…
No one needed a smart meter when we had smart baseload. Beware Australians, despite the promises and threats, smart meters may or may not make UK customers a paltry saving. When all is said and done it’s not even clear the benefits outweigh the costs.
People who have smart meters installed are expected to save an average of £11 annually on their energy bills, much less than originally hoped. A report from a parliamentary group now predicts a dual fuel saving of £26.
Customer pays, but energy firms save more:
Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs. However, the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers.
It is an £11 billion programme. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it appears the country would be richer if the government just gave back £170 to each person instead.
Smart meter looks like a dumb elephant:
The report also said that:
- More than half of smart meters “go dumb” after switching, meaning they stop communicating with the supplier
- Up to 10% of smart meters don’t work, because they are in areas where mobile phone signals are not strong enough
- By the end of the year only 22% of households will have the meters installed, meaning the 2020 deadline is certain to be missed
- The eventual cost of the programme could even outweigh the benefits
Remind me why the UK needs them?
Smart meters are supposed to play a major part in the UK’s clean vehicle revolution by allowing electric cars to charge overnight when wind power is strong, demand is low, and energy is cheap. — Read it all at the BBC News.
Another hidden cost of wind and EV’s.
Note the advertising spiel — every dumb program has the word “smart” in the title.
h/t Pat, GPWF
Image: Wikimedia National Institute of Standards and Technology
.jpg){kind=link}