Old ladies E7 & meter change?

[mattylad]

Holy thread wander batman!

OK so to continue, if it is as I suspect (that the immersion tank is on all night) does it make sense to add a further timer at the fused switch unit that feeds the tank heater
so that the tank is only heated for a few hours (how long does a tank take to heat fully?).
Only problem see is that when the E7 power is not enabled then how is the timer going to run?

 

[JohnW2]

On the other hand then - why are they being installed?

You tell me.

I doubt that one can blame 'the government' all that much, since they are reliant on advice/advisors. From all we've heard, I suspect that the politicians (who cannot be expected to understand all the technicalities) have somehow been persuaded by some 'experts' that this (astronomically expensive) exercise is going to result in a substantial reduction in energy demand - something I personally find hard to believe. In turn, I suppose that these 'experts' must believe in what they have advised, but I'm personally not at all sure of 'why?'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

It's called progress. The same reason they are installing remotely readable water meters - so the reading process can be automated, obviating the need for someone to knock at your door, hoping to catch you in, in order to manually read your meters.

It can't be that simple. As has been said, it's the government, not suppliers, who have pushed this - and, as also has been said/asked, why would the government be concerned about meter reading, or the cost of meter reading (particularly if it were going to 'cost a fortune' to reduce the cost of meter reading).

In any event, as an increasing number of meters are 'outside', the need for "knock at your door, hoping to catch you in" is reducing all the time. Furthermore, as I recently said, 'meter reading' seems to be a diminishing activity (quite apart from 'smart meters') - given my personal experience (without a 'smart' meter) is that I have not seen a meter reader for several years (probably at least 5-6 years), despite having changed supplier 2-3 years ago.

As for 'remotely readable water meters', mine is somewhat of a joke. Although literally 'remotely readable' it seems to have a range of only about 100 yards, since they have to drive their van to the end of my drive to 'read it'! In contrast, the remote reading thingy on my LPG tank manages to communicate satisfactorily with my supplier (top tell them when it needs a top-up) who is based well over a hundred miles away - so (as we know) 'it can be done'!

Kind Regards, John.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I am sure you know better than I exactly what the meters are capable of doing so choose one function and think of how it would be of use to the government.

I have in mind limiting the usage at certain times by variable rates and if necessary, instead of blanket power cuts, timed cuts to different premises in each location.

Then, of course, on the other hand there is the recouping of fuel duty when 'everyone' has EVs by charging hugely more for charging cars.

 

[JohnW2]

OK so to continue, if it is as I suspect (that the immersion tank is on all night) does it make sense to add a further timer at the fused switch unit that feeds the tank heater ... so that the tank is only heated for a few hours (how long does a tank take to heat fully?).

Provided one has a well-lagged HW cylinder (as previously discussed, mine is very well lagged) one gains (saves) very little by reducing the period for which an immersion is powered, since its thermostat does that anyway.

My immersion is powered (by a time switch) for the entire 7-hour cheap E7 period. However, as can be seen from the graph of a typical recent day, it usually only takes 1.5 - 2 hours to heat the water 'up to temp' at the start of that period (at which point the thermostat switches it off) after which the thermostat only switches the immersion back on fior a minute or three very occasionally (to 'top up' the heat) - only 9 or 10 times in the 5.5 hour period (after 'initial heating') shown below.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I am sure you know better than I exactly what the meters are capable of doing so choose one function and think of how it would be of use to the government.

My (very limited, despite what you say) understanding is that all the current technology can do is differentially charge for (total) electricity usage at different times of day and (if they ever use it) switch entire iunstallations on/off. Upgrading to 'technology with 'smarter' capabilities would presumably take another couple of decades or so, and goodness knows how many £billions.

I have in mind limiting the usage at certain times by variable rates ...

As above, differential charging at different times (according to demand) is one of the very few things that the present technology can do. To what extent that would 'limit usage' at high-demand times, I'm not so sure - I suspect that, other than for the most cash-stretched consumers, many people would probably continue to use electricity when they wanted/needed, and would merely moan about the fact that it was costing thyhem a lot more!

... and if necessary, instead of blanket power cuts, timed cuts to different premises in each location.

Yes - and, as above, that's the (one) other thing they could do with the present technology. However, other than facilitating the protection of 'vulnerable' people from power cuts, I'm not really sure what would be perceived as the advantage of that (over 'blanket' area cuts) - and I certainly don't see why the government would have any particular interest in such a practice.

In fact, in relation to both your suggestions, I don't see why government should have a particular interest in 'doing' it. If supply/demand problems arise then, as has always been the case, it's the supplies and distributors who have to address that (by power cuts or whatever), not 'the government'). The only time in my lifetime to date that I can recall the government having intervened was when, in a dire situation, they introiduced the "3-day week" in order to reduce energy demand.

Even in countries (like France) which have appreciable restrictions on electricity usage, I think that is probablty managed by suppliers/distributors, not 'the government'.

Then, of course, on the other hand there is the recouping of fuel duty when 'everyone' has EVs by charging hugely more for charging cars.

That clearly needs to be addressed, and I'm a little surprised that we have not already seen moves on that front. However, as I understand that, current 'smart' meter technology has no way of distinguishing electricity used for EV charging from any other usage (and, as above, upgrading the functionality would probably take decades/£billions).

Although again probably requiring £billions for infrastructure, probably the most sensible suggestion I've heard of would be to get rid of both 'fuel duty' and 'vehicle tax' and replace them with a charge/mile 'tax', operated by some 'smart' system. That would quite probably be no more expensive to implement than finding a way in which 'smart' electricity meters could separate out EV charging from other electricity usage.

Kind Regards, John

 

[mattylad]

OK so I just called the 80+ yr old lady who gets confused easily.
She is going to sack her heating engineer/plumber and son in law (because he missed the fact that the instructions are on the flap on the inside of the timer and she does now recall that someone mentioned that the heating is controlled by the radio signal and she has no control over when they come on. (apart from the power on/off and temp).

She read the instructions, set the times to a more reasonable time for heating the immersion and all is fine now..
The maxistore only controls the immersion. doh...

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Why is the government bothered about meter reading?

Probably because, it provides less granularity of consumption data, thus helping the country and the energy supply companies better predict and meet demand. Part of that will likely be the ability of suppliers to vary the charging rate instantly and much finer granularity than can be done with E7 at the moment. They probably also had in mind it facilitated easier switching, or it should have done had the spec. for the meters been adequate.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

You tell me.

I doubt that one can blame 'the government' all that much, since they are reliant on advice/advisors. From all we've heard, I suspect that the politicians (who cannot be expected to understand all the technicalities) have somehow been persuaded by some 'experts' that this (astronomically expensive) exercise is going to result in a substantial reduction in energy demand - something I personally find hard to believe. In turn, I suppose that these 'experts' must believe in what they have advised, but I'm personally not at all sure of 'why?'!

Kind Regards, John

I also doubt it will cut demand, rather it will facilitate better control of the time of the demand by adjustable charging.

 

[JohnW2]

I also doubt it will cut demand, rather it will facilitate better control of the time of the demand by adjustable charging.

As I intended (but didn't really succeed!), I meant to imply that I doubt that almost as much. As I wrote:

... I suspect that, other than for the most cash-stretched consumers, many people would probably continue to use electricity when they wanted/needed, and would merely moan about the fact that it was costing them a lot more!

I'm not so sure that the timing of demand is going to be quite so important in the future. At the moment, there is a considerable day/night difference, with much lower demand at night. However, as nocturnal EV charging proliferates, that difference is bound to decrease, and might even reverse in direction. Whether or not we will have enough electricity in general is a different question, but we could well end up with a relatively even spread of demand throughout the 24 hours, which would throw a spanner into the works of one of the few things which 'smart' meters could attempt to address - in other words, increasing EV charging is quite likely to make these meters 'even less useful'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Probably because, it provides less granularity of consumption data, thus helping the country and the energy supply companies better predict and meet demand. Part of that will likely be the ability of suppliers to vary the charging rate instantly and much finer granularity than can be done with E7 at the moment. They probably also had in mind it facilitated easier switching, or it should have done had the spec. for the meters been adequate.

You're again presuming that "the ability of suppliers to vary the charging rate instantly" would have a major effect on 'instantaneous demand' - but, as I've said, unless the rates became ridiculous, I have my doubts about that.

It would be easy enough to reduce demand by making cost so 'ridiculously high' (e.g. by raising VAT on energy to 200% ) that many people could not afford to use much, if any, electricity - but such an approach, let alone 'policy' would presumably represent political suicide for the government.

In any event, again, I'm not sure that the government is particularly interested in those issues/details, per se. All that matters to them is that supply can cope with demand - at least partially by reducing demand, since that is, in itself, something they want to achieve.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

So it seems Albert Einstein looked like Freddy Boswell from bread? But immersion heaters or any other form of domestic water heating is not normally going to power up for long, my insulation is not very good, but ½ hour every other day is enough. So looking at around 4.5 kWh per day, so even if not on E7 still less than £1.

As to central heating, it depends on losses, if one wants 16°C over night, 18°C in the morning then off until 6 pm when you want 20°C until 11 pm then power required depends on time taken to cool, setting mothers house to those setting it never reached 16°C over night as insulation too good.

Off peak heating tends to heat home when not required, and so it is uncertain if it really saves money, and clearly does not save energy.

 

[JohnW2]

... But immersion heaters or any other form of domestic water heating is not normally going to power up for long, my insulation is not very good, but ½ hour every other day is enough. So looking at around 4.5 kWh per day, so even if not on E7 still less than £1.

Indeed (in concept) - although I don't know how you got from "½ hour every other day" to "around 4.5 kWh per day". Did you mean 1½ hours ever other day (which would be about 4.5 kW per day) OR, perhaps more likely, "4.5 kWh per week" (which would be fairly close to "½ hour every other day")??

If you did mean 4.5 kWh per day (which I doubt) then, by quoting a daily price, you might be taking a leaf out of the book of those who sell insurance, 'extended warranties' etc., since you might regard the situation a little differently if you re-wrote "...less that £1 per day" as "...less than £365 per year"

Off peak heating tends to heat home when not required, and so it is uncertain if it really saves money, and clearly does not save energy.

True, but as I recently wrote, the progressive increase in nocturnal EV charging has the potential to eventually flip the situation, such that the period of lowest electricity demand (hence, one might hope, 'off-peak' charges) might become the daytime hours!

In passing, by co-incidence, as can be seen from the graph below, 4.5 kWh per day is roughly what my nocturnal (E7) immersion uses in mid summer. Even though extremely well lagged, the cylinder is in a minimally-heated part of the house, and therefore shows substantial seasonal variation in the energy usage, the energy used usually being almost double in mid-Winter as compared with mid-Summer. You can also seen on the graph the effect of my increasing the cylinder's insulation from 'very insulated' to 'very very insulated' in early 2018!

Kind Regards, John

 

[plugwash]

As I intended (but didn't really succeed!), I meant to imply that I doubt that almost as much. As I wrote:
I'm not so sure that the timing of demand is going to be quite so important in the future. At the moment, there is a considerable day/night difference, with much lower demand at night. However, as nocturnal EV charging proliferates, that difference is bound to decrease, and might even reverse in direction. Whether or not we will have enough electricity in general is a different question, but we could well end up with a relatively even spread of demand throughout the 24 hours, which would throw a spanner into the works of one of the few things which 'smart' meters could attempt to address - in other words, increasing EV charging is quite likely to make these meters 'even less useful'!

Kind Regards, John

Peak demand right now is around 6PM or so as home consumption ramps up but office consumption has not yet fully ramped down, if most drivers start charging their EVs immediately they get home from work then that will only make things worse.

 

[JohnW2]

Peak demand right now is around 6PM or so as home consumption ramps up but office consumption has not yet fully ramped down, if most drivers start charging their EVs immediately they get home from work then that will only make things worse.

We can but speculate, and you could well be right that there would be a potential 'problem' in the early evening if a massive rise in EV charging were to happen 'tomorrow'.

However, I think my general point remains, that the effect of increasing EV charging will, in general, be to reduce the amount of circadian variation in demand. A lot obviously depends on individual work/life patterns (a lot of people I know usually get home a lot later than 6pm) and, perhaps most important, the duration of the period of EV charging. At present, there is a low demand period from around 10pm until about 5am, and one would expect that EV charging would go a fair way to making that 'catch up' with the demand during the other 17 hours ..... and, as I said, the less the circadian variation, the less becomes one of the main perceived advantages/potentials of 'smart meters'.

If things happened as you suggest, then it would be difficult (in terms of 'public opinion', which some may fear translated to 'voting intention'!) for it to be addressed by 'smart' meters playing with TOU pricing, since it would presumably require the imposition of "punitively high' costs (to deter EV charging) at the very time of day that most people wanted to use the most electricity for other purposes!

Kind Regards, John