Smart Meters - the Telegraph's take

This is exactly what I posted here years ago. It's all about renewable energy. Especially in the early days. When the wind don't blow and the sun don't shine, electricity will be expensive.

But they can do that anyway, which is why it often pays to get a yearly contract as I do. Brian

the meters might

I can't for one minute seeing the politician allow it.

A tariff which changes without notice cannot possibly change user behaviour, and that is the only possible reason for having differential charging.

tim

I don't see the point (other than to make more money) as, if you don't know you are paying more for electricity, you can't change your usage.

I see nothing new of substance in the article - let alone a proposal to introduce unannounced changes in tariffs. Ofgem's consultation makes clear it's all about "incentives...to help their customers shift their consumption to times when electricity is cheaper to generate or transport."

And the consultation is on a very narrow point: giving suppliers more access to half-hourly consumption data - and then only for suppliers to settle _their_ purchases. The data isn't going to be available for research and policy analysis. To that extent, I think the Telegraph writer has misunderstood what Ofgem are doing. I could not possibly comment on how/why.

Who says ?

The idea that these things will allow customers to save money by changing their behaviour is simply marketing bullshit to persuade people to accept the things, and always has been, from day one.

Why would any company promote devices that will allow their customers to use less of their product ?

They have to make some gestures in that direction by way of cheaper tariffs etc. but that's all they ever were. Gestures.

While knowing damn all about the actual technicalities assuming they're buying electricity at current wholesale prices on the fly, than differential pricing in response to demand, would enable them to match the price they're currently paying. Which might mean lower prices for customers or bigger profits for the providers, maybe with a nice expenses paid fact finding trip to the Caribbean for the regulator, thrown in.

Which would also be useful in the event of shortages - at least for those who were willing and able to pay

Presumably some caps would need to be put in place however.

michael adams

...

I can't see multi-rate charging being anything but inevitable. It reduces t he cost price per kWh for both generation & distribution, so it'll happen. Of course it'll be marketed as a user money saving scheme, and of course th e total cost will be greater not less. What's new.

NT

Typical Brexiteer. Not when the sun shines and the wind blows electricity will be cheaper.

Don't forget that when the sun shines you are paying harry >50p a unit so it is more expensive when the sun shines.

So if we take that to its logical extension, we could adjust FIT payments to private generators using the same mechanism. So that on bright sunny windy days, they near enough earn SFA, and then on cold still winter nights they get enhanced payments.

Presumably the display on the smart meter will show the spot price, and give a colour coded easy to read "Cheap, average, expensive" kind of quick indication.

which bit?

That's completely different from the idea that dynamic pricing persuades people to change their behaviour

Why (other than because you can) would a supplier justify wanting to use dynamic pricing?

tim

if that saving is passed onto the consumer

if that's the case then the regulator wont allow it

what's so hard to understand

tim

but 99% of the time you wont be able to do anything to change your usage when the spot price changes

Are you going to stop the washing machine mid cycle, or stop cooking dinner, or stop watching your favourite TV program, all on zero notice?

Yup. Over £1200 worth generated this last quarter. The sun shines for the righteous.

You spoke of "differential charging" above. And you claimed that the only reason suppliers would introduce "differential charging" would be to change user behaviour. Which is clearly impossibe. Whereas I suggested *another* reason why suppliers would want to introduce "differential charging".

Now you've decided you want to talk about "dynamic pricing" instead.

That was explained above. The supplier will be buying electricity at a constantly changing spot price reflecting both the current supply situations as generating capacity goes on and off stream and current demand.

At the moment however the consumer pays a fixed price with maybe lower tarrifs to take up the slack in the system at periods of low demand.

If the supplier can adjust his price according to the spot price he has to pay then even with a 1/2 hr time lag this should eventually bring down demand. So he can buy at a lower spot price when there's less demand . Consumers don't have to sit staring at the meter they simply view the price changes retrospectively on their puters. Maybe days later. So they can eventually work out that maybe

But this is entirely different from the single-price proposition (i.e bullshit) in the original marketing. Whereby it was suggested that by constantly monitoring their smart meter customers would be switching stuff off rather than leaving it on standbye, boiling less water in the electric kettle etc etc Basically the sort of tightarses who will be attracted to that sort of thing haven't been sitting around for years, waiting for smart meters to appear on the scene.

michael adams

...

For those on the ball, it will be possible to save money, even make more money. You're not clever are you? So you won't be among them.

The shape of things to come. (Negative electricity prices.)

You are going to watch the weather forecast s*it-fer-brains. I 'spect there'll be special electricity price forecasts too. I 'spect there'll be computer software soon to turn non-essential stuff off automatically if prices go up.

All part of the thin edge of the wedge. If you had even half a brain, the future would be quite clear.