Smart meters, Pros & Cons?

[devonwoody]

My energy supplier wants me to apply for a smart electric meter.

If you have one what are the pros and cons please?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Other than that you don't have to supply meter readings, there don't appear to be any pros. The concensus seems to be to avoid them if possible. I did read that the takeup is so poor that to meet targets they need to install something like 40,000 a day. There was a thread on them recently - I won't search because I will lose the will to live.

 

[Eric The Viking]

Just say no.

There are lots of reasons: they don't work well, they're an invasion of privacy, they're actually dangerous (because of the way they work in transmitting too-powerful WiFi signals), and so on.

I realise Google will throw up loony results alongside sensible ones, but the more measured analyses I have seen indicate the whole thing is nonsense, for anyone who is already sensible about energy use. The spendthrifts amongst us will ignore any hints in any case.

There are also Big Brotherish, sinister overtones, in that the ultimate objective is to be able to control when and/or how much energy you are allowed to use. It won't be the current technology, but imagine being on a really cheap tariff that means you are actually cut off when demand is high enough. Those prepared to pay lots, get energy when they want it, the rest of us will need blankets and candles (or ice packs during heat waves).

I don't think these big companies should get any encouragement - they won't from me, anyway!

E.

 

[John Brown]

"they're actually dangerous (because of the way they work in transmitting too-powerful WiFi signals)"
Is there actually any proper scientific evidence for this? Just interested, don't want to start a row...

 

[Eric The Viking]

Apparently they use a burst mode of transmission with higher output than normal devices (by 10s of dB!). I think this is done because they're usually located in awkward places (under the stairs in the basement, in external meter cupboards, etc.), and the designers want to be certain the signal gets through. The actual data transmitted is minimal by modern internet standards, so that lends itself to the technique, too.

Years ago, when I worked in an industry that used RF a lot, SHF signals used to be treated with great caution. Don't forget that microwave ovens operate in a nearby part of the spectrum (OK, at much higher powers, admittedly). You are in effect very slightly cooking yourself in proximity to these devices.

We have got used to WiFi and mobile devices in daily life without much study of long term effects, and because the emissions aren't apparent people become blase about them (they don't really affect FM radio, unless faulty, for example, for all sorts of reasons). There are huge vested interests hoping they don't cause damage, but it's reversing the understanding of 30-40 years ago, when kit working at those frequencies was restricted to educated engineers, not Joe Public.

I know it's logically impossible to prove a negative (that they don't cause damage, in this case), but the evidence on the other side is actually stacking up. Apparently WiFi and cellular frequencies do cause damage to living organisms (you'll have to Google for the detail), which is quite predictable. It's one good reason why my home network is as cabled-up as possible, and I don't keep my mobile on me most of the time, and turn off WiFi when it's not in use (and use efficient aerials, so the output stages don't have to use high power for coverage). Like other radiation, such as UV, any bad effects are most likely cumulative (that's me guessing, not something I've read).

 

[Seiken]

Apart from the usual scare stories about radiation., there are two reasons
a) Not all energy supplier are able to use smart meters so if you one and switch you may get no benefits
b) There have been a number of house fires attributed to the quality of installation (not the meters themselves) carried out by rushed/inadequately trained technicians. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5THjNWMjNdKyWwCXt48HJNB/smart-meter-installations.

 

[transatlantic]

Just so I know for the future. Can you simply say no? or are they going to make it complicated?

I currently have one of the external monitors which is very useful I find (geo Minim Electricity Energy Monitor). So I have no real need for one. Submitting a meter reading every few months isn't exactly difficult

 

[sunnybob]

Just listened to a very informed debate on radio 4. They said that smart meters are not smart. If you change your energy supplier, you have to change the meter.

Martin lewis, the money man says stay away, its yet another governemnt botched job.
he even said (on live radio) the minister for energy was not a fit person for the post as he had never bothered to swap suppliers and had no idea of the trouble the "smart meters" were causing..

 

[AndyT]

rushed/inadequately trained technicians

- which can also result in a bill for £7,000 worth of gas in three weeks, in a vacated student house, previously occupied by my son and his friends, billed after they had left the property. The energy supplier says to ignore the bill, but it's extra hassle none of them want, with the attendant risk of a bad credit rating if the unpaid bill automatically gets sent off to the bailiffs while the right hand is failing to sort out the errors of the left hand...

 

[Seiken]

Just ignore the letter, I've had two now from my supplier asking me to contact them to arrange for a smart meter installation which have gone into the hampster bed generator (shredder), its not compulsory to allow them to fit one.

 

[Racers]

Smart meters give them the power to cut you off remotely and can make it difficult to swap suppliers.

Pete

 

[Tasky]

Just so I know for the future. Can you simply say no?

Dunno about other utilities, but I believe the water one will eventually be compulsory... at least as currently planned.
The added benefit here is the enhanced leak detection, while also not blowing your house up.

Negatives depend on how thick your tinfoil hat and lead underpants are, I suppose. I've heard rumours that thieves will be able to hack into the network, access your meter and tell when you're away on holiday so they can burgle you... because watching your house isn't good enough in this age of the Internet, I assume.
Another I hear is that companies will use these meters to collect and sell your private information... which you already gave them when you set up your account anyway, but never mind.

 

[Rorschach]

As others have said, just say no.

 

[John15]

I've got one. Sounds like I may have made a mistake.

John

 

[John Brown]

Apparently they use a burst mode of transmission with higher output than normal devices (by 10s of dB!). I think this is done because they're usually located in awkward places (under the stairs in the basement, in external meter cupboards, etc.), and the designers want to be certain the signal gets through. The actual data transmitted is minimal by modern internet standards, so that lends itself to the technique, too.

Years ago, when I worked in an industry that used RF a lot, SHF signals used to be treated with great caution. Don't forget that microwave ovens operate in a nearby part of the spectrum (OK, at much higher powers, admittedly). You are in effect very slightly cooking yourself in proximity to these devices.

We have got used to WiFi and mobile devices in daily life without much study of long term effects, and because the emissions aren't apparent people become blase about them (they don't really affect FM radio, unless faulty, for example, for all sorts of reasons). There are huge vested interests hoping they don't cause damage, but it's reversing the understanding of 30-40 years ago, when kit working at those frequencies was restricted to educated engineers, not Joe Public.

I know it's logically impossible to prove a negative (that they don't cause damage, in this case), but the evidence on the other side is actually stacking up. Apparently WiFi and cellular frequencies do cause damage to living organisms (you'll have to Google for the detail), which is quite predictable. It's one good reason why my home network is as cabled-up as possible, and I don't keep my mobile on me most of the time, and turn off WiFi when it's not in use (and use efficient aerials, so the output stages don't have to use high power for coverage). Like other radiation, such as UV, any bad effects are most likely cumulative (that's me guessing, not something I've read).

So that's a "no" then. Unless you use the word "apparently" in a different way.
I did actually spend a lot of time googling the subject, when our local tennis club was offered a sum of money to have a mobile mast atop one of our floodlight stanchions. As soon as the planning permission went in we were deluged with objections, petitions and quite frankly insulting letters. We had pointed out that both the NHS and Cancer research UK were of the opinion that, while the excessive use of mobile phones might possibly cause some measurable warming of tissue, the inverse square law of RF propagation made it extremely unlikely that proximity to a mast could cause any damage. The thing I couldn't get past was the fact that nobody had suggested a plausible biological mechanism for damge to take place.
Not that any of this cut any ice with the local. We withdrew the application.
One thing I found interesting was that, while googling the subject of WiFi and possible damage, I came across a firm selling magic boxes that claimed to neutralize the effects of WiFi.

Having typed all this, however, I won't be getting a smart meter any time soon.

 

[Rorschach]

There is no proven link to wifi and detrimental health effect unless you are a tin foil hat wearer. That has nothing to do with my reasons for not wanting a smart meter though.

 

[finneyb]

Previous thread on Smart meters any-opinions-on-smart-meters-t107749.html

Brian

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I knew someone would find it.

 

[John Brown]

There is no proven link to wifi and detrimental health effect unless you are a tin foil hat wearer. That has nothing to do with my reasons for not wanting a smart meter though.

The last time I was offered a smart meter, it was GSM(or whatever the generic term is these days), not WiFi. Surely if they wanted the ability to turn your electrickery off, WiFi would be too easily defeatable.

 

[Duncan A]

According to the government the most compelling reason for having a smart meter is that it will make US smart. We will be able to see that switching on an appliance uses energy - which of course we are all far too thick to realise for ourselves. :roll:
In fairness to the energy companies I don't think they are particularly keen on smart meters, it's just that they are obliged by the government to fit them by 2020 (?).
The cost of the exercise is unbelievable and the failure to specify technical standards means that, as others have stated, many meters are not compatible with other suppliers - so they'll have to be swapped out in the near future. More expense, so the claimed savings, even if real (which I doubt) will be eaten up in additional installation costs.
The meters are pretty well all made in China so of course we know that they couldn't possibly be hacked by the Chinese in the event of some sort of falling out in the future.
And we pay people large sums of money to come up with these brilliant ideas!
Duncan