" used improper usenet message composition style
by unnecessarily full-quoting:

The pool filter pump is an excellent example of a significant
residential load that can take advantage of lower rates
available with smart metering.

Not everyone has a pool - but I have to wonder what people did before
time-of-use (TOU) metering with their pool pump. Did they run them
24/7? And with TOU they're running them 12/5 + 2/24? Are these pumps
or pump-controllers able to be programmable like this? If you're
cutting back (by about 50%) on running a pool pump, then of course
you're going to be buying less electricity. You would also be saving
that money if you weren't on TOU and you reduced the pump use.

Another would be a well pump for lawn irrigation.

And fewer yet have a well. And lawn irrigation usually happens at night
anyways (no TOU-motivated time-shifting going on there).

There are smaller loads like the dishwasher, washer, dryer,
basement dehumidifier, that can often be time shifted too.

Many people say that laundry really can't be time-shifted without
impacting lifestyle.

Basement dehumidifiers are very inefficient and probably not used during
the summer when the home's AC unit is doing the job of reducing the
home's humitidy anyways. Are their dehumidifiers that can be programmed
to only come on in the evening (when TOU rates are low)? If not, again
we have a lifestyle-ergonomics issue.

All in all, I have no problem with varying rates being offered
that reflect the different costs of electricity to the utility.
That way you pay for what you actually use and when you use it.

The problem is:

1) the cost-per-home and the networking / software cost is HUGE
compared to the change in usage behavior for the average home.

2) there have been lots of problems with measurements and people
getting huge bills when TOU billing kicked in. There haven't
been enough procedural mechanisms and consumer rights and
protection when it comes to arbitrating TOU billing disputes.

There really wasn't a problem with the way it worked before TOU billing.

You have an electricity utility provider and a residential customer
base. The utility purchases electricity at various rates that change
during the day, and it can easily divide up it's total purchase
expenditure across it's customer base without knowing exactly which
customer used more or less "prime-time" or expensive electricity than
the average customer.

In order to know how your customer base used the prime-time expensive
electricity on an individual level and bill them accordingly, the smart
meter is a very expensive way to do that when you're talking about
residential customers vs industrial or commercial customers when you
look at the actual numbers.

If every residential customer used EXACTLY the same number of
"expensive" or prime-time KWH per month, then smart meters wouldn't be
needed since the utility can spread it's cost for that expensive
electricity equally and equitably (fairly) across it's customer base.

Without TOU billing, a utility can spread it's cost for expensive
electricity equally (but not equitably) across it's customer base.

So now you've got to consider the amount of inequality-of-use of
expensive or prime-time electricity across the customer base, and make
the case that the DIFFERENCE in use of prime-time electricity between
the best energy-saving and worst energy-using households is worth
measuring compared to the cost of implimenting the measurement system.

I say that difference is not worth the cost.

The way it worked in my jurisdiction before TOU was that the first X kwh
I used per month was billed at X1 cents per kwh, and the next N kwh used
was billed at N1 cents. The utility didn't know how much of the X or N
kwh I used was used during prime-time, but I was still penalized by
paying more for anything I used above X kwh so I was still motivated (or
rewarded) to cut back on electricity usage regardless.