"harry" wrote in message
...
On Apr 19, 11:16 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Smart meters to save power customers £64 each across Wales, report says -
19 April 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22205299

But surely if that is a £64 overpayment you get it back either as a lump
sum refund or by a £64 reduction in your payments for the next year.
There is *no* £64 overall saving. All you may have lost is the interest
on £64 but at current *savings*, ie not current account, rates that is
about a quid. More fecking spin...

It also mentions the privacy issues that half hourly or even daily
readings raise.

Warning over smart meters privacy risk - 12 June
2012http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

The default should be readings only required for billing purposes. As a
country we have been happy with quarterly readings for a long time... If
people wish to opt in to a higher frequency of reading then that is fine
but only as an opt in. With half hour intervals it would be very clear
when the property is actively occupied.

The bills need to have the reading frequency on them as well, so when you
take over a property you know what you have and can get it changed if
required. I bet there is still a possibilty for the meter to do one thing
and the billing system to think another though.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The real purpose of smart meters is yet to come.
It is as part of a "Smart Grid" that will do lots more including
control of thousands of micro generators.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid


That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ...

Arfa

On Apr 24, 3:27*pm, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...









On Apr 19, 11:16 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Smart meters to save power customers £64 each across Wales, report says -
19 April 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22205299

But surely if that is a £64 overpayment you get it back either as a lump
sum refund or by a £64 reduction in your payments for the next year.
There is *no* £64 overall saving. All you may have lost is the interest
on £64 but at current *savings*, ie not current account, rates that is
about a quid. More fecking spin...

It also mentions the privacy issues that half hourly or even daily
readings raise.

Warning over smart meters privacy risk - 12 June
2012http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

The default should be readings only required for billing purposes. As a
country we have been happy with quarterly readings for a long time... If
people wish to opt in to a higher frequency of reading then that is fine
but only as an opt in. With half hour intervals it would be very clear
when the property is actively occupied.

The bills need to have the reading frequency on them as well, so when you
take over a property you know what you have and can get it changed if
required. I bet there is still a possibilty for the meter to do one thing
and the billing system to think another though.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The real purpose of smart meters is yet to come.
It is as part of a "Smart Grid" that will do lots more including
control of thousands of micro generators.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ...

Arfa

Why don't you thonk a smart grid won't help them do this?

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/04/13 14:13, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:37:06 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

Mike Barnes wrote:
Arfa Daily :
I'm sure that just as much vitriol and bile could be equally
leveled at
most, if not all of the Labour party Prime Ministers of the last 50
years or so
I really don't think so - otherwise it would be.

She was right wing, and the Labour PMs were left wing. The Left wing are
very vocal in opposition, the right wing just get on with it, in
general. A Labour PM has to *really* screw things up before the
opposition get vocal. If Tory PM gets it slightly wrong,there's a whole
industry geared up to get vocal and emotional about it.
Since the vast majority of the press is aligned to the tories, then
it's the other way around.
which planet is this on?



One without the BBC and Daily Mirror, for a start.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Because (a) Snatcher doesn't rhyme with Wilson, and (b) It was mostly
Labour supporters doing the chanting.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:31:50 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Because Thatcher removed it for small children first, in a previous Tory
government.

I think.

--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
My posts (including this one) are my copyright and if @diy_forums on
Twitter wish to tweet them they can pay me £30 a post
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:31:50 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils
True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Because Thatcher removed it for small children first, in a previous Tory
government.

I think.

No, secondary schools lost it first under the Wilson government, then as
a Tory minister before she became party leader, Thatcher removed it from
primary schools in line with stated government policy.

All this is well documented.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 24/04/2013 21:31, Andy Champ wrote:
On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Andy

Most of the rants are from men, I suspect they feel inadequate when
compared to maggie and react in a bad way.

On 24/04/2013 22:08, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:31:50 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Because Thatcher removed it for small children first, in a previous Tory
government.

I think.


You think wrong.

In message , John Williamson
writes
Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:31:50 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils
True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?
Because Thatcher removed it for small children first, in a previous
Tory government.
I think.
No, secondary schools lost it first under the Wilson government, then
as a Tory minister before she became party leader, Thatcher removed it
from primary schools in line with stated government policy.

All this is well documented.


Treasury removed the funding for it whilst Thatcher was education
minister. Arguably she didn't remove it at all.



Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "diy" with "news" and reverse the domain

If you are reading this from a web interface eg DIY Banter,
DIY Forum or Google Groups, please be aware this is NOT a forum, and
you are merely using a web portal to a USENET group. Many people block
posters coming from web portals due to perceieved SPAM or inaneness.
For a better method of access, please see:

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

An ex-girl friend used to say that if women ruled the world it would
be a much better place than now, then MT got in, and that saying was
suddenly heard no more.

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:35:38 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

Most of the rants are from men, I suspect they feel inadequate when
compared to maggie and react in a bad way.

It obviously takes one to know one ...
--
================================================== =======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:13:07 +0100 Mark wrote :
She was right wing, and the Labour PMs were left wing. The Left wing
are very vocal in opposition, the right wing just get on with it, in
general. A Labour PM has to *really* screw things up before the
opposition get vocal. If Tory PM gets it slightly wrong,there's a
whole industry geared up to get vocal and emotional about it.

Since the vast majority of the press is aligned to the tories, then
it's the other way around.

The problem for the Mail/Express segment of the press is that when
Labour is in power they go overboard telling everyone how better things
will be when their lot get back into power. Then when this happens and
things don't change significantly, they just struggle to present a
coherent message. As a detached observer, I just love the way that
Cameron is for ever putting two fingers up to Mail readers - no EU
referendum, no ban on GM foods, gay marriage etc etc.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

On 24/04/13 23:35, Adrian wrote:
In message , John Williamson
writes
Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:31:50 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils
True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?
Because Thatcher removed it for small children first, in a previous
Tory government.
I think.
No, secondary schools lost it first under the Wilson government, then
as a Tory minister before she became party leader, Thatcher removed
it from primary schools in line with stated government policy.

All this is well documented.


Treasury removed the funding for it whilst Thatcher was education
minister. Arguably she didn't remove it at all.



Adrian
void Left_algorithm()
{
int cause,solution, action;
cause=findSomethingWrong(0);
if(cause)
blamePreviousToryGovernment();
else
solution=blameThatcher();
action=0;
taxes++;
return (void)LabourGovernment(action * void);
}


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Apr 24, 3:27 pm, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...









On Apr 19, 11:16 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Smart meters to save power customers £64 each across Wales, report
says -
19 April 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22205299

But surely if that is a £64 overpayment you get it back either as a
lump
sum refund or by a £64 reduction in your payments for the next year.
There is *no* £64 overall saving. All you may have lost is the
interest
on £64 but at current *savings*, ie not current account, rates that is
about a quid. More fecking spin...

It also mentions the privacy issues that half hourly or even daily
readings raise.

Warning over smart meters privacy risk - 12 June
2012http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

The default should be readings only required for billing purposes. As
a
country we have been happy with quarterly readings for a long time...
If
people wish to opt in to a higher frequency of reading then that is
fine
but only as an opt in. With half hour intervals it would be very clear
when the property is actively occupied.

The bills need to have the reading frequency on them as well, so when
you
take over a property you know what you have and can get it changed if
required. I bet there is still a possibilty for the meter to do one
thing
and the billing system to think another though.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The real purpose of smart meters is yet to come.
It is as part of a "Smart Grid" that will do lots more including
control of thousands of micro generators.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge
equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ...

Arfa

Why don't you thonk a smart grid won't help them do this?


It might, but I think that the initial investment to make it happen, would
not sit well with the shareholders

Arfa

On Apr 24, 9:36*pm, Huge wrote:
On 2013-04-24, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.

So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Because people are stupid?

You mean socialists are stupid?

On Apr 25, 12:24*am, Tony Bryer wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:13:07 +0100 Mark wrote :

She was right wing, and the Labour PMs were left wing. The Left wing
are very vocal in opposition, the right wing just get on with it, in
general. A Labour PM has to *really* screw things up before the
opposition get vocal. If *Tory PM gets it slightly wrong,there's a
whole industry geared up to get vocal and emotional about it.

Since the vast majority of the press is aligned to the tories, then
it's the other way around.

The problem for the Mail/Express segment of the press is that when
Labour is in power they go overboard telling everyone how better things
will be when their lot get back into power. Then when this happens and
things don't change significantly, they just struggle to present a
coherent message. As a detached observer, I just love the way that
Cameron is for ever putting two fingers up to Mail readers - no EU
referendum, no ban on GM foods, gay marriage etc etc.


True.
He will pay for it.
Just watch the coming local elections.

On Apr 25, 1:56*am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...









On Apr 24, 3:27 pm, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

....

On Apr 19, 11:16 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Smart meters to save power customers £64 each across Wales, report
says -
19 April 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22205299

But surely if that is a £64 overpayment you get it back either as a
lump
sum refund or by a £64 reduction in your payments for the next year.
There is *no* £64 overall saving. All you may have lost is the
interest
on £64 but at current *savings*, ie not current account, rates that is
about a quid. More fecking spin...

It also mentions the privacy issues that half hourly or even daily
readings raise.

Warning over smart meters privacy risk - 12 June
2012http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

The default should be readings only required for billing purposes. As
a
country we have been happy with quarterly readings for a long time....
If
people wish to opt in to a higher frequency of reading then that is
fine
but only as an opt in. With half hour intervals it would be very clear
when the property is actively occupied.

The bills need to have the reading frequency on them as well, so when
you
take over a property you know what you have and can get it changed if
required. I bet there is still a possibilty for the meter to do one
thing
and the billing system to think another though.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The real purpose of smart meters is yet to come.
It is as part of a "Smart Grid" that will do lots more including
control of thousands of micro generators.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge
equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ...

Arfa

Why don't you thonk a smart grid won't help them do this?

It might, but I think that the initial investment to make it happen, would
not sit well with the shareholders

Arfa

The expensive bit is being done right now (installing the smart
meters). The smart grid is just a matter of co-ordinating them. It
could probably be done with a PC sized computer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_g...twork_topology

On 25/04/2013 07:34, harry wrote:
On Apr 25, 1:56 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...









On Apr 24, 3:27 pm, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

....

On Apr 19, 11:16 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Smart meters to save power customers £64 each across Wales, report
says -
19 April 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22205299

But surely if that is a £64 overpayment you get it back either as a
lump
sum refund or by a £64 reduction in your payments for the next year.
There is *no* £64 overall saving. All you may have lost is the
interest
on £64 but at current *savings*, ie not current account, rates that is
about a quid. More fecking spin...

It also mentions the privacy issues that half hourly or even daily
readings raise.

Warning over smart meters privacy risk - 12 June
2012http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

The default should be readings only required for billing purposes. As
a
country we have been happy with quarterly readings for a long time....
If
people wish to opt in to a higher frequency of reading then that is
fine
but only as an opt in. With half hour intervals it would be very clear
when the property is actively occupied.

The bills need to have the reading frequency on them as well, so when
you
take over a property you know what you have and can get it changed if
required. I bet there is still a possibilty for the meter to do one
thing
and the billing system to think another though.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The real purpose of smart meters is yet to come.
It is as part of a "Smart Grid" that will do lots more including
control of thousands of micro generators.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge
equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ...

Arfa

Why don't you thonk a smart grid won't help them do this?

It might, but I think that the initial investment to make it happen, would
not sit well with the shareholders

Arfa

The expensive bit is being done right now (installing the smart
meters). The smart grid is just a matter of co-ordinating them. It
could probably be done with a PC sized computer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_g...twork_topology

What a bizarre way of expressing computing power!

How many Galaxy S4s (to take one current, fairly powerful-for-its-size
generally marketed computer) in one old-style tower case (to take one
idea of PC sized)?

--
Rod

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 23:34:33 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

The expensive bit is being done right now (installing the smart
meters). The smart grid is just a matter of co-ordinating them.

It's the latter bit that is a major stumbling block. There isn't, or
wasn't, an agreed national standard for the protocols that the Smart
Meters use to communicate.

And how do you "control" a windmill or PV system? You can't make the wind
blow or the sunshine...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 25/04/13 11:28, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 23:34:33 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

The expensive bit is being done right now (installing the smart
meters). The smart grid is just a matter of co-ordinating them.
It's the latter bit that is a major stumbling block. There isn't, or
wasn't, an agreed national standard for the protocols that the Smart
Meters use to communicate.

And how do you "control" a windmill or PV system? You can't make the wind
blow or the sunshine...

exactly. So you control the population's electricity, instead.

working plebs will be subject to random powercuts. Only those in the
Party, or with Special Needs (i.e. on benefits) will have electricity on
dark cold windless winter nights..



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:52:38 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ...


Why don't you thonk a smart grid won't help them do this?

Dispatch of some generation to support systemn frequnecy already takes place by
a similar mechanism to smart metering, but it is generation, in the order of
100KW upwards, a typical domestic microgenerator is not deemed important enough
to permit such a relationship between the Grid System Operator and the operator
of the generation. There is zero possibility of National Grid getting involved
in mass dispatch of microgeneration.

Smart metering requires a relationship between an infrastructure supplier and
the customer. The infrastructure supplier is, in a great many cases in the UK,
not a generator or distributor of electricity. In a nationalised or vertically
integrated utility, with large air conditioning or resistive heating load then
smart metering could work, in the free for all 'wild west' deregulated UK market
with very little electrical resistance heating it makes no sense for anyone to
get involved. Never let it be understood the free market is broken, there is no
obligation to supply, there is no incentive to invest long term in significant
areas in the UK energy sector. (the root causes are well known)

The most significant feature of smart metering is demand management. This
works, and has worked for many years, mainly, but not exclusively with
industrial and commercial users. The electricity distributor can achieve much
more for far less by targeting industrial and commercial users rather than
domestic consumers.

Extending demand management to consumer level requires the split of loads within
a property between essentials and interruptible's (unless we adopt 'smart,
individually addressable mains plugs). This is on top of the smart meter and
the infrastructure to support that. The infrastructure to support
disconnections using power line carrier techniques from the local distribution
point (3.3/6.6/11kV) was actually trialled many years ago, to do so now is very
prone to failure due to the widespread use of unlicenced homeplug devices that
do not meet any standards for interference and immunity. So you are stuck with
2G or 3G wireless comms, fixed line telephony, or a broadband connection for the
delivery of your disconnect and reconnect requests. Fixed infrastructure is
probably more reliable.

To implement smart metering in a new property might only cost around £100 on top
of the cost of the meter (an additional one or two none essential rings or
radials) To implement this on the existing housing stock could be anything from
5x that cost to the cost of a complete rewire which could be many thousands in
both the cost and remedial works.

Given the amount of housing stock replaced each year, and the timeframe of full
refurbishments then it's not going to happen.

Fundamentally it boils down to the fact that an investment in smart metering,
that is at around 100% of the retail cost of electricity consumed per annum,
that has the ability to trim demand by only a few % maybe twice per day for 30
minutes per day makes no commercial sense. The payback period is almost
certainly longer than the asset life of very longest lived assets on the
existing electricity grid.

If someone can afford to implement smart metering then they can make more money
from building a wind turbine or a CCGT.


--

On Apr 25, 7:34*am, harry wrote:
On Apr 25, 1:56*am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:









"harry" wrote in message

...

On Apr 24, 3:27 pm, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...

On Apr 19, 11:16 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Smart meters to save power customers £64 each across Wales, report
says -
19 April 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22205299

But surely if that is a £64 overpayment you get it back either as a
lump
sum refund or by a £64 reduction in your payments for the next year.
There is *no* £64 overall saving. All you may have lost is the
interest
on £64 but at current *savings*, ie not current account, rates that is
about a quid. More fecking spin...

It also mentions the privacy issues that half hourly or even daily
readings raise.

Warning over smart meters privacy risk - 12 June
2012http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18407340

The default should be readings only required for billing purposes.. As
a
country we have been happy with quarterly readings for a long time...
If
people wish to opt in to a higher frequency of reading then that is
fine
but only as an opt in. With half hour intervals it would be very clear
when the property is actively occupied.

The bills need to have the reading frequency on them as well, so when
you
take over a property you know what you have and can get it changed if
required. I bet there is still a possibilty for the meter to do one
thing
and the billing system to think another though.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The real purpose of smart meters is yet to come.
It is as part of a "Smart Grid" that will do lots more including
control of thousands of micro generators.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

That would require some part of the supply industry to make huge
equipment
and infrastructure investments from their profits. Whilst they are being
left alone to fleece the public and trouser huge wads of cash for their
shareholders, as they are currently, that ain't never gonna happen ....

Arfa

Why don't you thonk a smart grid won't help them do this?

It might, but I think that the initial investment to make it happen, would
not sit well with the shareholders

Arfa

The expensive bit is being done right now (installing the smart
meters). The smart grid is just a matter of co-ordinating them.

Grid balancing is the really hard bit, not "just a matter of...".

MBQ

On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:46:58 AM UTC+1, Arfa Daily wrote:
"The Other Mike" wrote in message

...

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 15:33:46 +0100, "Arfa Daily"

wrote:



Do I infer from the above that you didn't really take to Mrs T and her

government, then ... ? d;-)



You could, not sure how you worked it out.



I'm psychic ...







Brewing up improved ice cream in the lab is by far the absolute pinnacle

of her

career. After that it was all downhill. If it had been an animal it would

have

been double bagged and chucked in a canal at birth.



Stalin and Pol Pol were IMHO more acceptable leaders of their countries

and did

less long term damage than that, from the grave, the Bitch Thatcher,

continues

to inflict on this country .







Awww. Now you're starting to sound all nostalgic about her ...



I hope now that she's dead, people will finally move on and get over it.

I doubt they will, the problem is thatcherism still exists just like nazism does.


I'm

sure that just as much vitriol and bile could be equally leveled at most, if

not all of the Labour party Prime Ministers of the last 50 years or so

Not that I know of but those that I know hated thatcher also hated blair, but then again on closer inspection I found they hated thatchers polices more than the person but I can;t say the same about blair.
At least we knew what thatcher stood for.....

One day we'll stop hating Hitler too ;-)

On 25/04/2013 12:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

exactly. So you control the population's electricity, instead.

working plebs will be subject to random powercuts. Only those in the
Party, or with Special Needs (i.e. on benefits) will have electricity on
dark cold windless winter nights..




The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 05:50:44 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:
those that I know hated thatcher also hated blair, but then again on closer inspection I found they hated thatchers polices more than the person but I can;t say the same about blair.
At least we knew what thatcher stood for.....

One day we'll stop hating Hitler too ;-)

Hitler was a pussycat compared to Thatcher.. and did considerably less damage to
the economy of the UK.

--

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

Just work out how long the compressor on a freezer runs for in a typical day,
and its rating and you should realise your statement is complete ********. The
case for smart metering in a country that doesn't widely use aircon or resistive
heating in domestic premises is a none starter.

Take a typical modern A++ rated upright fridge freezer, 230kWh per annum

Centrally heated house at a constant temperature so assume that is a 0.63kWh per
day

Assume it runs for just one hour per day rather than 24 hour running at a circa
25W load

So that is a flat load of 630W for 60 minutes

Assume 24 million households have the same spec fridge freezer

Roughly one million fridge freezers will each be running for one hour per day
coinciding with time of peak demand

That is around 630MW of load control for one hour at a time of peak demand, on a
typical peak system loading of 60GW

So does someone (**** knows who) speculatively invest in 24 million
installations of smart meters costing around 10 billion pounds to save the cost
of one hour of 630MW of demand (assume GBP 200* / MWh every day - or GBP 46
milllion per annum... a payback time without allowing for any cost of capital of
over 200 years.

* it is often (GBP 30 - 40, the last 4 days range from GBP 53 - 134)

....or do they install say 100 load control schemes at large industrial and
commercial users, where the user, by virtue of their electricity demands are
fully incentivised to 100% fund the installation themselves by reducing or
eliminating peak demand charges, where the installation costs them only a few
thousand pounds to implement (with a guaranteed payback period of say five
years) and where the existing infrastructure to support this load reduction
mechanism has been proven over a number of decades to reliably reduce peak
system load as and when required, even during a system disturbance away from
system peak.

Smart meters for load control for domestic consumers make no sense at all, they
make no sense for microgeneration dispatch either. They are a technology without
any sensible application area in the UK. No doubt FoE and Greenpeace and
assorted green coloured ****wits will think they are wonderful.

--

On 25/04/13 22:53, The Other Mike wrote:
Smart meters for load control for domestic consumers make no sense at
all, they make no sense for microgeneration dispatch either. They are
a technology without any sensible application area in the UK. No doubt
FoE and Greenpeace and assorted green coloured ****wits will think
they are wonderful.

indeed. Margaret Thatcher would never have allowed them.

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily
bypass?

And I doubt that turning freezers off would make that much difference
anyway they aren't running most of the time and when they are it's not
very much maybe 150 W per freezer. You'd probably get a better result
turning off large screen tellies.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Manifest ********, we may still be suffering the effects of botched
Thatcherite privatisations, but we only comparatively recently
finished paying off the WW2 debts to the US caused by Hitler.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:38:50 +0100, The Other Mike
wrote:

Hitler was a pussycat compared to Thatcher.. and did considerably less damage to
the economy of the UK.
--
================================================== =======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

On Apr 25, 9:38*pm, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 05:50:44 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

those that I know hated thatcher also hated blair, but then again on closer inspection I found they hated thatchers polices more than the person but I can;t say the same about blair.
At least we knew what thatcher stood for.....

One day we'll stop hating Hitler too ;-)

Hitler was a pussycat compared to Thatcher.. and did considerably less damage to
the economy of the UK.

--

You ARE in cloud cuckooland.

On Apr 25, 10:53*pm, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, "dennis@home"

wrote:
The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

Just work out how long the compressor on a freezer runs for in a typical day,
and its rating and you should realise your statement is complete ********.. *The
case for smart metering in a country that doesn't widely use aircon or resistive
heating in domestic premises is a none starter.

Take a typical modern A++ rated upright fridge freezer, 230kWh per annum

Centrally heated house at a constant temperature so assume that is a 0.63kWh per
day

Assume it runs for just one hour per day rather than 24 hour running at a circa
25W load

So that is a flat load of 630W for 60 minutes

Assume 24 million households have the same spec fridge freezer

Roughly one million fridge freezers will each be running for one hour per day
coinciding with time of peak demand

That is around 630MW of load control for one hour at a time of peak demand, on a
typical peak system loading of 60GW

So does someone (**** knows who) speculatively invest in 24 million
installations of smart meters costing around 10 billion pounds to save the cost
of one hour of 630MW of demand (assume GBP 200* / MWh every day - *or GBP 46
milllion per annum... a payback time without allowing for any cost of capital of
over 200 years.

* it is often (GBP 30 - 40, the last 4 days range from GBP 53 - 134)

...or do they install say 100 load control schemes at large industrial and
commercial users, where the user, by virtue of their electricity demands are
fully incentivised to 100% fund the installation themselves by reducing or
eliminating peak demand charges, where the installation costs them only a few
thousand pounds to implement (with a guaranteed payback period of say five
years) and where the existing infrastructure to support this load reduction
mechanism has been proven over a number of decades to reliably reduce peak
system load as and when required, even during a system disturbance away from
system peak.

Smart meters for load control for domestic consumers make no sense at all, they
make no sense for microgeneration dispatch either. They are a technology without
any sensible application area in the UK. * *No doubt FoE and Greenpeace and
assorted green coloured ****wits will think they are wonderful.

--

If you're going to install a smart meter anyway, there is no addtional
cost.
There is lots of other stuff that could be controlled.
Washing machines.
Water heaters.
Space heaters.
Heat pumps.
I would forsee this sort of stuff being wired on a separate circuit.



Also there is power exporting stuff to be considered.

There will be no gas supply to future houses, they will use heat
pumps.
This alone will be a massive saving.

On Apr 25, 11:56*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily
bypass?

And I doubt that turning freezers off would make that much difference
anyway they aren't running most of the time and when they are it's not
very much maybe 150 W per freezer. You'd probably get a better result
turning off large screen tellies.

--
Cheers
Dave.

You do it with money. Electricity at peak times will be much more
expensive.

On Apr 25, 11:56*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily
bypass?

And I doubt that turning freezers off would make that much difference
anyway they aren't running most of the time and when they are it's not
very much maybe 150 W per freezer. You'd probably get a better result
turning off large screen tellies.


The biggest electricity user in my house is indeed the TV (390w)

Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily
bypass?

The answer is money - you simply have to move to a pricing model
that gives the user an incentive for using the facility.

In a similar way to peak charging for industrial premises - most
that I have visited have pretty strong internal controls managing
compliance.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

In article om,
"dennis@home" wrote:

Most of the rants are from men, I suspect they feel inadequate when
compared to maggie and react in a bad way.

Ha. Ha.

"Real" men are not strident, opinionated, egotistical bullies who insist
on getting their own way, right or wrong.

Though I'd accept that inadequate men may have admired Thatcher. (That's
usually the way that such people do get their own way: they're
surrounded by inadequates, and have a good press officer.)

John

On 25/04/2013 23:56, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily
bypass?

The ones that were trialled used RF switching so most people wouldn't
know how to bypass it, and why would they want to bypass it anyway?


And I doubt that turning freezers off would make that much difference
anyway they aren't running most of the time and when they are it's not
very much maybe 150 W per freezer. You'd probably get a better result
turning off large screen tellies.


A few hundred megawatts could help stabilise the grid when set off
against the wind turbines.

Anyway smart meters are useful as they don't need to send a meter reader
out as often, combine that with the need to replace all the meters
anyway and it makes sense even if you don't use the smart bits.

On 26/04/2013 06:58, harry wrote:
On Apr 25, 11:56 pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
The idea is to control smart appliances..

for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million
freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.

So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily
bypass?

And I doubt that turning freezers off would make that much difference
anyway they aren't running most of the time and when they are it's not
very much maybe 150 W per freezer. You'd probably get a better result
turning off large screen tellies.


The biggest electricity user in my house is indeed the TV (390w)


Are you using it for space heating?
Mine is 39 watts.

On Friday, April 26, 2013 1:26:04 PM UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/04/2013 06:58, harry wrote:

On Apr 25, 11:56 pm, "Dave Liquorice"

wrote:

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:29:25 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

The idea is to control smart appliances..



for instance you can smooth the peaks by turning off a few million

freezers and it won't affect the contents at all.



So how do you *actually* do that in a manner that the user can't easily

bypass?



And I doubt that turning freezers off would make that much difference

anyway they aren't running most of the time and when they are it's not

very much maybe 150 W per freezer. You'd probably get a better result

turning off large screen tellies.





The biggest electricity user in my house is indeed the TV (390w)





Are you using it for space heating?

Mine is 39 watts.

I'd say he has a 42" plasma ......at a guess a panasonic ;-)

my 28" sony CRT is 95W

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:31:50 +0100, Andy Champ wrote:

On 24/04/2013 14:18, Java Jive wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:09:41 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

He snatched the school milk from secondary school pupils

True, but we all know who removed it for even younger children.


So why do we remember chants and protests in the street for the person
who finished the job, but not for the person who started it?

Because milk is an important source of Calcium, in a country where the diet was
shown to be deficient in Calcium across most social sectors and where uptake is
known to be much more effective the younger you are. In the older age group,
removal of the milk made some difference, but nowhere near as much as in the
younger age group. The legacy of Thatcher and her milk snatching will become
more apparent in the coming years as that age group affected by her **** you
attitude encounters increasing cases of osteoporosis that was almost entirely
preventable.

The harm that Thatcher caused this country was immense and it continues to
permeate almost every aspect of our country today. She should have been
swinging from the gallows for treason decades ago.

--

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 02:51:15 +0100, Java Jive wrote:

Manifest ********, we may still be suffering the effects of botched
Thatcherite privatisations, but we only comparatively recently
finished paying off the WW2 debts to the US caused by Hitler.

It took 50 years or so paying off war debts. Thatchers legacy will be impacting
this country for centuries.

P.S. stop top posting you ****ing imbecile


--