kill a watt ez

[Bob F]

Ohhhh! A seminar at HD. That's sure to get you the best data.

[trader4]

It will get data from at least one company that is actually installing them here in NJ for HD and can give cost data, incentive program data, etc. The solar panels are made by a major company that is selling them around the world.

So, what's your problem and attitude?

[George]

Thats exactly as it should be and all taxes/fees should then be explicitly stated as line items. The provider is informing you what they are charging to provide service. They are only acting as a tax collector for the additional charges. This is no different than buying lunch and declaring that the $5 price listed for your sandwich is fraudulent when you pay $5.35 at the register. If you dislike the idea (I do) of weasel politicians applying "taxes we won't notice" on everything then fire them on election day.

[willshak]

He's waiting for his local mom and pop hardware store to have a seminar.

[Don Klipstein]

I would like to modify this a little:

The total per KWH cost is determined like this:

1. Subtract from the total bill the amount not related to KWH, in the likely event you have that. This would be a monthly line charge, monthly billing charge, or the like.

Doing this leaves the generation cost, transmission cost, distribution cost, fuel cost adjustment, energy optimization cost, male fertile bovine digestive product cost, and the taxes that should at least mostly be on these. These would be on a per-KWH basis.

(Should you find or determine a tax or surcharge or portion thereof that is on the monthly flat fee as opposed to the per-KWH related charges, subtract that along with the monthly flat fee. But if you fail to do that, you should not be off by much.)

1. Divide the result of Step 1 by KWH consumed. That is your actual per-KWH cost.

(You will be off, very likely only very slightly, if you fail in Step 1 to account for any surcharges/taxes on non-per-KWH charges.)

[Don Klipstein]

My non-KWH-related portion of my monthly electric bill is about $6. (My electric utility is PECO, due to me living in Pennsylvania near Philadelphia).

I subtract that from the total bill, and divide what's left to get my per-KWH cost (nearly 15 cents per KWH, above the USA average of 11 maybe now or soon

12 cents per KWH).

[ransley]

A connection fee? You mean for the telephone right.

[Pete C.]

No, you have to include every single charge on the bill as it is a component of the cost you paid per kWh during that billing period. Whether some portions are fixed charges that don't vary with kWh used is not relevant, they are still part of the cost you paid for each and every kWh you used that billing period.

[Pete C.]

I watched one utility change from an accurate cost per kWh (total bill divided by total kWh used) listing on the bill, to one that excluded taxes and fees from the calculation. During this change, there was no notation of the change in the calculation and this was clearly a move to make the cost of the electric service appear lower to customers who were not paying attention or not good at math. After some time the notation that this cost per kWh did not include taxes or fees mysteriously appeared.

[Caesar Romano]

On Mon, 24 May 2010 14:01:26 -0500, "Pete C." wrote Re Re: kill a watt ez:

That is correct.

[George]

But not for the purposes of this discussion. Lets say the fixed charges on an account are $20 and the total energy rate is $0.10/kwh. Lets say the current use is 1,000 kwh/mo. That means the bill should be $120 ($20

• 100) or + 100) or $0.12/kwh per your method. If use was 100 kwh less (or more) how much would the bill be? $110 or $130 respectively not $132 or $108.12/kwh per your method. If use was 100 kwh less (or more) how much would the bill be? 0 or 0 respectively not 2 or 8

[Don Klipstein]

That is a cost that does not get reduced by reducing electricity consumption.

Going by what you advise, reducing electricity consumption of some loads increases the cost of unchanged loads.

- Don Klipstein ( [e-mail])

[Pete C.]

I pay lower rates, the *more* electricity I use. My cost per kWh goes down on months where I use more than 1,000 kWh.

[Caesar Romano]

On Mon, 24 May 2010 16:04:27 -0500, "Pete C." wrote Re Re: kill a watt ez:

Which is how it is supposed to be.

[George]

Sure, tiered rates were neglected for simplicity but would need to be considered if. But fixed costs need to be neglected for the purposes of this thread.

[Bob F]

Where do you live, and how is the power generated? Where I live (Seattle, hydro) the rates go up for any over a certain amount.

[Bob F]

If you are concerned with the cost/savings for changing any particular appliance, you need to be concerned with the cost of that particular power usage change, which is not affected by the base charge. So no, you don't want to include the base charge.

[Edward Reid]

This is not correct. Modern refrigerators are designed to run nearly all the time. Turns out it uses less energy to use a small motor and run it constantly than to use a large motor and turn it on and off. If running all the time is the only problem, get used to it. But using the Kill a Watt is a good idea.

Edward

[Twayne]

I challenge you to offer up a citation for that; it makes no sense. Running all the time is one sign of a coolant leak.

[David Combs]

Well, it would sure keep the food at a more constant temperature.