Smart meters simply 'tax machines': Hudak

[Bonam]

Well, I do see a causal link. Countries like Cuba, Venezuela and teh Soviet Union that misprice their resources invariably wind up poor.

Really? You don't see any other similarities between these nations that might have a bigger impact on their prosperity?

[Wild Bill]

I think that's the problem, WB. Electricity conservation has been of the voluntary, charitable, do-it-for-the-children kind. When people see a benefit in their pocketbook, then conservation really occurs.

Swindle? Perhaps we should start another thread on this topic although I think there is an old thread on Churchill Falss kicking around somewhere. But look, WB, I can make my point here very simply.

If you own a huge gold deposit on the moon, in your mind you may be very, very rich. In fact though, you got nuttin unless you can find a way to bring the gold from the moon to the earth. Newfoundlanders just don't seem to understand this. They think that the valuable resource is the huge hydro potential of Churchill Falls. It's not. The valuable resource is the ability to bring that power to a place that makes it usable. Quebec gets the lion's share of the benefits of Churchill Falls because Quebec brings the valuable resource to the table.

First off, the "benefit in their pocketbook" is the problem! McGuinty instituted the smart meter billing. The cheapest rate is after 9:00 pm. However, this is still a penny or two higher than the former rate! So even if you only consume ALL of your electricity in the nighttime you still pay more than before. A saving is impossible.

Add in an overall rate hike, the HST, some bumps in the transmission carrying charges and other extra fees and we are seeing increases of as much as 50% in one jump! Even with frantic conservation measures the average person is still getting hit with perhaps 20%. Also, if you have a family it is a hardship to wait till after 9:00 at night to put a load in the washer and stay awake to take it out later and put it in the dryer, to have the clothes dry in the morning as the kids head out to school.

Elderly people on fixed incomes find the scheduling to be a PITA as well. This just isn't a "positive reinforcement" method to encourage conservation! What's more, most citizens don't believe that they are energy pigs who deserve to be forced to conserve. They remember all the political scandals about the Bruce Penninsula Nuclear Reactors being used as a slush fund trough for political appointments and skyhigh labour costs until the debt hit over $30 BILLION dollars! They are also aware of lost opportunities for erecting new transmission line arteries to Quebec and Manitoba. We have had two province wide blackouts in the past few years, one of which lasted most of a weekend.

Citizens believe we are paying so much not to encourage conservation but because of political ineptitude! This hurts fostering the idea of conservation, due to disrespect for the "official line" as to the reason for the need.

As for Churchill Falls, you don't have to convince me. You have to convince not just Newfoundland but the rest of the world! Check out this link:

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/story.html?id=17f52755-7ede-45a5-8b2f-6a8b7d004957

"Churchill Falls deal probed

The infamous Churchill Falls hydro agreement - giving Quebec long-term access to discount-priced power from Newfoundland and Labrador - was not only a bad financial deal for Newfoundland, it was also signed under coercive conditions, which may raise "substantive questions of business ethics and law," according to newly released research on the 1968 deal.

By The Gazette (Montreal) December 20, 2005 Be the first to post a comment

The infamous Churchill Falls hydro agreement - giving Quebec long-term access to discount-priced power from Newfoundland and Labrador - was not only a bad financial deal for Newfoundland, it was also signed under coercive conditions, which may raise "substantive questions of business ethics and law," according to newly released research on the 1968 deal.

A new study, by two professors at Memorial University in St. John's, says the Newfoundland company that developed the massive hydro project signed the extraordinary contract because Hydro-Quebec, after years of negotiating in goodwill, chose at the last minute to exploit inside information that the developer would go bankrupt without a deal.

Economics professor James Feehan and historian Mel Baker have written a 25,000-word analysis of how the Churchill Falls deal was done, based on historical documents and memoranda unearthed in Quebec, Newfoundland and at the National Archives in Ottawa."

The article is much longer and a good read. Hopefully you will consider a Quebec newspaper to be a credible source. A simple google will turn up page after page of sites that all seem to agree that Newfoundland got screwed. It was NOT a simple case of their needing Quebec to get the power to market. In the words of so many of those sites, it was a swindle plain and simple. What's more, these professors may have proven the deal to have been criminal!

[Smallc]

First off, the "benefit in their pocketbook" is the problem! McGuinty instituted the smart meter billing. The cheapest rate is after 9:00 pm. However, this is still a penny or two higher than the former rate! So even if you only consume ALL of your electricity in the nighttime you still pay more than before. A saving is impossible.

How about using less power?

[Wild Bill]

How about using less power?

Everyone I know has been conserving for at least 10-15 years. My washer and dryer are 25 years old. They still have the "Energy Star" sticker on their sides! So that proves we have been conscious as consumers about our electricity consumption for at least a quarter of a century.It's not like we've been wasting like mad and only heard about conservation last Saturday! How much more room to conserve is left?

As a techie, I am well aware that first off all, CFLs can never cut your consumption by more than a few percent. That's because lighting was never a bigger chunk of your bill in the first place! Power is measured in watts. The average old lightbulb consumed 60 watts an hour. An electric stove preparing supper uses up to several thousand watts!

Banning old lamps and using CFLs does mice nuts for the consumer! The only one to benefit is the Ontario Power Corporation! The savings may be trivial for the individual but the power company sees the total improved efficiency. This means they don't have to build more generators.

The big draws are burners and motors. There's burners in your clothes dryer and motors in your furnace, refrigerator and freezer. Your daughter's hair dryer uses about as much power 15 hundred watt light bulbs!

It is physically impossible to make a motor or a heating element that will be more efficient enough to cut consumption by enough to give consumers a significant break on their bill. Not because we can't or won't improve their design. The Law of Conservation of Energy is the limiting factor. A motor today may already be 90% efficient. If it takes 1000 watts of power to rotate a dryer drum that motor may only lose 100 watts in doing the task. It cannot draw less than the power needed for the mechanical result!

So frankly SmallC, your suggestion seems rather mean-spirited! "Let them eat cake!"

[Smallc]

So in other words, you don't want to, and you'll continue to go on making excuses.

[myata]

I'm beginning to see the point, grudgingly. What concerns me is not higher taxes, fees, rates per se - but lack of visible evidence that they result in real benefit for citizens who foot the bill as opposed to politicians who cut the cheques under flashlight. The pattern I see is near identical:

1) Slam new revenue source for the government: we pay

2) Run a media campaign to tell us how we benefit: we pay

3) Go back to "business as usual" mode: what exactly did we get in return for our investment?

I don't know how it works in Norway. Do they have a natural tradition of transparent government? Or a law making government to publish its expenses. But here it seems like every time taxes, fees, etc have gone up, things just return back to the good old status quo without any sort of idea about what's happening to all those extra peanuts and not really so that we were made to shell out.. again.. and again.. and again.

Let's see:

- Health tax: + 750 peanuts

Was advertised as the ultimate cure for the province's healthcare crisis.

Two recent anecdotes from own experience:

1) Some months back my family doctor retired and I was looking for a new one. Conveniently at the time HealthAccess Ontario was a lot on airwaves. It was supposed to connect you to your healthcare provider quickly and painlessly. I sent my request form and... every three or six? month receive a cute letter telling me that my file is active and blah.. I got three of those so far.. and counting. No I haven't a problem with health care per se (but see #2) but I can't help wondering if this HealthAccess just another government thing with a multimillion CEO, contractors and hospitability budgets that just turns.. and turns.. and turns.. now that the money (in the form of life necessity special target health tax) have been taken care of. May be somebody here knows, or could find out?

2) Couple of days back, kid has stubbed her toe in a game. It looked quite bad and we wanted to check if it could be broken. Nothing life threatening no. Went to a local emergency room (had to know asap as she had more practices coming same week, no room for delayed referrals). Seeing just a bunch of people waiting got quite inspired with the progress of our healthcare. Signed in, asked about wait time: 4+ hours. How so, with only a few folks waiting here? No, please proceed there, around corner: where two? three dozen in rows of chairs? We decided to take chances and see it heal on its own. So much for targeting emergency room wait times. Whatever happened to that goal, I wonder? Back to square one, with moneys safely put where they naturally belong?

And after that we had:

- HST (again, 1) real ad campaingn promising net neutrality of cost; 2) real money upfront - only gas went up some 7-8 cents where I am. And there's internet, electricity, heating, children classes and so on. 3) nothing or very little coming back in the form of "adaptation" check - and even that only for a year.

- Environmental fees: a I said previously, I'm all for paying for environmentally safe disposal of the products I consume. It's the only way to sustainable living. BUT: in return I require full transparency, full access to information where the money are going and what result is being achieved.

- No I'm not holding my breath for utility rates now. With the approach demonstrated by this government I predict informative and convincing publicity campaign, net positive revenue for the government and more peanuts to let go of for everybody else.

[Topaz]

Today, I read that quietly that Hydro in Ontario is getting another increase and more are coming to their profits. This they say is to to "green" power. BULL! To get off coal, which I can understand but there are some Ontarians that are going to have to choose between paying the hydro bill and eating, those of the ones on fixed incomes and low incomes. So now Ontarians see increases in their hydro bils, because of the smart meter, Harper's sin tax (HST) and increase profits for hydro companies! http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/24092010/71/central-hydro-firms-quietly-given-bigger-profits.html

[Oleg Bach]

Too many rules and restrictions - tax man is up our ass - the energy people are raping us...the court system loves to harrass the public with unjust and sinister policy....what's next? Are they going to put a smart meter on our forehead and if we are a tad to bright - there will be a remote dummy down switch..that can be flicked by some bureacrat doing the hench work of some bastard who believes that people are cattle to be harvested at their leisure?

People are becoming depressed because rich and poor alike are being ground up and stressed out with to many controls and restrictions. Eventually social depression sets in and with that economic depression...It used to be that they picked on the poor and middle class - now some sinister bastards are betraying their own also..TORONTO for instance is a mess..there are property taxes based on so called "market value" - the taxes are so intense that those with buisnesses and hopes can not AFFORD market value...which means the whole thing is a scam - market value must be by definition something that can be bought at the real estate market place..but most can not buy...Kind of reminds me of the biblical "mark of the beast" - those without the mark can not buy or sell....

So who has the mark and who symbolically continues to operate - why the mediorcre of course...we should all try to be less than we are in order to fool the big machine - time for us to all play stupid...and ignore the "smart" meters...evil and un-smart are the same...The stupid really believe that we are even more stupid than they - and the stupid seem to have some control over us....well someday the power will go out and all those artifical leaders will fall like unplugged robots...bitter? YEP like a basket of limes!

[Wild Bill]

So in other words, you don't want to, and you'll continue to go on making excuses.

No, I'm saying most people CAN"T conserve enough to make a significant saving on their electricity bill.

You seem to think that they can - that it's just a matter of choice and will. I'm saying they can't. It's a matter of physics and mathematics.

If you want to convince someone that they CAN save significant money on their Ontario electricity bill then perhaps you might want to try mathematics and physics to prove it.

Anyone can make a wish! "Let them eat cake!"

[Topaz]

No, I'm saying most people CAN"T conserve enough to make a significant saving on their electricity bill.

You seem to think that they can - that it's just a matter of choice and will. I'm saying they can't. It's a matter of physics and mathematics.

If you want to convince someone that they CAN save significant money on their Ontario electricity bill then perhaps you might want to try mathematics and physics to prove it.

Anyone can make a wish! "Let them eat cake!"

I agree with you. They had this program in California and it was reported they had to discontinue it because it wasn't saving any money or energy.The only good thing about this is IF you are a investor, you are making money!

[Smallc]

No, I'm saying most people CAN"T conserve enough to make a significant saving on their electricity bill.

You seem to think that they can - that it's just a matter of choice and will. I'm saying they can't. It's a matter of physics and mathematics.

So you're saying that every home in Ontario is insulated and sealed the best it can reasonably be? Are they buying the most efficient appliances they reasonably can? Do they have the best windows that they reasonably can? Are they changing to CFLs where they can? Should I go on?

[myata]

So you're saying that every home in Ontario is insulated and sealed the best it can reasonably be? Are they buying the most efficient appliances they reasonably can? Do they have the best windows that they reasonably can? Are they changing to CFLs where they can? Should I go on?

I would agree with that strategy with one BIG qualification: that we always know exactly, to the last dime, where the moneys collected for common, i.e. health, green, sustainability and so and yada, are going. If it's just to sponsor another useless government machine a la eHealth Ontario or that Recycling Council count me out, right now.

I actually propose a new tea party, Ontario style: no new taxes or any other expenses by taxpayers without full responsibility, transparency and tracking of collected revenues. We have enough of wasteful government and pseudo bureacracies to add new ones (Green Ontario, Recyclable Ontario, Sustainable Ontario and god you know what ontario).

[Wild Bill]

So you're saying that every home in Ontario is insulated and sealed the best it can reasonably be? Are they buying the most efficient appliances they reasonably can? Do they have the best windows that they reasonably can? Are they changing to CFLs where they can? Should I go on?

Well, I already covered CFLs. In a couple of posts! Thanks for actually reading before responding.

As for windows and appliances, I doubt if there's many people left who haven't done so, except for those who just can't afford it. You probably didn't read my point about how we've been at this for at least 25 years, either.

Still, you just go on! Some of us live in dream worlds and some of us in the real one.

Anyhow, you don't have to convince me. The issue is rapidly building into an election one. We'll see how many voters agree with me or with you, next year.

[Smallc]

I'm sorry, but if you think that people are as efficient as they can be in terms of electricity......

[fellowtraveller]

FT, I don't dispute that a modern electricity grid must cope with peak demand, and have some spare too. My point is that providing for that peak capacity is very costly. There are great savings to be had if it is possible to shift demand away from that peak moment.

This is what the price mechanism is designed to do. If pork is abundant, its price falls and many households change their eating habits. Go to any grocery store in Canada on a Thursday evening when the weekly sales flyer is new and watch people responding to prices. I don't see why a smart meter would have any different effect.

Your 'point' about providing for peak capacity is moot. There is no option in reality, other than trying to reduce overall consumption. Even doing that, you must plan and build for peak demand within that overall consumption. No option. It is certainly possible to have programs to contain both demand and consumption, but to control it with not accomdoating expanision is self defeating. Popualtion increases, industry grows, power supply will either follow or lead, but if it neither follows or leads you are headed to 3rd world status in a hurry.

Your example is false, as it addresses only demand which is irregualr (and turkeys eaten only on holidays would be less awkward).

Provision of electricity has two distinct but intertwined aspects- demand and consumption- and both must be reckoned with.

Here is why smart meters for homes are not going to be anything other than a money grab: because compared to industry, homeowners have far less flexibility in when and how they use power. They cannot cook dinner at 3 AM. They have less need to cool the house at 5 AM. They have no need of lights at noon. They have no need for air conditioning in winter.

I was once involved in abusiness where controlling demand was a very big deal, and we had many mechanisms to make sure that the demand meter never, ever spiked.

Do you undertsand how demand works on a utility bill? Your meter records the single highest amount of electricity used at any time in the year for any reason. When you arrive home at 5 PM and turn on the AC compressor and fan, turn on the oven, have a shower using warm water,open the fridge, pen the freezer, kids turn on the Xbox, you turn on some music and the microwave- the demand side of the meter resets to that highest consumption and you pay that surcharge for the next 12 months, even if the house is vacant for the next 364 days. How many of those things can you eliminate or change significantly? How do you think the utility company plans to recoup the few hundred dollars per household that the meters will cost? I thin they'll have it back in months from every home, and the big windfall in money will be pocketed indefintitely. In the meantime, every homeowner will be scrambling to cut their consumptionby a few measly kwh, not undertsanding how they are getting hosed on the demand.

Edited September 24, 2010 by fellowtraveller

[fellowtraveller]

If you;d like a good illustration of how important providing utterly reliable electricity is t an economy, read up on life in Nigeria. It is a huge market and there is some cash around because of the vast amount of petrodollars in the country. Nobody will invest there because the only reliable electricity is the stuff you make yourself, and for industry that is a nonstarter.

[scribblet]

You can't conserve enough to make up for the increase in rates and time of use, even if you get up in the middle of the night to do laundry. People are hurting seriously and it's getting worse. Too bad Canadians well, Ontarians are so apathetic.

read it and weep

Electricity distributors will be allowed to make higher profits after the provincial energy regulator quietly approved a hike earlier this year.

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Hydro+firms+quietly+given+bigger+profits/3569360/story.html#ixzz10U7H2kim

Tax me, I'm Canadian !!

[Smallc]

I didn't realize that company profits were taxes. Also, people in some provinces (BC, Quebec, Manitoba for sure) don't have high prices.

[August1991]

First off, the "benefit in their pocketbook" is the problem! McGuinty instituted the smart meter billing. The cheapest rate is after 9:00 pm. However, this is still a penny or two higher than the former rate! So even if you only consume ALL of your electricity in the nighttime you still pay more than before. A saving is impossible.

That's a political problem.

I have always like the term "revenue neutral" because despite its abuse, it implies that overall, the government isn't taking more. That is, some will benefit while others lose - but overall, the government isn't taking more.

In my mind, smart billing should be revenue neutral - or even better. If pricing accurately a resource is good for society, then surely there will be a net gain - sort of like the peace dividend at the end of teh Cold War.

The infamous Churchill Falls hydro agreement - giving Quebec long-term access to discount-priced power from Newfoundland and Labrador - was not only a bad financial deal for Newfoundland, it was also signed under coercive conditions, which may raise "substantive questions of business ethics and law," according to newly released research on the 1968 deal.

Let's take this outside.

The big draws are burners and motors. There's burners in your clothes dryer and motors in your furnace, refrigerator and freezer. Your daughter's hair dryer uses about as much power 15 hundred watt light bulbs!

True. But people can change their usage in imaginative ways.

No, I'm saying most people CAN"T conserve enough to make a significant saving on their electricity bill.

You seem to think that they can - that it's just a matter of choice and will. I'm saying they can't. It's a matter of physics and mathematics.

WB, have you ever lived outside of a northern country that was covered in ice 15,000 years ago? Finland, Russia, Canada all enjoy cheap Hydro. Elsewhere in the world, hydro is a weird term - and electricity is expensive.

And elsewhere, people do conserve electricity. I am not saying that we should conserve as a Lutheran Protestant act of grace, I am saying that we should do it for good business reasons. If we waste electricity at home, we cannot sell it abroad. We should conserve electricity because we are greedy and selfish.

To do otherwise, we would be foolish, and make everyone poorer - ourselves, and the people abroad who could use our electricty.

Edited September 26, 2010 by August1991

[August1991]

Really? You don't see any other similarities between these nations that might have a bigger impact on their prosperity?

Cuba, Venezuela and the Soviet Union (to name a few examples) are/were poor countries because they misprice their resources. They waste them.

The misfortune and suffering of ordinary people are due to the foolish policies of their regimes.

It is common sense that you don't buy something at a high price, and sell it at a low price. No family, no individual and no society has ever become prosperous by pursuing such a practice.

Edited September 26, 2010 by August1991

[August1991]

Your 'point' about providing for peak capacity is moot. There is no option in reality, other than trying to reduce overall consumption.

Overall consumption matters much less than peak demand.

Here is why smart meters for homes are not going to be anything other than a money grab: because compared to industry, homeowners have far less flexibility in when and how they use power. They cannot cook dinner at 3 AM. They have less need to cool the house at 5 AM. They have no need of lights at noon. They have no need for air conditioning in winter.

Hydro (whether Quebec or Ontario) has already signed the peak demand agreements with industries. The soft belly is now home consumption, and yes it is susceptible to smart meters.

It works with cinemas. If you go on Monday afternoons when they're empty , it's cheaper than on a Friday evening when they're full.

More important though, we Canadians should sell this gift of glaciers to ourselves at the same price that we sell it to foreigners. We should not waste it. By this, I am not using a moral "Dog In The Manger" argument. I am arguing that it makes bad business sense for us to sell something at home for a cheap price when we can get a better price abroad.

And of course, this extra gain (peace dividend) of good business should be shared for all. Only an incompetent politician would ignore this, or be unable to explain it.

Edited September 26, 2010 by August1991

[charter.rights]

The problems with CFLs is that we are no longer getting the heat that 60 and 100 watt light bulbs gave off in the winter, which could amount to about 10% of your heating supply. By the time you factor in the costs of the bulbs, the extra disposal costs that will be borne by the community waste disposal and the loss of BTUs for heat input it is pretty hard to come up with a cost-savings over all. In fact they may actually be using more power if we also factor in the manufacturing costs.

Every does know that CFLs are considered hazardous waste and should not be put in the garbage, right? They must be taken to a waste disposal site and put in with the hazardous waste along with batteries and smoke detectors......

[fellowtraveller]

fellowtraveller, on 24 September 2010 - 03:37 PM, said:

Your 'point' about providing for peak capacity is moot. There is no option in reality, other than trying to reduce overall consumption.

Overall consumption matters much less than peak demand.

Do you mean in terms of your utility in the contect of this OP, that is a brand new thing for homeowners, and controlling demand is more difficult for homeowners that are now faced with demand charges for the first time. You pay for both consumption and demand now, both matter

fellowtraveller, on 24 September 2010 - 03:37 PM, said:

Here is why smart meters for homes are not going to be anything other than a money grab: because compared to industry, homeowners have far less flexibility in when and how they use power. They cannot cook dinner at 3 AM. They have less need to cool the house at 5 AM. They have no need of lights at noon. They have no need for air conditioning in winter.

Hydro (whether Quebec or Ontario) has already signed the peak demand agreements with industries. The soft belly is now home consumption, and yes it is susceptible to smart meters.

It works with cinemas. If you go on Monday afternoons when they're empty , it's cheaper than on a Friday evening when they're full.

More important though, we Canadians should sell this gift of glaciers to ourselves at the same price that we sell it to foreigners. We should not waste it. By this, I am not using a moral "Dog In The Manger" argument. I am arguing that it makes bad business sense for us to sell something at home for a cheap price when we can get a better price abroad.

And of course, this extra gain (peace dividend) of good business should be shared for all. Only an incompetent politician would ignore this, or be unable to explain it.

The soft belly is now home consumption, and yes it is susceptible to smart meters.

If you are going to be in this discussion, we have to understaqnd the terms. The objective pof smart meters is not tracking consumption, the old dumb meters already do that.

It is a revenue grab, with govt complicit.

[capricorn]

This is what paying more for hydro in Ottawa brings you.

Power Outage in Vanier-area

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Hydro Ottawa now says it will be 9 pm before power is restored to 27-hundred customers in the Vanier area.

A loss of supply from the provincial grid is being blamed for the power outage in the Rideau River, Ottawa River, St. Laurent, and Coventry Rd area.

Crews are performing emergency switching to restore power.

At one point this afternoon, 52-hundred customers were without power.

http://www.cfra.com/?cat=1&nid=75925

Vanier, where I reside, is a community about 10 minutes by car from Parliament Hill. At the time of this brownout, it was 20 degrees under sunny skies and no air conditioners were humming. The community lost the supply from the provincial grid. How come? What will happen this winter when heating systems are blasting away to keep us warm? If Vanier needs to sap resources from the provincial grid to keep the lights on and furnaces working which other Ontario community will experience a brownout to compensate?

[fellowtraveller]

The community lost the supply from the provincial grid. How come?

Plenty of things can take you offline, and the system has failsafes to keep you offline if there is a major short circuit so you don't take down the whole grid.

Could be a tree falling or a possum in the switchgear.

Your MLAs should insist on a public inquiry into the incident, no doubt you will find it was a kamikaze McGuinty Liberal possum tasked with a suicide mission in furtherance of the demand meters..