Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Nanny State goes 50 for 0 against common sense as utilities propose taking over control of homeowners' thermostats to reduce power consumption   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
177
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

13826 clicks; posted to Main » and Fandom » on 26 Jul 2007 at 8:15 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



177 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
ELKHNT
2007-07-26 3:55:27 PM  
FTA:
those customers who voluntarily give up control of their usage - and it would have be voluntary - would be given rebates.

Subby is an asshat. Read the damn article first.
 
5000_gallons_of_toothpaste
2007-07-26 4:09:01 PM  
Ya, great idea. I'd also like to entrust Comcast to automatically order Pay Per View movies for me night and day even when I'm not at home and bill me for them! They wouldn't dream of screwing me!
 
ELKHNT
2007-07-26 4:10:54 PM  
I never said it was a good idea, just that the subby didn't exactly get the jist of the article.
 
tomWright
2007-07-26 4:31:28 PM  
Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Once they have the "voluntary compliance" part in, they remove the "voluntary" part.
 
Gosling
2007-07-26 4:59:31 PM  
tomWright: Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Once they have the "voluntary compliance" part in, they remove the "voluntary" part.

You imply from this that you are against seatbelts and helmets. Explain this position.
 
BigHarv
2007-07-26 5:03:10 PM  
ELKHNT: FTA:
those customers who voluntarily give up control of their usage - and it would have be voluntary - would be given rebates.

Subby is an asshat. Read the damn article first.

Exactly.

My brother was raving about this when living in Austin. They'd cycle when people's AC units ran during the peak power demands. This is entirely different than being able to turn ON someone's AC unit, 5000_gallons_of_toothpaste
 
Gwendolyn
2007-07-26 5:15:25 PM  
Gosling: tomWright: Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Once they have the "voluntary compliance" part in, they remove the "voluntary" part.

You imply from this that you are against seatbelts and helmets. Explain this position.

I think it's my own damn business if I want to wear a seatbelt or not. Don't be a shiatty driver and hit my car. Then you have nothing to worry about.
 
scottso
2007-07-26 5:31:50 PM  
My mother has this with her electric company. They can turn down her A/C for up to an hour per day on peak usage days and she gets a very large break on her monthly bill, whether they do it or not. I fail to see a problem.
 
BigHarv
2007-07-26 5:33:51 PM  
Gwendolyn: Gosling: tomWright: Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Once they have the "voluntary compliance" part in, they remove the "voluntary" part.

You imply from this that you are against seatbelts and helmets. Explain this position.

I think it's my own damn business if I want to wear a seatbelt or not. Don't be a shiatty driver and hit my car. Then you have nothing to worry about.

Fair enough. I guess with private healthcare, it's your own business if you end up with far more grevious injuries if an accident was you know, your fault. Actually, if you died, then it would save your HMO money. Look for some 'Unbuckle above 45 mph' signs coming your way soon.
 
Lionel Mandrake
2007-07-26 5:44:11 PM  
Many power utilities are gearing up to install "smart" meters in kitchens or living rooms to show customers the cost of their electricity use - per minute and perhaps per appliance.

No problem. Why not let people know when it is cheaper/better to run certain appliances?

During times of peak usage, utilities may even remotely adjust your home thermostat.

Problem. If people choose to run appliances during "peak usage," let them, just make it show up on their bill.

When the A/C is running hard, don't wash your dishes or wash your clothes. Wait until the sun goes down for that shiat.

But under no circumstances should you be prevented from doing stupid shiat, just encouraged to do the smart thing.
 
Marcus Aurelius [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2007-07-26 5:50:39 PM  
I'm in favor of homeowners taking over utility companies and raping them in the ass for a change.
 
lordargent
2007-07-26 6:13:56 PM  
ELKHNT : those customers who voluntarily give up control of their usage

Yeah, I remember SDG&E sending out something for this 2 years ago. Basically, let us control your thermostat and we will give you a discount.

Since my electric bill is only 80-130 dollars ($90 dollars on average) I tossed the letter straight into my microshredder.

/my co-workers and I had a good laugh over it at work the next day.
 
Snowflake Tubbybottom
2007-07-26 6:20:28 PM  
[image from mustangmods.com too old to be available]
 
Rational Exuberance
2007-07-26 8:30:31 PM  
They do this here for water - you get neighbors snitching on each other because someone watered their lawn more than once a week. *gasp*

If only the market mechanism had a way to reduce the quantity demanded...hmmm...hope those egghead economists get on that.
 
memilkisyummy
2007-07-26 8:32:35 PM  
Gosling: tomWright: Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Once they have the "voluntary compliance" part in, they remove the "voluntary" part.

You imply from this that you are against seatbelts and helmets. Explain this position.

He's probably from New Hampshire. Or wishes he was.
 
SBinRR [OhFark]
2007-07-26 8:33:27 PM  
Being "smart" isn't only for meters that alter electricity usage.
It's for the planet, too.

Old and Busted="Think of the children"
New & Improved="It's for the planet"
 
NCPokey
2007-07-26 8:34:29 PM  
Gwendolyn:
I think it's my own damn business if I want to wear a seatbelt or not. Don't be a shiatty driver and hit my car. Then you have nothing to worry about.

Always glad to see a mother of 3 is still willing to risk her life and the future of her family by not wearing a seatbelt, just to prove how free she is to be an idiot. Good on you for not letting The Man keep you down!
 
some random negro
2007-07-26 8:35:05 PM  
title of TFA: "Juicing down for global warming"

damn, i wonder why subby went for the "nanny state" angle and passed up an opportunity for another global warming thread?

/now where did i leave my nomex pajamas?
 
itchyvelour
2007-07-26 8:37:37 PM  
Nanny State goes 50 for 0 against common sense as utilities propose taking over control of homeowners' thermostats to reduce power consumption

As it's the power companies suggesting this and not the "Big Bad EBUL GUB'MENT", subby fails.

As it is, utilities can't keep up with rising demand.

Um...I kind of got the impression from reading here on Fark that the Magickal Invisible Hand of the Market would corect that on its own, as it does all things (hallowed be its name) when it is not interfered with?
 
PC LOAD LETTER [TotalFark]
2007-07-26 8:37:42 PM  
The nanny state should only be applicable to stupid people. Then I would not have a problem with it.
 
kidsizedcoffin
2007-07-26 8:38:05 PM  
You know that the follow up to this article will be the raising of rates because people are using less electricity, and thus the companies are pulling in less profit.
 
xtex
2007-07-26 8:41:18 PM  
We already have this in Georgia with Georgia Power. Everytime they turn off your A/C (it only lasts 60 minutes at a time), you get a $10 credit on your power bill.

One month, they sent the 'off' command to my house about 20 times. During the day. When I wasn't home anyway, and the A/C system was off (I have a digital thermostat thingy).

So I got a $200 credit for nothing. :)
 
Spazzmatazz
2007-07-26 8:41:32 PM  
tomWright: Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax

They'll address all the rest, but they won't address the helmet law. Which is someone sticking their nose in my farking business.
Period.
 
underbridge
2007-07-26 8:42:10 PM  
SBinRR New & Improved="It's for the planet"

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! Environmentalism is basically filling the void of family and religion in many people's lives. It is also becoming the biggest "We know whats best" and "Holier than thou" topic.

Nobody cares anymore if you're a gay interracial couple who use drugs and don't go to church. But if you drive an SUV you're the devil.
 
Rational Exuberance
2007-07-26 8:43:54 PM  
itchyvelour:
Um...I kind of got the impression from reading here on Fark that the Magickal Invisible Hand of the Market would corect that on its own, as it does all things (hallowed be its name) when it is not interfered with?

In most places, power companies are a government enforced monopoly. Not much of a market there...

But seriously, it's econ 101 to tell you how to reduce demand of something. You just, uh, raise prices. I guarantee people will start using less.

If there's really a supply shock, raising prices is the solution. That's it. No need to start imposing coercive measures.
 
Tanishh
2007-07-26 8:45:00 PM  
Gwendolyn: Gosling: tomWright: Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Once they have the "voluntary compliance" part in, they remove the "voluntary" part.

You imply from this that you are against seatbelts and helmets. Explain this position.

I think it's my own damn business if I want to wear a seatbelt or not. Don't be a shiatty driver and hit my car. Then you have nothing to worry about.

Easier said than done. If you hit something or a bad/drunk/otherwise unable to drive well...driver hits you and you die, you're not the only one hurt by that. But hey, if you want to give all your friends and family the finger(figuratively) by dying in order to make yourself a tiny bit more comfortable, be my guest.

I also hope for the sake of those who know you that you wear a seatbelt when you drive others around. Flying out of your seat when you hit someone or swerve to hit someone and thus depriving your car of a driver isn't very good. But hey, depriving your kids of a mother isn't very good either, now that I think of it.
 
hoobers
2007-07-26 8:46:36 PM  
The college my dad worked in had buildings all over the city. The main thermostat was in a building about 5 miles from him and in an area normally 10-15* hotter than where he was on the coast. During the summer, the auto thermostat would have his room so cold he would need a space heater and wear a sweater.

/guvvermint buildings
//figures
 
corinth
2007-07-26 8:49:03 PM  
itchyvelour: Um...I kind of got the impression from reading here on Fark that the Magickal Invisible Hand of the Market would corect that on its own, as it does all things (hallowed be its name) when it is not interfered with?

But new power plants are differently regulated than currently running ones. Hence why the last completed nuke plant was in 1996 (new window).
 
Resonant
2007-07-26 8:50:11 PM  
My company has had this deal with our electrical suppliers for years, and we get a HUGE break on electrical costs just for letting them turn off our compressors during peak hours. We have the option of turning them back on if our storage tanks are low, of course.
 
mark_bert
2007-07-26 8:52:14 PM  
kidsizedcoffin FTW!! -

I distinctly remember a thread on Fark that referred to someplace where the power company really emphasized energy conservation. Then a year later they raised the rates because the people weren't using enough power for the company to make a profit.

The power company doesn't give half a crap if you save money. They want you to reduce the amount of consumption so they can raise the rates, downsize, and still make the same profit. But hey, it's for the planet.
 
Bolebuns
2007-07-26 8:53:43 PM  
Underbridge,

Yeah...that interracial couple thing is a real kick in the pants, isn't it?

//you fail
 
xBIGxEASYx
2007-07-26 8:55:39 PM  
Perhaps they should have used that time and money developing more energy efficient appliances.
 
Arnold T Pants
2007-07-26 8:57:25 PM  
Government control and saving the world from global warming? This is every liberal's wet dream!!!
 
daevczen
2007-07-26 8:58:39 PM  
underbridge:
Nobody cares anymore
if you're a gay
interracial couple who use drugs
and don't go to church.
But if
you drive an SUV
you're the devil.

I was just imagining how that would sound with Randy Newman singing it.

/gay couple = bad?
/interracial couple = bad?!
 
Smiths
2007-07-26 8:59:57 PM  
Gwendolyn: I think it's my own damn business if I want to wear a seatbelt or not. Don't be a shiatty driver and hit my car. Then you have nothing to worry about.

Ya know, I'm gonna bookmark a "Submit Link" page as I do a daily check of news headlines, simply in preparation of the "Mother of the year candidate -- and TFer --...." greenlight that -- goddammit -- I should get.
 
stryker4526
2007-07-26 9:00:16 PM  
Wow, Gwendolyn is just being subjected to all kinds of pwn in here.

Sorry, Gwendy, but it becomes your problem once somebody is a shiatty driver and hits your car. Then it becomes your friends'/family's problem, and your children's problem, and you'll get raped by debt if you survive because I doubt an insurance company would pay anything to someone not wearing a seatbelt.
 
Oznog
2007-07-26 9:02:06 PM  
I'm an electrical engineer and am getting a real kick out of these replies...

Controlling the A/C is a good idea. Managing a grid near capacity is really tricky. Depending on your type of power plant, it may take hours to fire up a plant for more power and yet burns a lot of costly fuel to idle when it's NOT putting anything out.

So everyone turning on their A/C at once either requires having more power plants built- and online- than you actually need- or you have this scheme where the power company can control your load in an emergency when a hot day or just bad luck has all the A/C's on at once, esp when you didn't plan on that happening. Actually since A/C cycles and usually only runs 15%-50% of the time, just arranging it so your neighbor is on while yours is held off, then yours goes on when his goes off, reduces the peak need by 50% and it's generally unnoticible to either of you. You still get all the cooling you need.

More important, it SUCKS after an outage when they're trying to bring the grid back up but everybody's A/C thermostat will kick on all the A/C units the moment they put power back on the line, which loads the hell out of the plant and equipment. That's a big reason why they can only restore power block-by-block. They have to wait for the houses to cool down and shut off the A/C before they can power up more houses. They just need to be able to control this problem.

Currently- exceptions like Enron nonwithstanding- I don't see the power company as huge money-grubbers. Here in Texas we have the Public Utilities Commission regulate what they can change and how they charge it and they never got out of hand. What Enron showed is that deregulation/competition is a fraud, it's just a scam they crave to exploit the market.
 
Flying Lasagna Monster
2007-07-26 9:02:29 PM  
bagnewsnotes.typepad.comView Full Size


Approves
 
Bohemian
2007-07-26 9:03:12 PM  
I did the voluntary AC control thing at a previous residence. Ironically after we did that our house would be like an oven between 4pm and 7pm. We only got a 20% discount.

In a different house in the same area without the AC control the house doesn't heat up in the afternoon.

If they want to get people to use less electricity they need to make decent energy star ratings mandatory for all fridges and clothes dryers. If everyone was forced to do that you would see efficient appliances come down in price after the first year.

I think the real solution to this is to set up solar and small urban wind on your roof and only buy your extra juice from the utility.
 
Oh No Computer
2007-07-26 9:04:08 PM  
Flying Lasagna Monster: Approves

WTF? Did I miss something?
 
Peaceman
2007-07-26 9:05:11 PM  
NCPokey: Gwendolyn:
I think it's my own damn business if I want to wear a seatbelt or not. Don't be a shiatty driver and hit my car. Then you have nothing to worry about.

Always glad to see a mother of 3 is still willing to risk her life and the future of her family by not wearing a seatbelt, just to prove how free she is to be an idiot. Good on you for not letting The Man keep you down!

Umm...she didn't seem to be against wearing seatbelts or helmets at all. Simply against mandating them legally.
 
ParanoidAgnostic
2007-07-26 9:07:55 PM  
stryker4526

If you go skiing and run into a tree it becomes your friends'/family's problem, and your children's problem.

Noone needs to ski. I suggest that the government ban it.

Some activities are risky. The point is, if it's your own life you're risking it should be your decision as to whether or not to risk it, not the government's.
 
MagMysTour
2007-07-26 9:08:12 PM  
They should force all customers to do this, we need to combat global warming
 
Scudru
2007-07-26 9:10:33 PM  
Eliminate ghost load and you will save some real power. The ubiquitos brick transformer without circuitry to de-energise it after it is finished charging is a major energy user for absolutely no reason.Plus, everything that has an uneeded clock in it.
Turn off everything you can think of in your home and go look at your electric meter still spinning away.I had a stereo and TV that used 30 watts of power turned off!
That is 30 watts times 24 hours times 31 days = 22 KW a month so the TV came on 20 seconds quicker.
 
galactus5000
2007-07-26 9:12:02 PM  
BAN EVERYTHING!
 
Civil_War2_Time
2007-07-26 9:12:16 PM  
What I know, working within this industry, is that if people where more sensible with their energy consumption (like turning off un-needed lights/computers/a-c/etc...not too much harder than signaling a car-turn with your your blinker for the common good), there wouldn't be THREE mile-long trainloads of coal going into rural Montana to feed Colstrip every day.
 
stryker4526
2007-07-26 9:12:41 PM  
Oznog: I'm an electrical engineer and am getting a real kick out of these replies...

Controlling the A/C is a good idea. Managing a grid near capacity is really tricky. Depending on your type of power plant, it may take hours to fire up a plant for more power and yet burns a lot of costly fuel to idle when it's NOT putting anything out.

So everyone turning on their A/C at once either requires having more power plants built- and online- than you actually need- or you have this scheme where the power company can control your load in an emergency when a hot day or just bad luck has all the A/C's on at once, esp when you didn't plan on that happening. Actually since A/C cycles and usually only runs 15%-50% of the time, just arranging it so your neighbor is on while yours is held off, then yours goes on when his goes off, reduces the peak need by 50% and it's generally unnoticible to either of you. You still get all the cooling you need.

More important, it SUCKS after an outage when they're trying to bring the grid back up but everybody's A/C thermostat will kick on all the A/C units the moment they put power back on the line, which loads the hell out of the plant and equipment. That's a big reason why they can only restore power block-by-block. They have to wait for the houses to cool down and shut off the A/C before they can power up more houses. They just need to be able to control this problem.

Currently- exceptions like Enron nonwithstanding- I don't see the power company as huge money-grubbers. Here in Texas we have the Public Utilities Commission regulate what they can change and how they charge it and they never got out of hand. What Enron showed is that deregulation/competition is a fraud, it's just a scam they crave to exploit the market.

A solution to that would be to construct more nuclear powerplants. They're much more environmentally friendly than coal plants in the long run, IMO (though this point is the subject of much debate). The real thing that would be a miracle for our energy shortages would be a breakthrough in fusion technology that led to the development of a viable, large-scale nuclear fusion powerplant capable of producing power on commercial levels.
 
tlenon
2007-07-26 9:13:19 PM  
timlenon.comView Full Size


/Obey voluntarily as specified
/as all loyal citizens do...
 
rcaston
2007-07-26 9:13:55 PM  
tomWright: Yeah, "voluntary"

It is always voluntary at first.

Like seatbelts
like helmets
like the income tax


Is it already time for the revolution?
 
ParanoidAgnostic
2007-07-26 9:14:09 PM  
We don't need to combat global warming by giving up technology. we should do it by improoving technology.
 
Displayed 50 of 177 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

The next best thing to UltraFark

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.