On May 31, 8:30 pm, firstname.lastname@example.org 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?
On Jun 1, 1:24 pm, email@example.com 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?
On 6/1/2012 2:12 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org 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
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
On 6/2/2012 9:00 AM, email@example.com 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).
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 12:12:32 -0700 (PDT), " firstname.lastname@example.org"
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
email@example.com 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?
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.
On 5/31/2012 10:59 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org 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.
It's hidden under the "Demand side Management, remote prepayment, and controlled
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
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
effort to detect an 110v overload condition and disconnect both legs from
On Wed, 30 May 2012 12:24:46 -0400, email@example.com wrote:
You obviously can't read..
After observing some new smart meter installs. i decided to look up the meter
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 ..
Look up the term "service switch"..
With the addition of the fully rated 200 amp service switch, the meter is
pre-payment metering without all the historical cost associated with card
readers or other
legacy pre-payment technology. Load limiting and emergency conservation modes
meter apart when working in conjunction with a demand response program. Having
capability to be remotely configured, as well as being firmware upgradeable,
serves todayβs needs, as well as tomorrowβs evolving requirements."
Page 8. (I-210+)
Factory integrated Service Switch Capability
- Soft Switch Functions
- AMR Communications (AMR Interface formats include
SPI Format-1 data, SPI Format-2 Data
- Simple Voltag Event monitoring in addition to RMS
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
Both are listed as "Factory installed option for I-210+"..
From my conversations with GE'e engineer, some of the ordering options for the
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
U2 = Remote disconnect & Prepaid disconnect.
Now go outside and look at GE I-210+ smart meter installed on the side of your
you have one). Write down the extra options installed, just to the right of
inside a rectangle box outline (Very close to the exact center of the meter
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
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.
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
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
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
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.
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.