On 13-Apr-23 23:42, alan_m wrote:
> On 13/04/2023 22:20, Clive Page wrote:
>> On 13/04/2023 19:00, alan_m wrote:
>>> And the drawback are what?
>> I can think of several:
>>
>> With a smart meter the customer is sharing a lot of data, e.g. about
>> whether you are at home or on holiday, what your regular habits are in
>> terms of arriving home at the end of the day.  Many burglars would
>> give a lot to get their hands on such data, and I've no idea how well
>> protected it is.   Since the power company has no particular incentive
>> to keep the information private, I expect it isn't at all well protected.
>
> Clutching at straws here.  How ever did burglars rob so many houses
> prior to smart meters?

They disguised themselves with a flat cap, a striped jumper and a mask
which only covered a narrow band around their eyes[1].
Once the general public caught on to this disguise, they had to seek new
methods.

[1] I forgot the sack with the word "Swag" on it.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 14-Apr-23 12:33, Jeff Layman wrote:
> On 13/04/2023 22:15, SteveW wrote:
>> On 13/04/2023 22:01, Animal wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 17:37:25 UTC+1, Clive Page wrote:
>
>> If the meter calibration period has expired, they can force a change.
>
> I believe that the utility companies have a legal obligation to offer
> you a new meter if yours is out of certification or calibration, but you
> do not have a legal obligation to accept it. I don't know if they can
> force a change, by using a warrant to gain entry into your property to
> complete the change in a similar way to change ordinary meters to
> prepayment ones.

I don't like or want smart meters, but I do accept that, once the 10
year calibration period expires, the meter is (effectively) no longer a
meter.

However, I do feel very sorry for the poor sods who will eventually turn
up to change our meters.

The electricity meter will be no problem (to fit, but getting a G2
signal is a very different matter).

The real problem is the gas meter.
Ours is buried _inside_ a wall which is below ground level, and is
actually part of the road's sub structure.

Do they get paid a set fee for each installation?

--
Sam Plusnet

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 19:20:53 +1000, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk>
wrote:

> On 14/04/2023 08:36, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 14/04/2023 08:14, Chris Green wrote:
>>> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2023 20:42, Chris Green wrote:
>>>>> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/04/2023 17:37, Clive Page wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> group, I suspect, I have been refusing regular blandishments from
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> company to get a smart meter, as there seem to be no advantages to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> customer and many potential drawbacks.
>>>>>> And the drawback are what?
>>>>>>
>>>>> 'They' can disconnect you.
>>>>>
>>>> and they can do that with a dumb meter.
>>>>
>>> Only by breaking into your property and pulling the main fuse, they
>>> can't do it remotely.
>>>
>> My main fuse (and millions of others) is external to the house.
>
> The majority probably aren't though, as they only started fitting
> external meter boxes in recent decades.

> It does seem a very poor idea. Someone passing sees you loading your car
> for a holiday or one of your household puts too much on social media

Hardly anyone is actually stupid enough to
put their residential address on social media.

> and anyone who wants to burgle you can cut your power off, leave
> immediately and come back a few days later, when the alarm batteries are
> flat.

But the better systems will have notified the house occupier that
the power has been off for days so they can get that fixed remotely
so they don't come home to a stinking fridge and freezer full of
rotting food and have to buy a new fridge/freezer.

On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 22:12:40 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> Animal wrote:
>
> > Not getting one fitted is even better, as you won't get wildly overcharged for reactive current
> All UK domestic electricity supplies are billed for real power, not
> apparent power

correct for electromechanical meters

> (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
> isn't used for billing)

there's no probably about it, they have been found to charge for it at upto 6x normal real power rate.

On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 22:15:59 UTC+1, SteveW wrote:
> On 13/04/2023 22:01, Animal wrote:
> > On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 17:37:25 UTC+1, Clive Page wrote:
> >> I've had another communication from our current electricity supplier (EDF) saying that they are legally obliged to change our meters are they are at the end of their lifespan. This may well be true
> >
> > it isn't, it's just a sales pitch
> Meter calibrations do expire and they are obliged to change the meters
> for freshly calibrated ones.
> >> as we've had the same meters for a very long time. I think it is only the electricity meter is actually past its use-by date, but they want to change the gas meter as well "free of charge" - as if that is a bonus.
> >
> > they get paid, you get screwed
> >
> >> I last heard from them a few months ago but at the time I said that if this involved disconnecting the gas and electricity for any time at all, which it did, then I would refuse to have it done during cold weather. That excuse clearly worked, but probably can't be used again.
> >
> > you don't need an excuse. Just don't arrange a replacement. If they get pushy say no.

> If the meter calibration period has expired, they can force a change.

they don't.

> >> It seems that we do have a choice of smart meter or not - except that as far as I can gather if you opt for a non-smart meter what you get is a smart meter with its smart functionality disabled. How much of this is disabled I haven't yet been able to find out. Like many others on this group, I suspect, I have been refusing regular blandishments from the company to get a smart meter, as there seem to be no advantages to the customer and many potential drawbacks.
> >
> > correct
> >
> >> But what I don't know is whether having smart meters which is dumbed-down would be better or worse than having a genuine smart meter. Does anyone else have any experience of this?
> >
> > refusal to permit it to have any smart functionality is a bit better for you. Not getting one fitted is even better, as you won't get wildly overcharged for reactive current
> While smart meters may be able to measure reactive load, the currently
> are only set to produce the same readings as the old disk meters.

incorrect. Why don't people get informed before making claims?

> > and won't have an unfused fire hazard aka surge absorber.
> ???
>
> My CU has an SPD. That is before any MCBs, is there a problem with that?

Yes, they're fire hazards and in most cases serve no real use.

On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 22:20:08 UTC+1, Clive Page wrote:
> On 13/04/2023 19:00, alan_m wrote:
> > And the drawback are what?
> I can think of several:
>
> With a smart meter the customer is sharing a lot of data, e.g. about whether you are at home or on holiday, what your regular habits are in terms of arriving home at the end of the day. Many burglars would give a lot to get their hands on such data, and I've no idea how well protected it is. Since the power company has no particular incentive to keep the information private, I expect it isn't at all well protected.
>
> You can reduce your bills only if you make use of the information - and I can anyway read me meter at any time I want to to see how much power I am using by going to the meter cupboard. The smart meter just saves a few footsteps.
>
> It's still not clear whether smart meters are truly portable between power companies, so you might go to all the trouble of getting them installed and then lost the functionality quite soon.
>
> There are claims that your electricity can be cut off remotely if they think you are seriously in debt.

It's not a claim, they do cut people off. For the crime of disagreeing with their dodgy bill, you're liable to get put on a much higher rate prepayment plan. That means you get cut off repeatedly.

> Even if not, can you be sure that nobody will ever make a mistake and cut off the wrong customer? Energy companies seem to make lots of mistakes in metering as it is - just look at the consumer complains columns of any weekend newspaper.

A lot of their misbilling & misbehaviour is very hard to interpret as a mistake. They've made a fortune from it.

> Although I gather that the smart electricity meter is self-powered, the gas meter in most meter cupboards (including ours) has no mains supply so it must rely on a battery. What happens when this runs out and needs to be replaced? I'll bet that is done at the expense of the customer. The remote unit that they tout shows you your instant consumption also needs a battery - who pays for that?
>
> I've already been told that the gas and electricity will be disconnected for a time while they are installing the smart meter - maybe only half-an-hour if all goes well, but when did you last come across an electrical or gas job which didn't encounter problems?
>
> Regards

On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 10:52:29 UTC+1, alan_m wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 10:23, SteveW wrote:
> > On 14/04/2023 08:05, Jeff Layman wrote:
> >> On 13/04/2023 23:42, alan_m wrote:
> >>> On 13/04/2023 22:20, Clive Page wrote:
> >>>> On 13/04/2023 19:00, alan_m wrote:
> >>>>> And the drawback are what?
> >>>> I can think of several:
> >>
> >> (snip)
> >>
> >>>> consumption also needs a battery - who pays for that?
> >>
> >> We do - and then some... See below
> >>
> >>> Mine plugs into the mains. Wouldn't you just throw yours away as you
> >>> would still be manually reading the meters? Having no remote display
> >>> with a smart meter is no different to having no remote display with dumb
> >>> meter so where is the drawback?
> >>
> >> The drawback is paying for something we don't want, don't use, and
> >> don't need. You seem to forget that the smart meter installation
> >> programme across the country is costing £11 billion.
> >
> > But by using them to push people (through timed tariffs) to use energy
> > away from the peaks, they can save more than that by not building an
> > extra nuclear power station.
> >
> > It is the wrong solution, but I can see why they've chosen it.
> >
> If you are on a dumb meter the chances are you will only be offered the
> more expensive tariffs whereas those on a smart meter will at least have
> the opportunity to switch some activities away from the high cost per
> hour periods.

Savings have been talked about but have not materialised. Reminds me of nuclear electricity being 'too cheap to meter'.

> At this stage of the game having a dumb or smart meter
> isn't going to change what is going to happen.

not true at all.

> Is it just the power stations that need upgrading? When we all have
> electric cars and electric heating can the rest of the existing
> infrastructure cope?

those will never happen. Some might believe politicans' promises, but it's not doable at any cost.

> Even being generous with COP figures for heat pumps and taking a low
> efficiency figure for fuel in an ICE vehicle a average household
> switching to all electric is likely to use x2 to x3 more electricity in
> a year - but most of that extra will be in a 6 month period where CH is
> required so perhaps the infrastructure needs to supply x5 more.

the idea is inherently unworkable.

On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 11:35:19 UTC+1, David Wade wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 10:52, alan_m wrote:
> > On 14/04/2023 10:23, SteveW wrote:

> >>>> Mine plugs into the mains. Wouldn't you just throw yours away as you
> >>>> would still be manually reading the meters? Having no remote display
> >>>> with a smart meter is no different to having no remote display with
> >>>> dumb
> >>>> meter so where is the drawback?
> >>>
> >>> The drawback is paying for something we don't want, don't use, and
> >>> don't need. You seem to forget that the smart meter installation
> >>> programme across the country is costing £11 billion.
> >>
> Yes, but what is the cost of refusal.

nothing

> Because of government targets the
> power companies are not allowed to take "no" for an answer,

they have taken no for an answer in lots of cases

> and as many
> have found they still nag.

means nothing

> The staff costs for this must be huge.

more waste.

On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 13:57:46 UTC+1, Jeff Layman wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 10:23, SteveW wrote:
> > On 14/04/2023 08:05, Jeff Layman wrote:
> >> On 13/04/2023 23:42, alan_m wrote:
> >>> On 13/04/2023 22:20, Clive Page wrote:
> >>>> On 13/04/2023 19:00, alan_m wrote:
> >>>>> And the drawback are what?
> >>>> I can think of several:
> >>
> >> (snip)
> >>
> >>>> consumption also needs a battery - who pays for that?
> >>
> >> We do - and then some... See below
> >>
> >>> Mine plugs into the mains. Wouldn't you just throw yours away as you
> >>> would still be manually reading the meters? Having no remote display
> >>> with a smart meter is no different to having no remote display with dumb
> >>> meter so where is the drawback?
> >>
> >> The drawback is paying for something we don't want, don't use, and don't
> >> need. You seem to forget that the smart meter installation programme
> >> across the country is costing £11 billion.
> >
> > But by using them to push people (through timed tariffs) to use energy
> > away from the peaks, they can save more than that by not building an
> > extra nuclear power station.
> I doubt it will make much difference to what they could get with Economy
> 7 or whatever it is called. Apart from running washing machines or
> dishwashers at night there's not much of a saving to be made. Of course,
> it might temp you to change from gas heating to electricity. Not only is
> electricity much more expensive than gas (at present), but the cost
> during the day would be very high. And, as I mentioned at the start, how
> much difference would this make to currently using Economy 7 with
> storage heaters?
>
> How much smart meters are going to "save" is reducing every time someone
> looks at the figures. It used to be hundreds of pounds for every
> consumer. Now, you might like to look at, for example,
> <https://www.uswitch.com/gas-electricity/guides/energy-smart-meter-money-saving/>.
> Quote:
>
> "Smart Energy GB have calculated that, collectively, the savings could
> be as much as £560 million if everyone in Britain changed to a smart meter.
>
> This savings figures was further broken down regionally as part of their
> summer campaign to promote the benefits of upgrading to a smart meter,
> with the following results:
>
> Londoners could save up to £69.6 million a year if each household
> (583,083 homes) had a smart meter installed
> Scotland could save as much as £51.1 million a year if each
> household (544,719 homes) had a smart meter installed
> West Midlands households could save as much as £49.1 million a year
> if each household (585,694 homes) had a smart meter installed
>
> The above numbers were calculated by Smart Energy GB based on a 2%
> average energy consumption saving per household per year, which equates
> to £21.17 when calculated in line with fuel prices published by the
> Energy Saving Trust in March 2018. This is then multiplied by the number
> of households per region, which was then rounded."
>
> I can't get my head round the figures. The individual areas "could save"
> about £80 - 120 per household, but the last paragraph puts the saving at
> only £21?!
> > It is the wrong solution, but I can see why they've chosen it.
> I don't disagree, but it just goes to show what incompetents we have
> when it comes to energy needs in this country, if the wrong solution is
> better than doing nothing.

£560m is under £10 a person. In reality they don't save anything. They have no mechanism by which they could. Claimed savings are based on politician nonsense.

On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 19:56:13 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 17:05:00 +1000, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:

> > The approximate cost to each is £440
> Don't believe that given the number of them needed.
> > (£11 billion / 25 million). So the "smart meter" programme is costing
> > every household £440. I've no objection to those who want a smart meter
> > paying £440 to have one installed;
> You are ignoring the cost of a monkey showing up
> periodically to read your stupid meter.
> > I just don't want to pay it.
> You do pay for a monkey showing up
> periodically to read your stupid meter.

they haven't done that in years.
And when they did, they didn't use monkeys.

On 14/04/2023 10:27, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 10:20, SteveW wrote:
>> On 14/04/2023 08:36, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2023 08:14, Chris Green wrote:
>>>> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2023 20:42, Chris Green wrote:
>>>>>> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 13/04/2023 17:37, Clive Page wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> group, I suspect, I have been refusing regular blandishments
>>>>>>>> from the
>>>>>>>> company to get a smart meter, as there seem to be no advantages
>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>> customer and many potential drawbacks.
>>>>>>> And the drawback are what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'They' can disconnect you.
>>>>>>
>>>>> and they can do that with a dumb meter.
>>>>>
>>>> Only by breaking into your property and pulling the main fuse, they
>>>> can't do it remotely.
>>>>
>>> My main fuse (and millions of others) is external to the house.
>>
>> The majority probably aren't though, as they only started fitting
>> external meter boxes in recent decades.
>>
>> It does seem a very poor idea. Someone passing sees you loading your
>> car for a holiday or one of your household puts too much on social
>> media and anyone who wants to burgle you can cut your power off, leave
>> immediately and come back a few days later, when the alarm batteries
>> are flat.
>>
> Has there ever been a documented case of that actually happening, or is
> this yet more Usenet style overthinking and paranoia    ?

No idea, but new ways of robbing or conning people appear all the time.
People didn't used to steal cars by relaying communications to and from
keyless fobs, but as the systems became widespread, relaying became a
common enabler for theft.

On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 21:52:27 UTC+1, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 14-Apr-23 12:33, Jeff Layman wrote:
> > On 13/04/2023 22:15, SteveW wrote:
> >> On 13/04/2023 22:01, Animal wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 17:37:25 UTC+1, Clive Page wrote:
> >
> >> If the meter calibration period has expired, they can force a change.
> >
> > I believe that the utility companies have a legal obligation to offer
> > you a new meter if yours is out of certification or calibration, but you
> > do not have a legal obligation to accept it. I don't know if they can
> > force a change, by using a warrant to gain entry into your property to
> > complete the change in a similar way to change ordinary meters to
> > prepayment ones.
> I don't like or want smart meters, but I do accept that, once the 10
> year calibration period expires, the meter is (effectively) no longer a
> meter.

In fact they are so long term reliable that energy companies don't care if your old dial meter is decades past is cal by date. It's purely marketing bs.

On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 21:52:27 UTC+1, Sam Plusnet wrote:

> Do they get paid a set fee for each installation?

Yes, that's what it took to get them to do it. They wouldn't be doing this otherwise.

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:18:49 +1000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 14/04/2023 10:23, SteveW wrote:
>> But by using them to push people (through timed tariffs) to use energy
>> away from the peaks, they can save more than that by not building an
>> extra nuclear power station.
>> It is the wrong solution, but I can see why they've chosen it.
> Its just another desperate attempt to 'make renewable energy work'
>
> The cost of installing all those smart meters would easily have built
> another nuclear power station

But wouldn't have saved the cost of manually reading those meters.

On 13/04/2023 23:42, alan_m wrote:
> Clutching at straws again. Both my meters were replaced within an hour.
> The gas was off for around 10 minutes and the electricity a bit longer
> because the tails were replaced as well as having an isolation switch
> installed.  There is also the gas safety check for leaks, to make sure
> the lines are purged afterwards and to check that gas appliances are
> working. In general it's a like for like swap, just with a different
> meter. If there is a problem the same problem must exist with the old
> meters.
>
> The OP was suggesting that his replacements may not be smart meters and
> the replacements are required because the calibration has expired.
> Wouldn't the risk of having a problem with a replacement dumb meter be
> the same as a replacement with a smart meter?
>

+1 on all of that..

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:43:00 -0700 (PDT), Animal <tabbypurr@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 22:12:40 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Animal wrote:
>>
>> > Not getting one fitted is even better, as you won't get wildly overcharged for reactive current
>> All UK domestic electricity supplies are billed for real power, not
>> apparent power
>
>correct for electromechanical meters
>
>> (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
>> isn't used for billing)
>
>there's no probably about it, they have been found to charge for it at upto 6x normal real power rate.
Citation?
--
Dave W

Animal wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
>> isn't used for billing)
>
> there's no probably about it, they have been found to charge for it at upto 6x normal real power rate.

No doubt you're think of this guff?

<https://www.utwente.nl/en/news/2017/3/313543/electronic-energy-meters-false-readings-almost-six-times-higher-than-actual-energy-consumption>

All the links on Frank Leferink's page have mysteriously become 404s

<https://www.beama.org.uk/news/beama-response-to-ieee-article-on-accuracy-of-dutch-electricity-meters.html>

On 14/04/2023 21:15, SteveW wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 11:07, alan_m wrote:
>> On 14/04/2023 09:28, N_Cook wrote:
>>
>>> OK my really really smart meter (It told me I had an old PVR on
>>> standby , to avoid manually resetting its clock each month or so of
>>> sole use, was wasting 0.2 units of electricity a day as a vampire
>>> device).
>>
>> The vampire usage of electricity has been vastly overstated. Modern
>> devices, by law, have to be less than 0.5W in a standby state.
>> However this can be a bit misleading. My PVR has a standby state and a
>> deep standby state and its only the deep standby that consumes the low
>> figure. In standby little is switched off and so the power saving is
>> minimal. My PVR can wake up from deep standby for a recording and then
>> be configured to go back into deep standby afterwards.
>
> The trouble with deep standby is the start-up time, which puts many
> people off using it. I often put the TV on in the kitchen, while I am
> doing things and then, when I am finished, move into the living-room and
> carry on watching. Over a minute and often nearly two, missing from the
> programme, as I start the living-room box up is just too much.

The main problem with deep standby is that an appliance in that state
won't pass an aerial signal through to the next device in the chain. And
on older days it wouldn't pass the video signal through the SCART.

--
Max Demian

On 15/04/2023 11:12, Dave W wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:43:00 -0700 (PDT), Animal <tabbypurr@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, 13 April 2023 at 22:12:40 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Animal wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not getting one fitted is even better, as you won't get wildly overcharged for reactive current
>>> All UK domestic electricity supplies are billed for real power, not
>>> apparent power
>>
>> correct for electromechanical meters
>>
>>> (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
>>> isn't used for billing)
>>
>> there's no probably about it, they have been found to charge for it at upto 6x normal real power rate.
>
> Citation?

I've seen reports of gas bills being many times higher after a smart
meter has been installed but when you dig a bit deeper into the stories
the old meter hadn't been read for years and the householder hadn't
provided any readings. The old meter was read for the first time in
many years on the swap to a smart meter and when the bill came in the DD
payment needed to be x times more because previously they had been under
paying.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 15/04/2023 00:05, Animal wrote:
> On Friday, 14 April 2023 at 19:56:13 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 17:05:00 +1000, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>
>>> The approximate cost to each is £440
>> Don't believe that given the number of them needed.
>>> (£11 billion / 25 million). So the "smart meter" programme is costing
>>> every household £440. I've no objection to those who want a smart meter
>>> paying £440 to have one installed;
>> You are ignoring the cost of a monkey showing up
>> periodically to read your stupid meter.
>>> I just don't want to pay it.
>> You do pay for a monkey showing up
>> periodically to read your stupid meter.
>
> they haven't done that in years.
> And when they did, they didn't use monkeys.
I've had meter readers readers turn up 5 times since the end of November
- which was when we had smart meters fitted! Clearly the left hand does
not know what the right hand is doing.

On 15/04/2023 12:14, Max Demian wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 21:15, SteveW wrote:
>> On 14/04/2023 11:07, alan_m wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2023 09:28, N_Cook wrote:
>>>
>>>> OK my really really smart meter (It told me I had an old PVR on
>>>> standby , to avoid manually resetting its clock each month or so of
>>>> sole use, was wasting 0.2 units of electricity a day as a vampire
>>>> device).
>>>
>>> The vampire usage of electricity has been vastly overstated. Modern
>>> devices, by law, have to be less than 0.5W in a standby state.
>>> However this can be a bit misleading. My PVR has a standby state and
>>> a deep standby state and its only the deep standby that consumes the
>>> low figure. In standby little is switched off and so the power saving
>>> is minimal. My PVR can wake up from deep standby for a recording and
>>> then be configured to go back into deep standby afterwards.
>>
>> The trouble with deep standby is the start-up time, which puts many
>> people off using it. I often put the TV on in the kitchen, while I am
>> doing things and then, when I am finished, move into the living-room
>> and carry on watching. Over a minute and often nearly two, missing
>> from the programme, as I start the living-room box up is just too much.
>
> The main problem with deep standby is that an appliance in that state
> won't pass an aerial signal through to the next device in the chain. And
> on older days it wouldn't pass the video signal through the SCART.

Not a problem for us, out quad LNB and our terrestrial aerial feed into
a multi-switch, distributing both satellite and TV signals to each room,
independent of the boxes themselves.

On 14/04/2023 10:45, Andy Burns wrote:
> Mike Clarke wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> All UK domestic electricity supplies are billed for real power, not
>>> apparent power (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
>>> isn't used for billing)
>>
>> ...isn't used for billing yet ?
>
> Any suggestion that's going to change?  Other than it seems like a bee
> in BigClive's bonnet and some Dutch university having their 5 minutes of
> fame regarding smart meters using Rogowski coils which no UK meters use.
>

I don't suppose there are any plans to change it but the introduction of
smart meters means it could be done. How long before the bean counters
realise that it's a good way to increase revenue. It could more than
double the running costs of all those LED lamps with capacitive dropper
PSUs.

--
Mike Clarke

On 14/04/2023 13:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 12:46, Jeff Layman wrote:
>> Unfortunately, no government is going to say "enough is enough - we've
>> got to stop throwing good money after bad"
>
> Its amazing what a few by-election defeats will do.
>

Nothing.

On Saturday, 15 April 2023 at 11:38:32 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> Animal wrote:
> > Andy Burns wrote:
> >
> >> (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
> >> isn't used for billing)
> >
> > there's no probably about it, they have been found to charge for it at upto 6x normal real power rate.
> No doubt you're think of this guff?
>
> <https://www.utwente.nl/en/news/2017/3/313543/electronic-energy-meters-false-readings-almost-six-times-higher-than-actual-energy-consumption>
>
> All the links on Frank Leferink's page have mysteriously become 404s
>
> <https://www.beama.org.uk/news/beama-response-to-ieee-article-on-accuracy-of-dutch-electricity-meters.html>

What came out from that discussion is that there is no standard these meters are required to meet wrt reactive current. And surprise surprise, if there were any reasonable standard they would fail, even if we don't use rogowski based ones..

On 16/04/2023 20:57, Animal wrote:
> On Saturday, 15 April 2023 at 11:38:32 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Animal wrote:
>>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>>
>>>> (a smart meter can probably measure the latter, but it
>>>> isn't used for billing)
>>>
>>> there's no probably about it, they have been found to charge for it at upto 6x normal real power rate.
>> No doubt you're think of this guff?
>>
>> <https://www.utwente.nl/en/news/2017/3/313543/electronic-energy-meters-false-readings-almost-six-times-higher-than-actual-energy-consumption>
>>
>> All the links on Frank Leferink's page have mysteriously become 404s
>>
>> <https://www.beama.org.uk/news/beama-response-to-ieee-article-on-accuracy-of-dutch-electricity-meters.html>
>
> What came out from that discussion is that there is no standard these meters are required to meet wrt reactive current. And surprise surprise, if there were any reasonable standard they would fail, even if we don't use rogowski based ones..
>

SMETS2 meters in the UK are required to measure both real and reactive
power (though currently domestic users are billed only for real) and
must be certified as meeting the requirements of Statutes and
Directions. Unsurprisingly that includes their accuracy.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid