On 26/03/2016 08:10, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2016 02:58:29 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35894922

"The British government has committed to getting 53 million smart
meters into our homes and small businesses by the end of 2020, at an
estimated cost of £11bn."

analysis snipped

"The EU has said that all its members must provide smart meters by
2020 as long as there is a positive economic case to do so."

Economic case for whom, energy companies or consumers?

Germany said no on ecomonic grounds, Austraila and Canada found it
too expensive and of little benefit.

I can't see the benefit for most people. Is the government really
expecting people to be looking at their meters every few hours to see
what electricity they're using, and thereby cutting back? I can't see
it happening. If people aren't aware of what kit uses how much
electricity, they're unlikely to be interested in the usage at any one
moment, or what is using it. If people are sufficiently interested,
they either know what uses large amounts, or they can go out and buy a
monitor that tells them.

The only useful smart meter would be one that can be interrogated
remotely from some central computer, so that it's not necessary to
employ someone to come and read it every six months.


Looks to me like a typical case of a British Politician modus operandi:

- Maths/science and facts are for geeks - I didn't do that as part of
PPE at Oxford, and ignoring it has never stopped me in the past

- I made a decision, and as bad as it may be, it would be better to
continue regardless of the evidence, as stopping it would make me look
bad and may prevent me from winning my seat at the next election