New California Law Will Base Electricity Bills on Income Level
(www.thegatewaypundit.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (31)
sorted by:
I know as I type this, that the significance of it will be lost on most of you, but there is actually a physics argument in favor of California's pricing model.
It's a well known problem in electrical engineering that the simple, residential electric meters have limitations. They do not have the expensive circuitry necessary to perform the phase difference calculations to determine true reactive power consumption. Rather, they use assumptions to do a simpler calculation to determine apparent power.
Now, there's something you have to understand about the electrical grid:
AC power is divided into two complex components: real power and reactive power. An ideal resistor consumes only real power, and an ideal inductor consumes only reactive power.
It is MUCH more expensive to deliver reactive power than it is to deliver real power. Like direct current, reactive power can only be delivered a few miles, meaning in most metros it has to be produced in-situ using capacitor banks at transformer stations. Which are expensive, maintenance intensive, and prone to exploding. A generating plant may cost half a billion dollars to build and millions to operate, but utility scale capacitors have to be deployed and replaced in huge numbers. Never underestimate multiplication.
Since the grid was devised, the largest change in residential energy consumption patterns has been air conditioning. A/C units consume obscene amounts of reactive power to drive their compressors and fans.
Now, this consumption is measured by residential electrical metering units because it shows up in apparent power. The hucksters selling capacitors claiming they'll make your power meter stop are just that; the meters measure apparent power, the capacitor won't make them stop counting. All adding capacitors at your house does is make the power company's life easier and make your house a fire hazard.
BUT, the meters don't have the capacity to BILL customers differently based on their power factor (that is, the balance of resistive vs inductive load).
And since highly inductive loads are more expensive to meet than resistive loads, this is something the power companies sort of want to do.
But they can't, because the metering technology to do it is expensive. It makes sense to use it for massive industrial customers. It's not practical to do it for residential customers.
So the current electrical billing system in California (that is, the old system) was already bad, because the wealthiest people have the highest load factors (something which the meters couldn't accurately bill).
Shush, you interrupted him huffing his own farts at how much smarter he is than the rest of us dumb dumbs.
More to the point, "Smart Meters" can give a detailed record of power use, which can be analyzed to show power usage room by room. With access to a "smart power meter" and a database to for comparison, an enterprising soul can tell when you are in the living room watching TV and how many slices of toast you had for breakfast that morning.
It is inevitable that "smart" power meters will be used for incredibly detailed, ubiquitous surveillance.
No, they do not.
The typical residential "smart" meter is the GE I-210, which is a kWh hour only device.
To get vAr measurement you have to step up to the GE kV2c, which is several times more expensive per unit. When you are talking about footprints of millions of customers, a choice between one product or another product which costs several times more, it doesn't matter what capacities the product offers, management will pick the cheaper choice 100% of the time.
If you want people to listen to you maybe don't start out by insulting us. Faggot
The replies have not surprised me. But they would have been the same no matter what I opened with, so yeah, I'm gonna open with getting a jab in.
Aren't you trying to convey information to everyone? Why do you care about replies? Most people who read a post never reply anyway, and I'm pretty sure 90% of the people's reactions (partially conveyed in downvotes - though most people don't vote either) were ONLY based on your opening, and most likely half the people didn't even read past that after you insulted them. It would have been smarter to put your insults at the end of the comment so people have already invested in reading it and THEN you tell them what stupid pigs they are. I had a professor like that once.