I see (I think, I'm still not sure about where the contacts are or whether are actually in the base product or are a factory option--to me the brochure is tantalizingly vague on detail and I found no more in depth documents altho granted I didn't spend a long time looking).
--
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That 100A breaker will trip if the current exceeds 100A in either of the poles. So, f you wire both ends to the same service conductor then you can have a max of 100A in each pole of the breaker and 200A combined in the single service conductor. So, you got it right earlier.

I think it could exist. One of the things that has been claimed for smart meters is the ability to shed loads, though how this would be done I have never seen explained. This is one clever way. If the meter also were set to cut off power all together if the load exceeded a certain level, eg 100A, then it could solve the potential overload problem when the 240V load shedding is used.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/2/2012 9:00 AM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:
...

I don't (and didn't) say it couldn't; only that I can't find enough specifics on actual operational details in the brochure to infer that it really does (shunt 240V that is).
I can see the disconnect; I don't see how one can draw the conclusion on the other (from that piece of data, anyway, and a quick search didn't find reference to doing so by any combination of keywords I could think of to try).
--
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 12:12:32 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

I did NOT say it was "OK" I just said the chances of it happening would be EXTREMELY unlikely because ALL heavy loads are 240 and as such would be shut off.
What combination of 110 volt loads in YOUR house would come close to 100 amps, muchless 200 - or heaven help you, 400 amps??????
I'm sure any "intelligent system" that would allow doubling up the two sides of a 240 volt service onto one side of the supply would also monitor current and SHUT DOWN at least one side at a time in case of overload.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca improperly and unnecessarily quoted dozens of unnecessary lines from at least 14 previous posts in this thread.
Would it kill you to trim the garbage before you add a few sentences to the end of this train of visual trash?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 00:29:44 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

For some reason this group is much worse for that than the other ones that I regularly read.
My newsreader shows about 25 lines of message without scrolling. If I can't see any new content in that - just quoted material from the previous message - then I just don't bother reading whatever it is that the poster has to say and move on. cheers
Jules
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Cranky old men.
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/31/2012 10:59 AM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

>

Yes that might work. The AHJ would probably have to sign off on doing it.
IF the meter can connect both legs to one side, and IF that power switching capability is in the meter or added, and IF such switching is allowed my guess is that it is an alternative to rolling blackouts if power use exceeds supply. Relatively short 220V interruptions might work.
--
bud--



Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's hidden under the "Demand side Management, remote prepayment, and controlled outage restoration" as part of the optional "service switch function".
As for the actual ordering options..
F2 = Demand limit, J2 = Emergency Load reduction(same leg of 110V connected to both sides, no"0v appliance operation.)
It's been a while since I talked to GE.. (I need to dig up my notes.)
Demand limit kicks in once customer reaches some sort of programmed threshold(10kW or KWh consumed) and shuts off the 220v appliances (for some period of time).
Emergency load reduction, similar stuff.
As for safety during while the load reduction kicked in. (It would be trivial programming effort to detect an 110v overload condition and disconnect both legs from service.).
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Your point is exactly?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Bullshit
Go look at the GE 210+ specs and get back to us.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 30 May 2012 12:24:46 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

You obviously can't read..
After observing some new smart meter installs. i decided to look up the meter capability on the internet. But, I found the on-line documentation incomplete. So, I called up GE and talked to their engineers about the undocument ordering/meter options.
As for documented features ..
http://www.gedigitalenergy.com/products/brochures/I210_Family.pdf Look up the term "service switch".. Page 4.
"Advanced Functionality
With the addition of the fully rated 200 amp service switch, the meter is capable of pre-payment metering without all the historical cost associated with card readers or other legacy pre-payment technology. Load limiting and emergency conservation modes set this meter apart when working in conjunction with a demand response program. Having the capability to be remotely configured, as well as being firmware upgradeable, this product serves today’s needs, as well as tomorrow’s evolving requirements."
========= Page 8. (I-210+)
"Optional Functions
Factory integrated Service Switch Capability - Soft Switch Functions - AMR Communications    (AMR Interface formats include quadrature pulse, PSEM,          SPI Format-1 data, SPI Format-2 Data     - Simple Voltag Event monitoring in addition to RMS momentary voltage display "
======== On Page 9 of the PDF under the table titled "Residential Meter Selector" . Look at the middle column for "I-210+ Basic Energy",
Go down to Items 10(Service switch) and 11(Remote disconnect).
Both are listed as "Factory installed option for I-210+"..
======== From my conversations with GE'e engineer, some of the ordering options for the GE-210+ residential meters are:
O = AMR, V2 = Simple Voltage event monitor, F2 = Demand limit, J2 = Emergency Load reduction(same leg of 110V connected to both sides, no"0v appliance operation.) U2 = Remote disconnect & Prepaid disconnect.
======== Now go outside and look at GE I-210+ smart meter installed on the side of your house. (if you have one). Write down the extra options installed, just to the right of "I-210+" inside a rectangle box outline (Very close to the exact center of the meter face).
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 15 May 2012 05:54:49 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@toyotamail.com wrote:

I think $100/mo is fair.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
micky wrote:

The often-stated case for smart meters (for electricity) is that they allow for time-of-use billing.
In other words, the cost of electricity changes during the course of a day, and smart meters allow utility companies to more equitably charge individual home owers for the electricity they use.
But this represents a false economy when applied on such a small scale as the individual home.
The REAL unspoken reason for smart meters is that they save manpower costs (meter-reading costs) for electric utilities.
The main problem is this:
Over the life of the meter, the meter will save the utility company maybe $100 in meter-reading and other costs (remote turn on/off, etc). However, this is offset by the up-front cost of buying the meter, installing the network, billing software, etc. This cost (say, $500 over the life of the meter) will be borne by the home owner through additional monthly fees.
The real savings (manpower mostly) will be enjoyed by the utility (say, $100) at the expense of the home owner - a much larger expense (say, $500) than the utility will gain.
Ordinarily, such a bargain in the commercial / retail marketplace is more equitable.
For example, a consumer might pay a higher annual cost for one credit-card over another, where the benefits of the card are perceived to be worth the extra cost.
Utility companies want smart meters because they reduce their meter-reading costs, plus they can do more with the meters (remote disconnect/reconnect, offer pre-paid electicity service, etc).
The time-of-use aspect of billing for residential electricity is bogus.
Electric utilities that supply a given residential customer base always recoup what they spend to buy electricity by charging the customer base accordingly. There is no need to figure out, on a house-by-house basis, who used how many kwh during 9-am to 5-pm (or what-ever). A total kwh reading per month is sufficient. The differences in use patterns between houses do not amount to anything worthy of spending $500 to $1000 for a new meter and related billing infrastructure.
Again, time-of-use electricity billing for residential customers represents a false economy, when the cost of the metering systems and software are taken into account.
If those costs are borne mainly or exclusively by the home owner, then only the utility company wins - and the home owner can never realistically change their life-style to the point where they time-shift enough of their electricity use to recoup the extra new costs of paying for the meter that is imposed on them by the utility.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/15/2012 7:33 AM, Home Guy wrote:

again, you're mostly wrong
in the case where the home is generating power during the day, it is critical to know which way power is going when.
in the case where you have a very new energy efficient home, it is critical to know the difference in power being used between other nearby homes when.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Home Guy wrote:

I know maths is hard, but let's see if we can figure this out:
Let's assume a manual meter-read can read, oh, one meter every three minutes.
At $20/hr, all things considered, it costs the power company about $1/month to read your meter.
A "smart" meter costs about $200 and about $40 worth of labor to install it.
So, then, for all that, the power company will recoup the expense for buying and installing the meter in 240 months, about 20 years.
Obviously the power company can't make economic sense with this scenario. I guess that's why they're charging me a few bucks per month for this shiny new meter.
Aside: The power distribution company DID come out and test the pole in my backyard recently. They dug an access hole about 18" deep around it and bored out a 1/2" plug of wood. I don't know what they did with the plug - maybe sent it to a lab for testing - but they did nail an aluminum plate about the size of a fifty-cent piece to the pole with the test date on it.
The power company employee did say he thought the pole in my yard was okay - it was one of the older ones pressure treated with creosote. It should last sixty years he opined. He further said the newer poles, those treated with eco-friendly materials (like extract of arugula), rot out in about a week.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

I don't buy your estimated price of $200.

No - that's why they have added either completely new line-items on your bill, or have increased existing ones.

And now tell me how that's working out for the customer.

(stuff about a pole)
What's that got to do with this discussion?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.