Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds wrote:

The truth is that - individual residental homes - don't comsume
enough electricity to warrant the cost for ultra-precise time-of-
use metering and billing.

Strange, but California has more people than any other state, but
the lowest energy consumption.

Lowest on a per-capita basis - not on a total-use basis.

California is second to Texas in terms of total energy use.

That isn't/wasn't due to smart readers,

California's low energy-use-per-capita is mostly because of climate. It
has a vastly more temperate climate compared to Texas.

I'd also imagine that over some period of time, 5 or 10 years, not
having to have the overhead of meter readers will more than pay for
the smart meters, thus helping to stabilize costs to the consumers

The costs will remain - because nobody wants to remove a fee once it's
in place.

And - smart meters have a projected lifespan of about 1/2 that of analog
wheel-meters.

Smart-meters would be more prone to be taken out by lightning hits (even
indirect hits).