On May 29, 1:25*pm, Home Guy wrote:

And I've also seen far too many questions asked and then the thread is
hijacked by others who want to take the question on a tangent because
they don't know how to answer the original question but instead feel a
compulsion to post something to prove they are worthy or relevant to the
group.

AND:

I have seen way too many people propose entirely stupid questions and
postulate insane methods to try and answer them...

Yet, those people, like yourself, keep coming back here and asking
their questions leaving out important material facts because the
person seeking an answer either didn't know such information was
important or had any bearing on the answer they desired or they
are asking something they are totally ignorant about... Getting
defensive about your question when people attempting to help you
by asking for clarification of certain aspects and more details
about your situation is a clear indication that you are asking for
the information for illicit purposes or are just plain trolling...

Feeling like you need to offer *correction* to people who reply
to your newsgroup posting when they offend some etiquette
guideline is just showing that you are too focused on the
format of the message rather than the content... Chill out...

I didn't know that in addition to being an expert on accounts
payable that you were also an internet psychologist -- good
to know...

~~ Evan

On 5/29/2011 10:03 PM, Robert Green wrote:
....

No, I beg to differ. I always feel much more comfortable encountering
service personnel and such knowing as much as I can learn elsewhere. I
believe the OP has learned a great deal from this thread and could get to
the point where an encounter isn't even necessary. His bill probably holds
the sad tale of a one time excursion into a higher rate zone that's cost him
big time. I'll bet he now becomes very aggressive managing his peak load.
....

I get no feeling OP has really learned a thing...it seems to all just
pass over as it doesn't fit into the preconceived notion.

His complaint is he has a few months w/ very high usage; not that the $
amount is high at relatively low total usage (as would be the symptom of
a demand-induced premium). I think the likelihood he actually has a
demand meter is very low.

From the numbers on usage he posted before, it appears to be a fairly
consistent usage w/ a couple of months extreme outliers. Both of those
are early in different years; my hypothesis is that the other months
are, for the most part, estimated rather than actually read and the one
annual blip is the catchup because they've not updated the average usage
to reflect actual since it was set up (probably before OP bought the
building).

--

" wrote:

Would you consider, say, 2000 kwh? Would a single month's total
usage of 2000 kwh qualify a customer for a demand meter? Would
4 consecutive months of 2000 kwh be the line-in-the-sand for
putting a customer on a demand meter?

http://www.nationalgridus.com/niagar...lec-demand.pdf

Define "such small".

2000 kwh per month is "such small".

Anyone with a 100 amp, single-phase service that is using their
service at 50% for an entire month would tip the scale at a
4300 kwh bill.

And 4300 is more than 2 x 2000.

Hardly what I'd call justified for utilizing 50% of the
smallest installable utility service.

You wouldn't have demand metering with a 100A service.

Did you read the link?

A 100 amp service is 4 times what you need to draw 2000 kwh in a month.

On May 29, 11:03*pm, "Robert Green"
wrote:
"dpb" wrote in ....
On 5/29/2011 8:59 AM, Home Guy wrote:
harry wrote:

Does a "demand meter" give a more accurate measure of energy
consumption?

(I note that no explicit answer is given for that question)

No. *It's immaterial to the usage; only determines what the appropriate
rate will be.

I wouldn't say it that way. *It's very material in that (as you clarify) it
sets the rate for the usage. *Just nit-picking to make it clear to the OP
that there are two very clearly different factors to consider in business
rates that are different from residential rates. *A power blip that ended up
turning every device on simultaneously (a rare situation - except for X-10
users g) could be an extremely costly event. *Why? *Because peak demand
rates are set by the maximum power ever used during the metering period.
The OP could have easily changed the dynamics of his billing by plugging in
a couple of new space heaters at exactly the wrong time. *That sort of event
could easily explain why the OP finds himself owing a lot more money than
last year even though the kWh used could be virtually identical.

Again, that only will matter if you're actually on a
demand-based billing (which, personally, I would doubt for a small
office-type complex, but wouldn't be impossible).

I've learned (the very hard way) that with posters here from all over the
world, many of the things I thought were customary nation or world-wide are
just local quirks. *(-:

So are you saying that customers with "demand meters" are billed on the
basis of their peak demand - a reading based on only a few minutes worth
of energy usage as seen over an entire billing period?

Yes

How is that a fair or equitable way to bill a customer?

What's "fair" got to do with it? *

"Deserves got nothing to do with it" - Unforgiven

It's owing to the fact that as another already posted, facilities have
to be provided by the utility to handle the peak load; that costs more
so they bill more. *It's also an incentive to the customer to look at
load-leveling techniques aggressively to cut their costs.

Are commercial customers that typically use between 2000 and 3000 kwh of
electricity per month normally considered as candidates for a demand
meter, or are they used for much higher usage customers?

Generally, much higher.

All you'll have to do is look at your bill and you'll know what the
tariff schedule is.

Again, you're looking in the wrong place here, first.

No, I beg to differ. I always feel much more comfortable encountering
service personnel and such knowing as much as I can learn elsewhere. *I
believe the OP has learned a great deal from this thread and could get to
the point where an encounter isn't even necessary. *His bill probably holds
the sad tale of a one time excursion into a higher rate zone that's cost him
big time. *I'll bet he now becomes very aggressive managing his peak load.

I would suggest dropping $25 for a basic Kil-O-Wat plug in meter

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16882715001

to measure the current draw of all his equipment. *Then I'd figure out some
sort of switching interlock or timer system to insure that loads don't all
coincide.

In all likelihood, the "problem" is _NOT_ in the metering but in either
having an unknown or parasitic load, the "reading" not being actual
reading but estimated until the "catch up" real reading at the beginning
of the year or other explainable issue. *The likelihood of your meter
being in error is quite low for the explanation of the usage data you
previously posted.

Which is why I recommend the Kil-O-Watt meter. *You can measure each device
(except hard-wired ones) and get a true reading (wattage or V/A) of its
instantaneous power consumption or the consumption over a period of time.
A clamp meter is a good way to measure the items hardwired to the circuit
panel, but it's pretty lousy for determining wattage or power consumption
over time for stand-alone devices.

-
Bobby G.

@Bobby:

Or the OP could have an an electrician install an emon demon like
RBM suggested in his main service panel and the reading from it
and the amount of electricity the OP is being billed for should always
agree...

http://www.emon.com/index.html

~~ Evan

On May 29, 9:04*pm, Home Guy wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
So are you saying that customers with "demand meters" are billed
on the basis of their peak demand - a reading based on only a
few minutes worth of energy usage as seen over an entire billing
period?

How is that a fair or equitable way to bill a customer?

Because the cost to generate the electricity is small compared to
the cost to deliver the energy. The cost to deliver the energy,
in turn, is determined by the infrastructure needed (poles,
transformers, generation capability, etc.). A commercial customer
with even a short peak demand may require more infrastructure to
support that demand than dozens of residential customers.

So what would you consider or where would you place the threshold for
which demand metering should be used by a customer?

What monthly kwh usage would you consider "worthy" or significant enough
for an electricity supplier to use a demand meter to cover this
so-called significant cost of delivering this huge amount of brief peak
energy?

Would you consider, say, 2000 kwh? *Would a single month's total usage
of 2000 kwh qualify a customer for a demand meter? *Would 4 consecutive
months of 2000 kwh be the line-in-the-sand for putting a customer on a
demand meter?

http://www.nationalgridus.com/niagar...lec-demand.pdf

Demand meters for such small users are total bull****.

Anyone with a 100 amp, single-phase service that is using their service
at 50% for an entire month would tip the scale at a 4300 kwh bill.
Hardly what I'd call justified for utilizing 50% of the smallest
installable utility service.

How would you justify the infrastructure costs needed to supply such a
paltry service such that demand metering is needed?

@Home Guy:

You are too focused on the total billed number of kWh to see why
a demand meter is used for electrical services with a main disconnect
rated over a certain amperage...

A customer with a steady draw (demand) of 2.7 KW over 30 days to
end up being billed for 2,000 kWh over the course of a billing period
is *MUCH* easier for a power company to serve than a customer
whose draw is 500 KW a couple of times during the same billing period
and winds up with the same 2,000 kWh of use...

To serve the second customer whose demand is erratic and might
come at a time when the local power grid is overloaded requires
the power company to provide beefier service lines in that area
and have the capacity to accommodate that erratic load without
tripping safety devices in the power grid or browning out other
customers...

You just don't seem to understand that the greater the amount
of power a customer needs to use at the same time (peak demand)
is more important than the total of the kWh that customer is billed
for during any given period... Whether you use 1 KW for 2,000 hours
or 2,000 KW for 1 hour makes a difference in how the power company
serves you as far as equipment and capacities...

Again whether or not you have a demand meter depends on the
purpose of the occupancy and the amperage rating of the main
disconnect... A home with a 100 or 200 amp main service would
usually not have a demand meter, but a home with a 1,200 amp
main disconnect very well might have a demand meter installed...

~~ Evan

Robert Green wrote:

His bill probably holds the sad tale of a one time excursion
into a higher rate zone that's cost him big time. I'll bet he
now becomes very aggressive managing his peak load.

I've located some PDF documents that my local utility has on-line.

I have to have a "12-month average demand" equal to or more than 50 kW,
or have a 12-month rolling kwh consumption greater than 150,000 KWhrs in
order to have a demand meter. 150,000 kwhrs divided by 12 is 12,500 kwh
per month, which is about 4 times my average monthly consumption.

So no, I don't think I've experienced any one-time excursion into a
higher rate zone, at least not in terms of being demand-metered (if
indeed there are any other ways of entering a higher rate zone).

In article , dpb wrote:


I get no feeling OP has really learned a thing...it seems to all just
pass over as it doesn't fit into the preconceived notion.

Agree.


His complaint is he has a few months w/ very high usage; not that the $
amount is high at relatively low total usage (as would be the symptom of
a demand-induced premium). I think the likelihood he actually has a
demand meter is very low.

Here's an interesting page:

http://www.united-cs.com/demand.aspx

illustrating how peak demand can create a tenfold increase in cost.

Despite the OP's relatively low actual usage, the power coming into the
building is substantial. IIRC, 400 amps of 3-phase. Perhaps that
capability is what puts him in the demand category with the power
company. (The page referenced says all 3-phase users are billed that
way, but of course chances are OP is not in that particular service
area)

If the OP would stop believing that he already knows everything and
actually read the bill as has been suggested, or post it online if he's
incapable of understanding it, "more will be revealed."

On Mon, 30 May 2011 00:35:21 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

" wrote:

Would you consider, say, 2000 kwh? Would a single month's total
usage of 2000 kwh qualify a customer for a demand meter? Would
4 consecutive months of 2000 kwh be the line-in-the-sand for
putting a customer on a demand meter?

http://www.nationalgridus.com/niagar...lec-demand.pdf

Define "such small".

2000 kwh per month is "such small".

OK.

Anyone with a 100 amp, single-phase service that is using their
service at 50% for an entire month would tip the scale at a
4300 kwh bill.

And 4300 is more than 2 x 2000.

Say it ain't so! That would be *highly* unusual and would not be an issue
with demand metering, now would it? shakes head

Hardly what I'd call justified for utilizing 50% of the
smallest installable utility service.

You wouldn't have demand metering with a 100A service.

Did you read the link?

Yes, did you? It talks about residential customers not having demand
metering.

A 100 amp service is 4 times what you need to draw 2000 kwh in a month.

Good grief, you're stupid!

On Sun, 29 May 2011 19:33:50 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote:

On May 29, 10:11*pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 21:04:29 -0400, Home Guy wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

So are you saying that customers with "demand meters" are billed
on the basis of their peak demand - a reading based on only a
few minutes worth of energy usage as seen over an entire billing
period?

How is that a fair or equitable way to bill a customer?

Because the cost to generate the electricity is small compared to
the cost to deliver the energy. The cost to deliver the energy,
in turn, is determined by the infrastructure needed (poles,
transformers, generation capability, etc.). A commercial customer
with even a short peak demand may require more infrastructure to
support that demand than dozens of residential customers.

So what would you consider or where would you place the threshold for
which demand metering should be used by a customer?

What monthly kwh usage would you consider "worthy" or significant enough
for an electricity supplier to use a demand meter to cover this
so-called significant cost of delivering this huge amount of brief peak
energy?

It's not the monthly kWh usage that determines whether demand metering is used
or useful. *It's the *peak* usage and when that peak occurs. *The
infrastructure has to be built for the largest demand, not average. *Where the
threshold is placed is a different matter for each power company.

Would you consider, say, 2000 kwh? *Would a single month's total usage
of 2000 kwh qualify a customer for a demand meter? *Would 4 consecutive
months of 2000 kwh be the line-in-the-sand for putting a customer on a
demand meter?

I don't believe any residential customers have demand metering, but I could be
wrong.

http://www.nationalgridus.com/niagar...lec-demand.pdf

Demand meters for such small users are total bull****.

Define "such small".

Anyone with a 100 amp, single-phase service that is using their service
at 50% for an entire month would tip the scale at a 4300 kwh bill.
Hardly what I'd call justified for utilizing 50% of the smallest
installable utility service.

You wouldn't have demand metering with a 100A service. *...at least not a
residential service.




yes you might. APS in Arizona offers demand metering to residential
customers, (at least they did when I lived there)

Isn't it a TIME metering (usage in peak times is metered differently than
off-peak times)? Peak metering on such small loads would be dumb.

The so called PEAK demand was based on the highest power used during
any 60 minute period over the billing period. With demand metering,
they lower the kWh rate but they charge you also for the peak. For
example, with standard billing you might pay $0.12 per kWh. With
demand billing you would pay $0.06 per kHW plus $5.00 per peak kWh.
So for example if I used 100kWh during and a peak of 5 kWh during the
month the charge would be $60 plus $25. If you are just a little
careful you can save a lot of money. If you are just a little
careless it can cost you a lot of money.

Yes, we've already discussed all that. Ad-nauseam.

Also following this thread some of you seem to be mixing up power
factor and demand billing, they are two different things. Some
industrial billing plans bill by kWh, peak kWh AND power factor.

You're not following this thread, then. People are trying to figure out what
is causing the moron OP to run around with his hair on fire.

Smitty Two wrote:

Despite the OP's relatively low actual usage, the power coming
into the building is substantial.

What a joke.

The "power coming into the building" can be no more than the power being
used by the building's equipment, devices or appliances.

That fact that I've got some high-rated switch gear and primary supply
wire shouldn't play a role in how I'm billed. It's still a basic
3-phase 120/208 supply. Nothing fancy.

" wrote:

2000 kwh per month is "such small".

OK.

So you agree that 2000 kwh is a pittance.

Did you read the link?

Yes, did you? It talks about residential customers not having
demand metering.

So what?

Why should any utility put a demand meter on anyone pulling only 2000
kwh per month?

A 100 amp service is 4 times what you need to draw 2000 kwh
in a month.

Good grief, you're stupid!

If that statement is incorrect, then you tell us how many kwh a 100 amp
single phase service can provide in a month (730 hours in a month, btw).

On Mon, 30 May 2011 01:08:10 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

" wrote:

2000 kwh per month is "such small".

OK.

So you agree that 2000 kwh is a pittance.

I agree that you're a moron, but I'm certainly not alone here.

Did you read the link?

Yes, did you? It talks about residential customers not having
demand metering.

So what?

Why should any utility put a demand meter on anyone pulling only 2000
kwh per month?

They certainly didn't. Why do you insist they did?

A 100 amp service is 4 times what you need to draw 2000 kwh
in a month.

Good grief, you're stupid!

If that statement is incorrect,

It's not, but that doesn't change the fact that you're stupid as a stump.

then you tell us how many kwh a 100 amp
single phase service can provide in a month (730 hours in a month, btw).

It might be correct, but completely irrelevant. Unless your power company (or
PUC) is totally whacked, you wouldn't have demand metering with such a puny
service.

Now, why don't you listen to the people you're asking question of? Or put
another way, why did you ask if you don't want the answer?

In article , Home Guy wrote:

Smitty Two wrote:

Despite the OP's relatively low actual usage, the power coming
into the building is substantial.

What a joke.

The "power coming into the building" can be no more than the power being
used by the building's equipment, devices or appliances.

Let me rephrase, perhaps you'll like this better, Mr. Semantic Pedantic:

Your building has a 400 amp 3-phase SERVICE. That's what I mean by "the
power coming into the building." I don't care if you're all huddled
around a transistor radio and a candle, you still have an industrial
level of service to your building. THAT is a good reason for the utility
to put you on demand metering or apply a host of other charges that
those with smaller services would not incur.


That fact that I've got some high-rated switch gear and primary supply
wire shouldn't play a role in how I'm billed. It's still a basic
3-phase 120/208 supply. Nothing fancy.

Uh-huh. You gonna attend the next PUC meeting and speak up about how you
think the electric company "should" behave?

On May 29, 2:59*pm, Home Guy wrote:
harry wrote:
Does a "demand meter" give a more accurate measure of energy
consumption?

(I note that no explicit answer is given for that question)

It only shows the maximum. Usually they only show peaks that
last a few minutes
The purpose of a demand meter is to discourage the electric
consumer from high peaks in demand. Usually there is an
additional charge that depends on this peak.

So are you saying that customers with "demand meters" are billed on the
basis of their peak demand - a reading based on only a few minutes worth
of energy usage as seen over an entire billing period?

How is that a fair or equitable way to bill a customer?

Are commercial customers that typically use between 2000 and 3000 kwh of
electricity per month normally considered as candidates for a demand
meter, or are they used for much higher usage customers?

Don't you know the meaning of "additional"?
Whether you get a demand meteror not depends on how near to the
knuckle the electricity system is being run locally. And on the
companies billing policy.

Home Guy wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:

Despite the OP's relatively low actual usage, the power coming
into the building is substantial.

What a joke.

The "power coming into the building" can be no more than the power being
used by the building's equipment, devices or appliances.

That fact that I've got some high-rated switch gear and primary supply
wire shouldn't play a role in how I'm billed. It's still a basic
3-phase 120/208 supply. Nothing fancy.
Hi,
Is that 3-ph. Delta or Star configured? So many were talking about Pf
and still you talk like that? I resigned, over and out. It may be easier
to tech my cat.

"Home Guy" wrote in message ...
Robert Green wrote:

His bill probably holds the sad tale of a one time excursion
into a higher rate zone that's cost him big time. I'll bet he
now becomes very aggressive managing his peak load.

I've located some PDF documents that my local utility has on-line.

I have to have a "12-month average demand" equal to or more than 50 kW,
or have a 12-month rolling kwh consumption greater than 150,000 KWhrs in
order to have a demand meter. 150,000 kwhrs divided by 12 is 12,500 kwh
per month, which is about 4 times my average monthly consumption.

So no, I don't think I've experienced any one-time excursion into a
higher rate zone, at least not in terms of being demand-metered (if
indeed there are any other ways of entering a higher rate zone).

I'd agree that according to the documents it's unlikely you have a demand
meter BUT mistakes happen and they may be basing YOUR billing on some
previous occupant of the premises who may have indeed been operating a
business that used far more electricity that you currently use.

I do stand my by statement that if and when you contact them, you'll be in a
much better position, knowledge-wise, to determine whether what they are
saying is truthful. I once had to take the gas company to the public
service commission because they simply decided I must be cheating because my
gas usage had dropped so much in one year (I switched to a few space heaters
since I was living in primarily one room, recovery from surgery). Why pay
to heat the rest of the house when I was only using one room?

They were such assholes about it that I now wouldn't trust them or the
electric company with a burned out match. The PSC reversed their decision
to bill be for gas I "should have used" because if the meter had failed, it
was the company's fault, not mine. It was a unpleasant experience that
taught me that those who say "the power company" rarely makes mistakes just
haven't had any problems with their utilities - yet.

So good luck to you Home Guy. I believe it's never wrong to question
something you think is way out of line and to learn all you can about the
issue before contacting those in authority. Obviously loads of other people
here believe differently, but they are informed by different experiences.
My experience is that utilities CAN and DO make serious mistakes, and when
they do, they often try to cover up their incompetence or worse, even if it
costs some poor guy like you or me $100's or $1,000's.

It's too bad much of this thread devolved into a typical Usenet ****ing
match, but remember, there's never a shortage of Usenet posters who live
just to get people's goats by posting that "everything you do is wrong and
you're an idiot." Except they usually spell it "your an idiot." Learning
not to respond to "goat getters" is one of the many tests of manhood that
Usenet offers. (-:

Good luck. I hope you sort this out. Something looks fishy.

--
Bobby G.

On May 28, 5:38*pm, "
wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 15:21:47 -0500, Jim Yanik wrote:
"RBM" wrote :

"Mark" wrote in message
....
On May 27, 8:47 pm, Home Guy wrote:
RBM used improper usenet message composition style by full-quoting:

3) There are (on average) 30.4 days in a month, and therefore 730
hours in a month. If I take the above wattage calculation (120 x
total_current) and multiply it by 730, then divide by 1000, I
should get a quantity energy measurement (KWh) that should match
(or approximate) my bill from the local utility - assuming that
the load in use at the time of the readings are representative of
daily or continuous use. If this method of obtaining a
representative monthly KWh measurement is not correct (or needs
more refinement) then please state what, why or how.

**You're not going to be the least bit accurate trying to calculate
that way.

I want to establish several use-case situations, primarily a
"worst-case" KWh monthly usage by assuming that all the devices that are
normally on during a week-day 9-am to 5-pm work day and turned off at
all other times are instead left on continuously 24/7.

I can also get current readings for other use-case situations (evenings
and week-ends) that should give me a more closer-to-reality current
reading and factor in their time-of use over the course of a month.

This is a small office - not a home. There are fewer variable involved.

There is no reason that you shouldn't be able to look at the
electric meter.

The meter is in a locked cabinet. The only time I get to see it is when
the meter-reader guy comes around once a month to read it.

I suspect the meter is in a locked cabinet to prevent tampering / bypass
(the meter is inside the utility / furnace room of the building and is
not accessible from the outside).

And besides, having the ability to lay my eyes on the meter won't tell
me anything about the accuracy of the meter, or the real-time current
consumption.

All I want to know is - should the current readings from a clamp-on
meter (when extrapolated across the 730 hours of a typical month) jive
with the accumulated KWh reading as measured by a typical billing
meter? Do I have to do any "special" math to the wattage I calculate
with the meter to arrive at what the billing meter is measuring?

yes you are correct you can get a rough reading this way..
you need to measure and sum only the 3 black cables, do not include
the white striped cable in the sum.

Add up the 3 currents and multiply by 120 and this is your VAs and the
actual Watts will be equal to or less then the VAs.

Multiply by hours and you have Watt Hours.

Divide by 1000 and you have kWh which is how you are billed.

Mark

This is a commercial service and metering equipment. How is he going to
guestimate demand?

since the white return wire returns the current from all 3 phases,wouldn't
that give you the sum of all the currents?

Only the *difference* of the three phases is returned in the neutral. *With a
balanced load there will be zero current in the neutral.


YOU ARE ALL SO FULL OF HOOEY.....THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS INCORRECT.
ON SAID NEUTRAL THERE WILL BE A POTENTIAL TO GROUND EQUAL TO THE
LOAD....
KRW YOU ARE ONE DUMBASS ENDANGERING MOTHER****ER.

I HAVE COME TO TNE CONCLUSION THAT THOUGH SOME OF YOU ARE VERSED AND
EDUCATED YOUR OBSERVATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE IS WANDERING...RENDERING
THESE GROUPS USELESS, MISGUIDING AND NOT WORTH THE EFFORT PUT INTO
THEM...

PATECUM
TGITM

" wrote:

Did you read the link?

Yes, did you?

Why should any utility put a demand meter on anyone pulling
only 2000 kwh per month?

They certainly didn't. Why do you insist they did?

This electricity provider (National Grid) serves close to 4 million
customers across 29,000 square miles of Massachesetts, New Hampshire,
New York and Rhode Island.

This is the link:

http://www.nationalgridus.com/niagar...lec-demand.pdf

And this is what it says:

===========
National Grid installs a demand meter whenever a customer's energy
consumption has exceeded 2000 kilo-watt hours (kWh) per month for four
consecutive months. Once demand billing begins, it does not end until
after the monthly energy consumption has been less than 2,000 kwh for 12
consecutive months. This requirement may not be avoided by temporarily
terminating service. New or existing customers whose connected load
indicates that the energy consumption will exceed 2,000 kwh per month
will have a demand meter installed. The demand charge will be the
hightest average kW measured in a 15 minute interval during the billing
period, but not less than one kw and not less than the demand contracted
for.
=============

Now take your foot out of your mouth and explain why such an agressive
policy is needed for a demand meter for such a paltry energy usage.

Tony Hwang wrote:

It's still a basic 3-phase 120/208 supply. Nothing fancy.

Is that 3-ph. Delta or Star configured?

Does it ****ING MATTER?

If it does, then explain why.

On May 30, 12:53*am, Home Guy wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
His bill probably holds the sad tale of a one time excursion
into a higher rate zone that's cost him big time. *I'll bet he
now becomes very aggressive managing his peak load.

I've located some PDF documents that my local utility has on-line.

I have to have a "12-month average demand" equal to or more than 50 kW,
or have a 12-month rolling kwh consumption greater than 150,000 KWhrs in
order to have a demand meter. *150,000 kwhrs divided by 12 is 12,500 kwh
per month, which is about 4 times my average monthly consumption.

So no, I don't think I've experienced any one-time excursion into a
higher rate zone, at least not in terms of being demand-metered (if
indeed there are any other ways of entering a higher rate zone).

Why are we talking about the issue of a demand meter and rates?
From your previous posts, it was clear you were on the path of
attempting to measure KWh usage and verify that it matches the
bill. Now, I don't know what kind of bill the guys suggesting it's
a rate issue have, but on my bill it clearly shows the Kwh actually
used. Any billing at higher rates is then taken care of by adjusting
the rate clearly on the bill.

And weren't those Kwh usage numbers from the bills that you
posted already that we had?

On 5/30/2011 4:51 AM, Robert Green wrote:
....

If their meter is bad or wired to a parasitic load, remotely monitoring a
sub-meter won't help a bit. It seems everyone here is making a lot of
assumptions based on facts not entered into evidence....

Again, this ignores the symptom as posted earlier--over 17 months the
average is reasonably consistent w/ two extreme outliers (which are both
early in separate calendar years).

If the meter were faulty that wouldn't be the kind of error on would
expect; one would expect continuously high (or may getting higher) usage
indication if it's over-metering. Or, the parasitic/stolen load is
intermittent. Or some other effect nobody's thought of.

Yet again, I conjecture the "normal" readings are estimated and the
large ones are an annual "cactchup" to match reality when the meter is
actually physically read again. Certainly not conclusive but there's
bound to be a reason and it's unlikely the OPs simplistic technique is
going to get anywhere in resolving the issue.

As others have said, a physical photocopy of a couple of the monthly
bills (obviously w/ personal data elided) posted at a hosting site would
be quite an interesting exhibit.

A monitoring of what can be will start, but in a complex he'll still
have quite a few loads that can't be on the kill-o-watt meter (sp?); as
far as I know they're only available for single-phase loads and his main
loads likely are the lights/heat/etc that I would presume are 3...

There seems a fixation on this demand meter but
a) don't even know if it is, and
b) even if were, doesn't make any difference other than $$ amounts;
doesn't explain/have anything to do w/ the above usage data that aren't
the billing amounts but the used kwh.

--

On 5/29/2011 11:53 PM, Home Guy wrote:
Robert Green wrote:

His bill probably holds the sad tale of a one time excursion
into a higher rate zone that's cost him big time. ...

I've located some PDF documents that my local utility has on-line.

I have to have a "12-month average demand" equal to or more than 50 kW,
or have a 12-month rolling kwh consumption greater than 150,000 KWhrs in
order to have a demand meter. 150,000 kwhrs divided by 12 is 12,500 kwh
per month, which is about 4 times my average monthly consumption.

So no, I don't think I've experienced any one-time excursion into a
higher rate zone, at least not in terms of being demand-metered (if
indeed there are any other ways of entering a higher rate zone).

OK, there's at least another data point. What does the bill itself say
are the rates just for confirmation that they used the same (or only
fuel factors or other known rate adjustments)?

Again, does the bill actual say every month is a "real" reading or
estimated or averaged/computer-generated one? That should be
discernible as well. That the months that are such obvious outliers are
both early in different calendar years and that the other months are
more or less regular makes me think they aren't reading the meter
physically on the first of every month as you think but are using a
use-estimating/averaging plan w/ the annual catchup that's getting you
because the average isn't high enough for the total annual use.

I'd again ask; does that same trend hold for the other four years or so
since you've had the building? I'm thinking it's a good likelihood it
does. What is the annual _total_ use for each year? Is that pretty
consistent?

Picking up the phone and confirming that would be a start. Sending a
copy of the summary statements that show the anomaly and asking for an
explanation of that would be another step.

The single-month discrepancies don't jibe w/ the other ideas thrown out
imo unless there's a client/renter/interloper who has a one-month-a-year
fetish to run a kiln 24/7 or somesuch large (very) intermittent load.

--

On May 30, 3:14*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Home Guy" wrote in ....
Robert Green wrote:

His bill probably holds the sad tale of a one time excursion
into a higher rate zone that's cost him big time. *I'll bet he
now becomes very aggressive managing his peak load.

I've located some PDF documents that my local utility has on-line.

I have to have a "12-month average demand" equal to or more than 50 kW,
or have a 12-month rolling kwh consumption greater than 150,000 KWhrs in
order to have a demand meter. *150,000 kwhrs divided by 12 is 12,500 kwh
per month, which is about 4 times my average monthly consumption.

So no, I don't think I've experienced any one-time excursion into a
higher rate zone, at least not in terms of being demand-metered (if
indeed there are any other ways of entering a higher rate zone).

I'd agree that according to the documents it's unlikely you have a demand
meter BUT mistakes happen and they may be basing YOUR billing on some
previous occupant of the premises who may have indeed been operating a
business that used far more electricity that you currently use.

Thoroughout this discussion it's been clear that Homeguy has
been talking about KWh from his bills. I don't know what kind
of bills you get, but every bill I've seen shows the METER readings
and then seperates out any rate issues. In other words, they
send you a bill for 1000Kwh at rate 15c and 300 at rate 20c.
I haven't seen one adjusted for peak usage, but it sure would
seem that would be handled on the bill by some obvious
multiplier, like 1.3X, etc.

For what you are suggesting to be behind what
Homeguy is seeing, the meter would have to be taking
all that in to account, instead of giving true Kwh
usage, peak demand, time of use, etc and then
having the billing folks calculate what to do with
it and show it on the bill. And then you would
never see the true Kwh used, which has been
on every electric bill I've ever seen.

Don;t you think Homeguy can read a bill?




Bobby G.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On May 29, 8:23*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Home Guy wrote:

So are you saying that customers with "demand meters" are billed on
the basis of their peak demand - a reading based on only a few
minutes worth of energy usage as seen over an entire billing period?

How is that a fair or equitable way to bill a customer?

Because the cost to generate the electricity is small compared to the cost
to deliver the energy. The cost to deliver the energy, in turn, is
determined by the infrastructure needed (poles, transformers, generation
capability, etc.). A commercial customer with even a short peak demand may
require more infrastructure to support that demand than dozens of
residential customers.

Don;t know how it works where you are, but both the cost
of the energy and the delivery costs, which are seperated
out are significant parts of my bill.

On 5/30/2011 7:34 AM, Home Guy wrote:
....

Now take your foot out of your mouth and explain why such an agressive
policy is needed for a demand meter for such a paltry energy usage.

I did (or at least made a surmise) earlier...

I would presume that it is owing to the intense regulation being imposed
on utilities that almost completely hamstrings them from being able to
expand generation (and of also transmission) capacities or even to keep
existing generation online.

In such a circumstance, anything they can do to provide incentives to
users to level peak demand is a plus.

Or, the other possibility is that it is a condition placed on them by
the State regulators. Certainly it will have been approved by same.

--

" wrote:

Why are we talking about the issue of a demand meter and rates?

Because some people have speculated that I was on a demand meter, and
that degenerated into what the typical (or actual) criteria is for a
utility company to install a demand meter for a given customer.

From your previous posts, it was clear you were on the path of
attempting to measure KWh usage and verify that it matches the
bill.

Yes, that was on friday. Most of this discussion took place over the
weekend, when there was little or no opportunity for new information to
come forward.

Now, I don't know what kind of bill the guys suggesting it's
a rate issue have, but on my bill it clearly shows the Kwh
actually used. Any billing at higher rates is then taken care
of by adjusting the rate clearly on the bill.

Yes. You'd have to take up that issue with those that have been harping
on the possibility that I have a demand meter.

And weren't those Kwh usage numbers from the bills that you
posted already that we had?

Yes, those were the "raw" KwH numbers from previous bills. They include
a 5% "adjustment factor" to cover energy lost to "line loss" - primarily
in the form of heat (heating in supply wires, step-down transformers,
etc) - at least that's how they define it.

The adjustment factor for residential customers is 4.1%, and I believe
for commercial customers it's 5%.

dpb wrote:

Yet again, I conjecture the "normal" readings are estimated and
the large ones are an annual "cactchup" to match reality when the
meter is actually physically read again.

I've stated already that the meter is consistently read by a person on
either the first or second business day of the month. This person must
be escorted to the utility room where the meter is located. About half
the time I do this, and when I don't to it a co-worker does, and I'm
told about it.

Our water meter is read by the same person at the same time.

Since never a single month goes by without a reading, your theory of
estimated billing caused by a missed reading should not apply.

dpb wrote:

Again, does the bill actual say every month is a "real" reading or
estimated or averaged/computer-generated one? That should be
discernible as well.

I will post more info on what a typical bill looks like, and whether or
not I see the word "estimated" anywhere on it.

I do know that the bill is broken down into about 4 or 5 different
energy rates.

IE - the first X kwh is billed at Y cents per kwh, and the next J kwh is
billed at K cents per kwh, etc.

Our residential bills are similarly structured, but they have fewer
tiers (maybe just 2, or 3 at most).

Let me throw this out as a new question:

How are poly-phase (in this case, 3 phase) kwh measurements made?

Is it just the sum of the individual phases, or is it the sum times some
factor (ie square-root of 3) or some such?

In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:

Home Guy, I'll probably take a beating myself for saying this (fish got to
swim, scolds have to scold) but I'm sorry you took such a pounding. It's
uncalled for, especially over an apolitical issue like this.

Uh, to put it bluntly, and accurately, he started it. That's not me
beating on you, or HG, it's just a statement of fact. He posed his
questions and concerns poorly, withheld important information, and
declined to accept repeated reasonable advice from several knowledgeable
responders, insulting them in the process. Usenet doesn't tend to be a
"turn the other cheek" crowd.

dpb wrote:

explain why such an agressive policy is needed for a demand meter
for such a paltry energy usage (2,000 kwh per month)

anything they can do to provide incentives to users to level peak
demand is a plus.

How about a more simple explanation: Creative revenue enhancement?

On 5/30/2011 8:57 AM, Home Guy wrote:
dpb wrote:

Yet again, I conjecture the "normal" readings are estimated and
the large ones are an annual "cactchup" to match reality when the
meter is actually physically read again.

I've stated already that the meter is consistently read by a person on
either the first or second business day of the month. This person must
be escorted to the utility room where the meter is located. About half
the time I do this, and when I don't to it a co-worker does, and I'm
told about it.

Our water meter is read by the same person at the same time.

Since never a single month goes by without a reading, your theory of
estimated billing caused by a missed reading should not apply.

Well, that's first time I've seen it stated that you personally knew the
meter was physically read; previously left the possibility/probability
that the reader did his thing w/o your personal knowledge; only you
presumed it was done.

Do you verify the readings this person takes at the time? Since there's
such a question when the large reading shows up, it would seem only
reasonable to do so.

I can then only go back to the suggestion of ask, ask, ask, for what is
going on. Somehow, something is very different in those particular
months (but I don't think it's the meter itself that is likely the cause).

--

In article , dpb wrote:

Yet again, I conjecture the "normal" readings are estimated and the
large ones are an annual "cactchup" to match reality when the meter is
actually physically read again.

The "level pay plans" that I've heard of and participated in do indeed
have an annual adjustment month, but they don't vary month to month
other than that.

OP did say that a meter reader visits monthly. My guess on the four
identical months is that a meter reading error (of a magnitude
sufficient enough to trigger a red flag) was made, so they used an
average.

HG, to paraphrase John Lennon, "we'd all like to see the bills."

On 5/30/2011 9:13 AM, Smitty Two wrote:
In , wrote:

Yet again, I conjecture the "normal" readings are estimated and the
large ones are an annual "cactchup" to match reality when the meter is
actually physically read again.

The "level pay plans" that I've heard of and participated in do indeed
have an annual adjustment month, but they don't vary month to month
other than that.

The one the church here is on is computer-generated and isn't perfectly
level; the algorithm adjusts for factors such as weather based on a
(very) crude model that uses previous years' records for an adjustment
factor to try to preclude the catch-up from being too far out. Hence,
the monthlies aren't identical. OTOH, the residential level-pay plans
from the same utility in town don't have the adjustment; they are flat.

OP did say that a meter reader visits monthly. My guess on the four
identical months is that a meter reading error (of a magnitude
sufficient enough to trigger a red flag) was made, so they used an
average.

Well, while OP said that early on, it wasn't clear to me that that might
have been his impression as opposed to an actual observation that indeed
a real meter reader did physically read the meter each and every month.
So, I was surmising there could be a difference between actual and
what OP thought was actual.

His later posting indicates the guy actually shows up; it's still
indeterminate what he actually does since we don't have his actions on
youtube to see that he only walks in, scribbles down some random set of
numbers and leaves...


HG, to paraphrase John Lennon, "we'd all like to see the bills."

Indeed.

Still the very large outliers while others are more or less consistent
just reeks of manual correction somewhere. Or, there is a phantom load
that is in use on occasion that OP doesn't know about. It isn't meter
creep or somesuch causing that discrepancy that is so great.

--

On 5/30/2011 9:07 AM, Home Guy wrote:
dpb wrote:

explain why such an agressive policy is needed for a demand meter
for such a paltry energy usage (2,000 kwh per month)

anything they can do to provide incentives to users to level peak
demand is a plus.

How about a more simple explanation: Creative revenue enhancement?

Even simpler: Rate commissions and consumer advocate groups combined w/
environmental and other regulations...

(30+yr commercial utility engineering experience)

--

On May 30, 9:53*am, Home Guy wrote:
" wrote:
Why are we talking about the issue of a demand meter and rates?

Because some people have speculated that I was on a demand meter, and
that degenerated into what the typical (or actual) criteria is for a
utility company to install a demand meter for a given customer.

From your previous posts, it was clear you were on the path of
attempting to measure KWh usage and verify that it matches the
bill.

Yes, that was on friday. *Most of this discussion took place over the
weekend, when there was little or no opportunity for new information to
come forward.

Now, I don't know what kind of bill the guys suggesting it's
a rate issue have, but on my bill it clearly shows the Kwh
actually used. *Any billing at higher rates is then taken care
of by adjusting the rate clearly on the bill.

Yes. *You'd have to take up that issue with those that have been harping
on the possibility that I have a demand meter.

And weren't those Kwh usage numbers from the bills that you
posted already that we had?

Yes, those were the "raw" KwH numbers from previous bills. *They include
a 5% "adjustment factor" to cover energy lost to "line loss" - primarily
in the form of heat (heating in supply wires, step-down transformers,
etc) - at least that's how they define it.

The adjustment factor for residential customers is 4.1%, and I believe
for commercial customers it's 5%.

Good, that confirms what I thought. Just wanted to make
sure I wasn't missing something.

On Mon, 30 May 2011 01:12:58 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

That fact that I've got some high-rated switch gear and primary supply
wire shouldn't play a role in how I'm billed. It's still a basic
3-phase 120/208 supply. Nothing fancy.
Hi,
Is that 3-ph. Delta or Star configured? So many were talking about Pf
and still you talk like that? I resigned, over and out. It may be easier
to tech my cat.

It is wye connected. If it were delta it would be 120/240.

"Home Guy" wrote

Our water meter is read by the same person at the same time.

Since never a single month goes by without a reading, your theory of
estimated billing caused by a missed reading should not apply.

I've never heard of a power company that would give a crap about the water
meter. Is this the same utility? Very unusual in my experience, but
anything is possible.

On May 29, 9:04*pm, Home Guy wrote:

Would you consider, say, 2000 kwh? *Would a single month's total usage
of 2000 kwh qualify a customer for a demand meter? *Would 4 consecutive
months of 2000 kwh be the line-in-the-sand for putting a customer on a
demand meter?

How would you justify the infrastructure costs needed to supply such a
paltry service such that demand metering is needed?

@Home Guy:

Just because you are only using 2,000 kWh a month in your building
is meaningless... Your building is equipped with service entrance
equipment which could supply it with far more power if you were
doing things that needed it...

You clearly do not possess enough information or knowledge to
be of any use describing what service equipment you have installed
in your building... You say you are only using 120/208 3-phase
power, well you have no idea what your building is being supplied
with, it could have a 400-amp 277/480 3-phase supply which would
mean that you are only using one or two sub panels fed by an
on premises transformer...

It is *NOT* the power companies' fault that your building's electrical
facilities are GROSSLY over sized for the current occupancy that
you are using it for... But that is nothing the power company nor
the PUC will ever worry about -- as long as your building is equipped
with the service entrance equipment which has 400-amp capacity
you will never be able to get rid of the "demand meter" even if your
actual power usage is very low at approximately 2,000 kWh a
month...

If it is _that_ important to you to no longer have a "demand meter"
then you can hire an electrician to remove the old electrical service
equipment and install a smaller service in-line with what your
actual power consumption is, but until you have all the old power
panels and service head removed from your building, the power
company WILL NOT install a non-demand meter for your building...

You can ask RBM how much that would cost, depending on the
sq. ft. of the building it can be expensive...

~~ Evan

On May 29, 9:04*pm, Home Guy wrote:

Anyone with a 100 amp, single-phase service that is using their service
at 50% for an entire month would tip the scale at a 4300 kwh bill.
Hardly what I'd call justified for utilizing 50% of the smallest
installable utility service.

@Home Guy:

Get a clue, 100-amp is *NOT* the smallest installable utility
service...
It is for houses and buildings but it is not the smallest size of
electrical
service available...

Traffic signal boxes generally have a 30-amp service and there are
pole
mounted equipment cabinets for cable companies that also have small
services in the way of 30-amp/40-amp single phase...

~~ Evan

On 5/30/2011 12:04 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

"Home Guy" wrote

Our water meter is read by the same person at the same time.

Since never a single month goes by without a reading, your theory of
estimated billing caused by a missed reading should not apply.

I've never heard of a power company that would give a crap about the
water meter. Is this the same utility? Very unusual in my experience,
but anything is possible.

This is likely a contract meter-reading service I'd guess given that.
Altho I've not seen that before, either, seems at least plausible.

Wasn't able to determine who the utility supplier is from previous
postings--I thought he said was in CT; the link to the pdf on the rates
was a Niagara Mohawk pub though who afaik, are limited to NY. So, can't
see whether there is a combined utility in the area or not unless HG
tells us.

--