re: #287 lawhawk

Smart grid implementation has run into issues in CA after some people found that their monthly charges went up considerably (sometimes double) after the smart meters were installed. Utilities claim that they’ll eventually see savings after users adjust their consumption demands to take advantage of lower pricing.

There are also issues over individuals and businesses giving utilities the power to determine their power usage.

Tariff structures and gaming the PUC (Public Utility Commission) have a lot to with how these things play out in California.

For example, SDG&E got a new tariff structure that they were able to implement for households on net-metering (where the household produces electricity via solar / wind) that was supposed to pay these customers more money for supplying power at peak hours.

Now that just sounds like a wonderful idea, especially for folks with solar because the production almost always occurs at peak. But SDG&E modeled what would happen with the new structure using data they’d collected from the smart meters. They came up with a set of hours for “peak”, “semi peak” and “off peak” and then cobbled together a rate structure (by eliminating tiers) where they actually ended up getting more revenue from producing households than before.

The PUC either didn’t see it coming or simply went along, but the “reward” to the customer has become yet another disincentive from an intransigent utility that plays up the PR about alternative energy while fighting its implementation at every step.

I expect the implementation of the “smart grid” to proceed in the same manner - it offers more opportunities to game the system and deplete the change of any benefit for the consumer.

Government managed monopolists are still monopolists.