Smart meters. Wish you hadn't?

[Condi]

dickymint said:

Condis 'savings' just do not apply to the majority of users ie. those that are just about treading water, live in small houses or renters, no chance of an EV due to initial cost or lack of charging on/near their home, kids that need to eat generally at peak time, no chance of solar or heat pumps.......you get the drift!

I've said before short term there are incentives that favour the well off (and to be frank don't need these savings) but sooner or later. as in when everybody has smart meters, the carrot will be withdrawn, there will be much fewer suppliers, little competition as regards switching. It'll go back to a cartel where the winners will NOT be the consumers but the shareholders.

Unless of course it goes back to being nationalised - I'm not a fan of privatisation but in this case it could work?

semi-rant over

Edit: I'm a Tory in case that matters.

This is just nonsense. There is no carrot, as I put above, it's simply the wholesale cost of power, plus costs, plus some profit, plus a premium for 4-7pm because that is when TNOUS is calculated. No subsidy, no discounts.

If anything the subsidy has been everyone who uses power at less expensive times subsidising those who come home at 5pm, put the over, washing machine and all the lights on.

I find it hard to believe anyone is arguing against paying a price which reflects the cost of the energy they use. If you want to use a lot of energy at times of high demand, and high prices, then why shouldn't you expect to pay a lot for it?

As suggested earlier, I expect the longer term answer, and some kind of middle ground, is that the day is broken into 4 or 5 time periods, with a known/fixed price in each period. This incentivises people to move loads they can do, while not getting any unexpected spikes in price across the year. Clearly ofgem are also thinking the same thing https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68655725

Edited by Condi on Wednesday 27th March 12:14

[borcy]

TonyRPH said:

(my bold)

Flattening the demand curve is impossible. There will always be demand peaks at specific times of the day, regardless of pricing.

People need to do stuff at specific times of the day - you are suggesting that instead of everyone having their evening meals between the traditional meal times of 6pm and 7pm, that they should instead spread their meal times across a much wider span.

This will simply not work (or possibly for a tiny, tiny percentage of the population).

Controlling demand like this is a pipe dream....

I think it depends on how much flattening the curve people are talking about. Then of course you are talking about people, most want the power system to work around them not the other way around. The current system has worked for years, the gov/industry has to try and convince people to get onboard with this idea.

Smart meters are obviously part of it, but the roll out is way behind and the reliability of them is poor. I think the industry has a pretty tough challenge to convince enough people to make this worth while. For example comparisons to companies are pretty pointless, what they do is of no interest to the av customer.

[PF62]

Condi said:

If anything the subsidy has been everyone who uses power at less expensive times subsidising those who come home at 5pm, put the over, washing machine and all the lights on.

That's what I find to be very amusing - the very people who would benefit financially from a 'time of use' tariff (that requires a smart meter) arguing against them.

[borcy]

Condi said:

I find it hard to believe anyone is arguing against paying a price which reflects the cost of the energy they use. If you want to use a lot of energy at times of high demand, and high prices, then why shouldn't you expect to pay a lot for it?

Edited by Condi on Wednesday 27th March 12:14

Of course people will, remember people see electricity as a utility in the same way as water and gas. They pay the same to flush the toilet whether it's raining or not, of course there can an explaination as to how/why they are different but people aren't interested in that, that's in the box marked 'not my problem'.

Something may come in like Ofgem suggested yesterday, however it may be far longer than anyone in the industry wants. Look at the smart meter roll out or water meter rollout let alone smart water meters.

It's a really tough sell, people increasingly don't believe companies/gov when they are told this better for everyone, they hear 'better for our profits' add in the horizon scandal and it's a real challenge.

[Condi]

borcy said:

I think it depends on how much flattening the curve people are talking about. Then of course you are talking about people, most want the power system to work around them not the other way around. The current system has worked for years, the gov/industry has to try and convince people to get onboard with this idea.

Yes, but just because something has worked for years doesn't mean there are not more efficient ways to do it with new technology. It does require a change in mindset from consumers, which is something that they will have to get on board with at some point.

borcy said:

Of course people will, remember people see electricity as a utility in the same way as water and gas. They pay the same to flush the toilet whether it's raining or not, of course there can an explaination as to how/why they are different but people aren't interested in that, that's in the box marked 'not my problem'.

The explanation is very simple, and it's that water and gas can be stored, whereas power has to be produced in the same millisecond it's being used. This makes it much more akin to things like flights, trains etc which have different prices depending on the date and time you want to travel. A 5am flight on NYD is very cheap, the same flight at 2pm in August is much more expensive.

As you say, there is a bit of "it's not my problem", but everything is moving in that direction so whether people like it or not it's something inevitable which is coming to consumers.

[Mr Whippy]

PF62 said:

Mr Whippy said:

I think whatever the argument, if you buy yourself a battery and some solar, AND a smart meter for cheap unit buying, you’re sorted.

That's terrible advice.

How so?

Smart meter = can buy electric at cheapest rates.
Battery = can store cheap units for later.
Solar = can generate own units if needed, though costs might not stack up if you can buy cheap grid units, but always nice to be able to be somewhat power independent if necessary (in the uk that might turn out to be valuable if our energy strategy continues to be so half hearted)

[borcy]

Condi said:

The explanation is very simple, and it's that water and gas can be stored, whereas power has to be produced in the same millisecond it's being used. This makes it much more akin to things like flights, trains etc which have different prices depending on the date and time you want to travel. A 5am flight on NYD is very cheap, the same flight at 2pm in August is much more expensive.

As you say, there is a bit of "it's not my problem", but everything is moving in that direction so whether people like it or not it's something inevitable which is coming to consumers.

Yes, the industry isn't the same as water but people see that it is mainly because utilities are must have, flights not really. Explanations of likening it to flights is a bit like shouting into a vacuum

I'd disagree about it being inevitable, it's moving in one way but not reversible. Whether the industry like it or not all those people get a vote, and be under no doubt the gov, when pressured by consumers/voters, will step into the electricity market regardless of anything the industry may have to say about it or money spent already. See HS2.

Edited by borcy on Wednesday 27th March 13:24

Edited by borcy on Wednesday 27th March 13:27

[Condi]

borcy said:

I'd disagree about it being inevitable, it's moving in one way but not reversible. Whether the industry like it or not all those people get a vote, and be under no doubt the gov, when pressured by consumers/voters, will step into the electricity market regardless of anything the industry may have to say about it or money spent already. See HS2.

It is inevitable, I think, if nothing else because it goes a long way to helping reach net zero due to better use of renewable output and more efficient thermal running. Not only that as more people have EVs and heat pumps they want cheaper overnight tariffs. There are others who want a more flexible tariff across the day. All of this means that those on a fixed tariff are going to end up paying comparatively more, as the energy companies will assume that these people are using a lot of energy at peak times - which they probably are. And so even without them doing anything those who wish to remain on a fixed tariff will see that get comparatively more expensive and make the flexible or time based tariffs look cheaper. There will be some who don't wish to change and that's fine, but for many people it will be more attractive.

[borcy]

Condi said:

borcy said:

I'd disagree about it being inevitable, it's moving in one way but not reversible. Whether the industry like it or not all those people get a vote, and be under no doubt the gov, when pressured by consumers/voters, will step into the electricity market regardless of anything the industry may have to say about it or money spent already. See HS2.

It is inevitable, I think, if nothing else because it goes a long way to helping reach net zero due to better use of renewable output and more efficient thermal running. Not only that as more people have EVs and heat pumps they want cheaper overnight tariffs. There are others who want a more flexible tariff across the day. All of this means that those on a fixed tariff are going to end up paying comparatively more, as the energy companies will assume that these people are using a lot of energy at peak times - which they probably are. And so even without them doing anything those who wish to remain on a fixed tariff will see that get comparatively more expensive and make the flexible or time based tariffs look cheaper. There will be some who don't wish to change and that's fine, but for many people it will be more attractive.

Yeap i get that from an industry perspective. But like I say people see it quite differently.

I take it you think the government won't step in and the vast majority of consumers will buy into this with few issues?

[Mr Whippy]

Condi said:

borcy said:

I'd disagree about it being inevitable, it's moving in one way but not reversible. Whether the industry like it or not all those people get a vote, and be under no doubt the gov, when pressured by consumers/voters, will step into the electricity market regardless of anything the industry may have to say about it or money spent already. See HS2.

It is inevitable, I think, if nothing else because it goes a long way to helping reach net zero due to better use of renewable output and more efficient thermal running. Not only that as more people have EVs and heat pumps they want cheaper overnight tariffs. There are others who want a more flexible tariff across the day. All of this means that those on a fixed tariff are going to end up paying comparatively more, as the energy companies will assume that these people are using a lot of energy at peak times - which they probably are. And so even without them doing anything those who wish to remain on a fixed tariff will see that get comparatively more expensive and make the flexible or time based tariffs look cheaper. There will be some who don't wish to change and that's fine, but for many people it will be more attractive.

My gripe with energy has always been the bad pricing. Trying to average it out over a year.

Smart meters have allowed actual billing automatically on a monthly basis for me, great.

The idea of paying (and benefitting) from shifting usage to low demand/lower cost on a minute to minute fine grained level seems like a no brainer to me.

And I’m not a fan of smart metering, privacy loss etc.


Buy a battery and you’re sorted. Top up at cheapest price. Use energy when you need to.

Best of boast worlds.

[Condi]

borcy said:

Yeap i get that from an industry perspective. But like I say people see it quite differently.

I take it you think the government won't step in and the vast majority of consumers will buy into this with few issues?

No, I can't see the government stepping in at all. They're on a mission to hit net zero - and this helps with that. They also want innovation and competition in the energy market, which this helps with by offering a wider choice of products to consumers. Look at the ofgem announcement the other day that they're considering a price cap tariff with different prices throughout the day, they might get some push back from consumers but it's clear where the direction of travel is going.

Consumers will buy in eventually, they just need it explained. The biggest resistance is likely to be from older folk who have only ever known it one way and refuse to accept that the world has changed, but that is not unique to this, for younger people I don't see it being such a big thing at all. Explain to them that they can have cheaper bills by doing certain things at different times and consumers will buy into that. It doesn't need lots of other changes.

[PhilkSVR]

I will buy into it if it saves me money. Adapting my routines or more accurately thinking about when I use energy is a change that I am prepared to make. If the incentive is lower costs then I will look hard at how I can take advantage of those lower costs. Tariff selections are more varied now, there is much more choice based on your circumstances. It just needs some thought.

[dickymint]

Condi said:

borcy said:

Yeap i get that from an industry perspective. But like I say people see it quite differently.

I take it you think the government won't step in and the vast majority of consumers will buy into this with few issues?

No, I can't see the government stepping in at all. They're on a mission to hit net zero - and this helps with that. They also want innovation and competition in the energy market, which this helps with by offering a wider choice of products to consumers. Look at the ofgem announcement the other day that they're considering a price cap tariff with different prices throughout the day, they might get some push back from consumers but it's clear where the direction of travel is going.

Consumers will buy in eventually, they just need it explained. The biggest resistance is likely to be from older folk who have only ever known it one way and refuse to accept that the world has changed, but that is not unique to this, for younger people I don't see it being such a big thing at all. Explain to them that they can have cheaper bills by doing certain things at different times and consumers will buy into that. It doesn't need lots of other changes.

That can will be kicked further and further down the road,

[borcy]

Condi said:

borcy said:

Yeap i get that from an industry perspective. But like I say people see it quite differently.

I take it you think the government won't step in and the vast majority of consumers will buy into this with few issues?

No, I can't see the government stepping in at all. They're on a mission to hit net zero - and this helps with that. They also want innovation and competition in the energy market, which this helps with by offering a wider choice of products to consumers. Look at the ofgem announcement the other day that they're considering a price cap tariff with different prices throughout the day, they might get some push back from consumers but it's clear where the direction of travel is going.

Consumers will buy in eventually, they just need it explained. The biggest resistance is likely to be from older folk who have only ever known it one way and refuse to accept that the world has changed, but that is not unique to this, for younger people I don't see it being such a big thing at all. Explain to them that they can have cheaper bills by doing certain things at different times and consumers will buy into that. It doesn't need lots of other changes.

Fair enough

I see being a much more bumpy ride with the gov far more involved as campaigns build. People still want electricity to work for them not seen as a whim to when is convenient for the industry. Again perhaps not how it works but the industry isn't the most trust worthy with the public.


You only have to look at freezes on pre payment meters installations, subsidies in the market when prices rises, support for special tariffs such as pensioners, the disabled.

Wait till Mr Lewis gets involved

But we'll see.

Edited by borcy on Wednesday 27th March 14:01

[borcy]

dickymint said:

That can will be kicked further and further down the road,

Agreed the gov will decide what net zero is and when it's achieved.

[OutInTheShed]

Condi said:

Of course there will always be periods of higher and lower demand, but the more demand you can shift away from peak periods towards other times then the more efficient the system becomes. If you give people an economic incentive to change when they use power they will, but up to now it's not something anyone has thought about because they've paid a fixed price irrespective of when it was used. For example, putting the dishwasher on at 9pm instead of 6pm, doing the washing at a weekend instead of at 5pm on a Tuesday. With smart plugs and such like you could schedule the fridge to shut off at 4pm and come back on at 7pm - big commercial enterprises are already doing this, chilled warehouses etc - but there has never been any incentive for domestic customers to bother.

Offer people cheaper power for making a few little changes and you'd be surprised how they respond.

Back last century, we had economy 7 and used to run the washing machine overnight. TBH we still run it overnight, not because the lectricty is cheaper, but because it means the washing is done at breakfast time readfy to dry on the line.

With normal domestic use, there's only so much load shifting to do, we all tend to want the lights and TV on in the evening.
The people most enthusiastic about complex tariffs seem often to be those using a lot of electricity for non-essential purposes like sexponds.
Cars are obviously a game changer, suddenly there is a signifcant pool of 'load' which can be controlled.


A look at Gridwatch
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
suggests there are no genuinely cheap, free or surplus periods of electricity in today's market, there is always demand for gas-fired power stations.
It's only really highly volatile at the margins and because the market is somewhat broken. Nobody is defending the way the market is currently run, in time I think it will change. At the moment we have OCtopus playing games with small numbers of users, if everyone signed up the game would be different. It is absolutely, gaming, 'Game Theory in the mathematical sense is a big part of it.
Looking at the wind contribution, it's pretty obvious that adding more wind capacity will change the game. We will have periods of surplus and periods of 'tight' supply, but these won't be daily, or predictable. It might be a different pool of users who are best placed to game the market then?

[Condi]

OutInTheShed said:

With normal domestic use, there's only so much load shifting to do, we all tend to want the lights and TV on in the evening.
The people most enthusiastic about complex tariffs seem often to be those using a lot of electricity for non-essential purposes like sexponds.
Cars are obviously a game changer, suddenly there is a signifcant pool of 'load' which can be controlled.


A look at Gridwatch
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
suggests there are no genuinely cheap, free or surplus periods of electricity in today's market, there is always demand for gas-fired power stations.
It's only really highly volatile at the margins and because the market is somewhat broken. Nobody is defending the way the market is currently run, in time I think it will change. At the moment we have OCtopus playing games with small numbers of users, if everyone signed up the game would be different. It is absolutely, gaming, 'Game Theory in the mathematical sense is a big part of it.
Looking at the wind contribution, it's pretty obvious that adding more wind capacity will change the game. We will have periods of surplus and periods of 'tight' supply, but these won't be daily, or predictable. It might be a different pool of users who are best placed to game the market then?

You're right, there is only so much load which can move, but we may as well incentivise those loads which can be move to move.

I don't agree it's gaming at all - here are the wholesale GB power prices for today. Ignore the NO2 column. You can see energy is about twice as expensive at peak periods than it is at lower price periods. All the Octopus tariff does is pass that cost back to consumers, with a premium for certain times of the day. If everyone signed up, you'd end up with a much flatter demand shape, and on average energy costs would be lower due to more efficient use of thermal plant. See my example about with 24 people wanting to run a 1kw load for 1 hour.

And you're right that renewable output has a big influence on price, but there are parts which are more predictable than others. For example, in summer the sun shines and solar power generation is high. A bit like energy firms use average consumption models to calculate their prices to consumers, they can use average generation models to average out the tight and oversupplied days if people have a more fixed price contract.

Unequivocally the market is moving from a world where power was generated on demand to meet customer needs to a world where supply and demand are both variables. That will require some change in customer attitudes but I don't think resistance to it is as great as you think.

Edited by Condi on Wednesday 27th March 15:36

[PF62]

Mr Whippy said:

PF62 said:

Mr Whippy said:

I think whatever the argument, if you buy yourself a battery and some solar, AND a smart meter for cheap unit buying, you’re sorted.

That's terrible advice.

How so?

Smart meter = can buy electric at cheapest rates.

Correct

Mr Whippy said:

Battery = can store cheap units for later.

Simply not cost effective for most people as even the best calculations put a payback period in the decades.

Mr Whippy said:

Solar = can generate own units if needed, though costs might not stack up if you can buy cheap grid units,

Correct, the costs don'e stack up.

Mr Whippy said:

but always nice to be able to be somewhat power independent if necessary (in the uk that might turn out to be valuable if our energy strategy continues to be so half hearted)

If we are headed down that 'tin foil' hat route then personally I would be investing in a shotgun and a store of tinned beans.

[PF62]

OutInTheShed said:

A look at Gridwatch https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/suggests there are no genuinely cheap, free or surplus periods of electricity in today's market, there is always demand for gas-fired power stations.

Gridwatch is giving the national view, not a localised view.

Embedded generation, which includes some solar and wind farms, is connected to the local grid and not the national grid, which means there can be localised surpluses and that is the reason why Octopus gave me three hours free electricity today and three hours tomorrow because in my area there is too much renewable generation. During the time period I am getting free electricity then Gridwatch will show the gas stations firing, but locally there is just too much renewable generation.

OutInTheShed said:

It's only really highly volatile at the margins and because the market is somewhat broken. Nobody is defending the way the market is currently run, in time I think it will change. At the moment we have OCtopus playing games with small numbers of users, if everyone signed up the game would be different. It is absolutely, gaming, 'Game Theory in the mathematical sense is a big part of it.

Looking at the wind contribution, it's pretty obvious that adding more wind capacity will change the game. We will have periods of surplus and periods of 'tight' supply, but these won't be daily, or predictable. It might be a different pool of users who are best placed to game the market then?

Sure things might change in the future, but then they might not, and even if they do what does that have to do with what you do today.

If anyone thinks that not having a smart meter installed today and benefitting from the cheaper rates now will change what happens in the future is deluded.

[LimmerickLad]

PF62 said:

If anyone thinks that not having a smart meter installed today and benefitting from the cheaper rates now will change what happens in the future is deluded.

Do you need to declare a vested interest in any way at all?