EDAboard.com | EDAboard.eu | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | RTV forum PL | NewsGroups PL

OT: Earth Hour

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics AUS - OT: Earth Hour

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Sylvia Else
Guest

Wed Apr 02, 2014 5:44 am   



On 1/04/2014 11:38 PM, Trevor wrote:
Quote:
"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhb65e$6sj$25_at_dont-email.me...

So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent, which
was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and drop wire
is outrageous. Cost for transformers etc are load dependent and should
rightly be covered by usage costs rather than have charges reduce as usage
goes up! Sad


Costs for transformers are *peak* load dependent, so each consumer
should be paying for transformers in proportion to their contribution to
the peak load.

Usage charges do not capture peak load very well at all.

Time of use metering can better capture peak load, but it would be
difficult to sell a system where consumers don't know how much they'll
be charged for electricity until after the event.

Strictly speaking the transformer cost relates to *projected* peak load,
which complicates allocating the cost even more.

There may be no simple answer to this one, much less one that people
will actually agree is equitable.

Sylvia.

news13
Guest

Wed Apr 02, 2014 10:48 am   



On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

Quote:
On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the
size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge on
someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.


WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?

Jasen Betts
Guest

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:04 pm   



On 2014-04-01, Trevor <trevor_at_home.net> wrote:
Quote:

"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhb65e$6sj$25_at_dont-email.me...

So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent, which
was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and drop wire
is outrageous. Cost for transformers etc are load dependent and should
rightly be covered by usage costs rather than have charges reduce as usage
goes up! Sad


In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the size
of your main fuse


--
umop apisdn


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news_at_netfront.net ---

Sylvia Else
Guest

Wed Apr 02, 2014 1:09 pm   



On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:
Quote:
On 2014-04-01, Trevor <trevor_at_home.net> wrote:

"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhb65e$6sj$25_at_dont-email.me...

So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent, which
was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and drop wire
is outrageous. Cost for transformers etc are load dependent and should
rightly be covered by usage costs rather than have charges reduce as usage
goes up! :-(

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the size
of your main fuse



That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge on
someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

Sylvia.

Sylvia Else
Guest

Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:56 pm   



On 2/04/2014 7:48 PM, news13 wrote:
Quote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the
size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge on
someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?


I take it that you think it's obvious that it has nothing to do with it.
You're mistaken. I'll explain why, if you ask the question again in a
civilised way.

Sylvia.

news13
Guest

Wed Apr 02, 2014 5:31 pm   



On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 19:56:04 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

Quote:
On 2/04/2014 7:48 PM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the
size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge on
someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?


I take it that you think it's obvious that it has nothing to do with it.
You're mistaken. I'll explain why, if you ask the question again in a
civilised way.


FO, your argument. Make it or shut up.
You started this shite fight you cross posting troll.

news13
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:45 am   



On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:01:50 +1100, Trevor wrote:

Quote:
"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhehol$sbm$3_at_dont-email.me...
So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent,
which was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and
drop wire is outrageous.

Who are you with?
Now with Origin and it is $280p.a.

You do realise that depends on where you live right?


So you're with Origin and in the inner city and pay more?
We were with Integral. I guess they invested in infrastructure.

>

news13
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:46 am   



On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 10:48:11 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

Quote:
On 3/04/2014 2:31 AM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 19:56:04 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 7:48 PM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on
the size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge
on someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?


I take it that you think it's obvious that it has nothing to do with
it.
You're mistaken. I'll explain why, if you ask the question again in a
civilised way.

FO, your argument. Make it or shut up.
You started this shite fight you cross posting troll.


To be clear, the reason I'm not providing you with the argument is that
you're not debating in a civilised manner. As things stand, you do not
have a correct understanding of the situation. That's your loss, not
mine.


I can live with that.

Sylvia Else
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 5:48 am   



On 3/04/2014 2:31 AM, news13 wrote:
Quote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 19:56:04 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 7:48 PM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the
size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge on
someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?


I take it that you think it's obvious that it has nothing to do with it.
You're mistaken. I'll explain why, if you ask the question again in a
civilised way.

FO, your argument. Make it or shut up.
You started this shite fight you cross posting troll.


To be clear, the reason I'm not providing you with the argument is that
you're not debating in a civilised manner. As things stand, you do not
have a correct understanding of the situation. That's your loss, not mine.

Sylvia.

Trevor
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:01 am   



"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhehol$sbm$3_at_dont-email.me...
Quote:
So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent,
which was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and
drop wire is outrageous.

Who are you with?
Now with Origin and it is $280p.a.


You do realise that depends on where you live right?

Trevor.

Trevor
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:07 am   



"Sylvia Else" <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:bq11btF52sfU1_at_mid.individual.net...
Quote:
On 1/04/2014 11:38 PM, Trevor wrote:
"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhb65e$6sj$25_at_dont-email.me...

So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent,
which
was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and drop
wire
is outrageous. Cost for transformers etc are load dependent and should
rightly be covered by usage costs rather than have charges reduce as
usage
goes up! :-(


Costs for transformers are *peak* load dependent, so each consumer should
be paying for transformers in proportion to their contribution to the peak
load.


Yep, but currently don't.


> Usage charges do not capture peak load very well at all.

We now have smart meters here which CAN measure peak loads accurately.


Quote:
Time of use metering can better capture peak load, but it would be
difficult to sell a system where consumers don't know how much they'll be
charged for electricity until after the event.


It is a standard option here already to have time of day charging.


Quote:
Strictly speaking the transformer cost relates to *projected* peak load,
which complicates allocating the cost even more.


Not any more.


Quote:
There may be no simple answer to this one, much less one that people will
actually agree is equitable.


The answer is already available, naturally those who are being subsidised
never agree with paying more.

Trevor.

Trevor
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:14 am   



"Sylvia Else" <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:bq3ltrFmc9pU1_at_mid.individual.net...
Quote:
On 3/04/2014 2:31 AM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 19:56:04 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 2/04/2014 7:48 PM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:
In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on the
size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge on
someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?


I take it that you think it's obvious that it has nothing to do with it.
You're mistaken. I'll explain why, if you ask the question again in a
civilised way.

FO, your argument. Make it or shut up.
You started this shite fight you cross posting troll.


To be clear, the reason I'm not providing you with the argument is that
you're not debating in a civilised manner. As things stand, you do not
have a correct understanding of the situation. That's your loss, not mine.


Yep, size of transformers etc is dependent on the overall peak load, not
just one house. That much is obvious. And the fact that the peak load from
each residence and business contributes to the overall peak load is also
obvious, but currently not taken into account DESPITE the technology being
in place here already.

Trevor.

Sylvia Else
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:38 am   



On 3/04/2014 11:07 AM, Trevor wrote:
Quote:
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:bq11btF52sfU1_at_mid.individual.net...
On 1/04/2014 11:38 PM, Trevor wrote:
"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhb65e$6sj$25_at_dont-email.me...

So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent,
which
was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and drop
wire
is outrageous. Cost for transformers etc are load dependent and should
rightly be covered by usage costs rather than have charges reduce as
usage
goes up! :-(


Costs for transformers are *peak* load dependent, so each consumer should
be paying for transformers in proportion to their contribution to the peak
load.

Yep, but currently don't.


Usage charges do not capture peak load very well at all.

We now have smart meters here which CAN measure peak loads accurately.


Time of use metering can better capture peak load, but it would be
difficult to sell a system where consumers don't know how much they'll be
charged for electricity until after the event.

It is a standard option here already to have time of day charging.


Strictly speaking the transformer cost relates to *projected* peak load,
which complicates allocating the cost even more.

Not any more.


Time of use charging can allow a more equitable allocation of the cost
of providing actual peak load capacity, but until the projected peak
load is realised, there's nothing to measure.

So what do we do? Allocate the cost pro-rata based on actual peak load?
That penalises those who've already installed and their
air-conditioners, and subsidises those who are just about to install them.

Quote:


There may be no simple answer to this one, much less one that people will
actually agree is equitable.

naturally those who are being subsidised
never agree with paying more.


That's the truth.

Sylvia.

Sylvia Else
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:47 am   



On 3/04/2014 11:46 AM, news13 wrote:
Quote:
On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 10:48:11 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 3/04/2014 2:31 AM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 19:56:04 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 7:48 PM, news13 wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:09:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/04/2014 5:04 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

In some places (France IIRC) they size the supply charge based on
the size of your main fuse

That makes some sense, although it would represent an unfair charge
on someone whose peak load occurred outside peak time.

WTF does consumption time have to do with a size of feed charge?


I take it that you think it's obvious that it has nothing to do with
it.
You're mistaken. I'll explain why, if you ask the question again in a
civilised way.

FO, your argument. Make it or shut up.
You started this shite fight you cross posting troll.


To be clear, the reason I'm not providing you with the argument is that
you're not debating in a civilised manner. As things stand, you do not
have a correct understanding of the situation. That's your loss, not
mine.

I can live with that.


Of course you can. As the saying goes, "ignorance is bliss".

Sylvia.

Dechucka
Guest

Thu Apr 03, 2014 7:04 am   



"Sylvia Else" <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:bq3orpFmuauU1_at_mid.individual.net...
Quote:
On 3/04/2014 11:07 AM, Trevor wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:bq11btF52sfU1_at_mid.individual.net...
On 1/04/2014 11:38 PM, Trevor wrote:
"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:lhb65e$6sj$25_at_dont-email.me...

So, the first trick is to lead a less energy expensive lifestyle.

Which unfortunately does not reduce your "supply charge" by one cent,
which
was my complaint in the first place! $500 a year for a meter and drop
wire
is outrageous. Cost for transformers etc are load dependent and should
rightly be covered by usage costs rather than have charges reduce as
usage
goes up! :-(


Costs for transformers are *peak* load dependent, so each consumer
should
be paying for transformers in proportion to their contribution to the
peak
load.

Yep, but currently don't.


Usage charges do not capture peak load very well at all.

We now have smart meters here which CAN measure peak loads accurately.


Time of use metering can better capture peak load, but it would be
difficult to sell a system where consumers don't know how much they'll
be
charged for electricity until after the event.

It is a standard option here already to have time of day charging.


Strictly speaking the transformer cost relates to *projected* peak load,
which complicates allocating the cost even more.

Not any more.

Time of use charging can allow a more equitable allocation of the cost of
providing actual peak load capacity, but until the projected peak load is
realised, there's nothing to measure.

So what do we do? Allocate the cost pro-rata based on actual peak load?
That penalises those who've already installed and their air-conditioners,
and subsidises those who are just about to install them.


You can use off peak now for hot water heating so there is a precedent

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics AUS - OT: Earth Hour

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic versionBulgarian versionCatalan versionCzech versionDanish versionGerman versionGreek versionEnglish versionSpanish versionFinnish versionFrench versionHindi versionCroatian versionIndonesian versionItalian versionHebrew versionJapanese versionKorean versionLithuanian versionLatvian versionDutch versionNorwegian versionPolish versionPortuguese versionRomanian versionRussian versionSlovak versionSlovenian versionSerbian versionSwedish versionTagalog versionUkrainian versionVietnamese versionChinese version
RTV map EDAboard.com map News map EDAboard.eu map EDAboard.de map EDAboard.co.uk map