Blondie Massage Spa

Smart Meters. The Latest Liberal Boondoggle...

GameBoy27

Well-known member
Nov 23, 2004
12,658
2,537
113
Then again, I'm not surprised by anything this Government does.

Ontario’s $2 billion smart meter program for hydro utilities has delivered few benefits for the hefty cost, says Ontario’s auditor-general Bonnie Lysyk.

In fact, one in six of the 4.8 million meters have not yet transmitted any readings, she found.

And Lysyk took the occasion of her probe of the smart meter program to take a roundhouse swipe at energy bureaucrats for plunging into the system without proper planning, and making it impossible for consumers to understands their rising hydro bills.

Lysyk took a special jab at Hydro One, which she said incurred about 50 per cent of the cost of the smart meter program — but installed only 25 per cent of the meters.

Smart meters allow utilities to charge different prices at different times of day, a function that’s supposed to encourage conservation, especially at peak times when the system is under stress.

But Lysyk said the pricing system has had only “a modest impact on reducing peak demand” among householders and “no impact at all on energy conservation.”

Among her findings:

- Smart meters were supposed to cost $1 billion. In fact, the total cost will be double that amount.

- The energy ministry grossly over-estimated the benefits of the smart meter program. It figured the benefit would be $600 million over 15 years. But it forgot to include a yearly inflationary increase of $50 million. That reduces the net benefit of the huge project to $88 million over 15 years.

- The cost of smart meters varied wildly among Ontario’s 73 local utilities, which paid from a low of $88 per meter to a high of $544.

- Energy bureaucrats have bamboozled consumers for years by hiding the true costs of energy in a catch-all fee called the “global adjustment” that now makes up the majority of the cost of energy.

Lysyk said that neither the energy ministry nor the Ontario Energy Board — which is supposed to protect ratepayers — did a cost-benefit analysis of smart meters before plunging ahead with the program, first estimated in 2005 to cost $1 billion.

“Given the large scale of smart metering and the high risk associated with new technology, its implementation should have warranted strong governance and oversight,” Lysyk wrote.

The initial cost-benefit estimate — which proved wildly inaccurate — was performed only after the energy board had approved its implementation plan.

Costs continued to rise after the initial $1 billion estimate. They stood at $1.4 billion by the end of 2013, Lysyk reports.

In addition, the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) — which operates the Ontario power grid minute by minute — spent $249 million on a provincial data centre to collect the torrent of information that flows out of smart meters.

The cost is billed to ratepayers.

But Lysyk found that, in many instances the quarter-billion-dollar centre duplicates the data collected by many utilities. (The IESO responds that it has “exclusive authority” over the function performed by the centre.)

After all that expense, did smart meters produce savings? Lysyk was hard put to find them.

Smart meters send in data by electronic signal, so meter readers are no longer required. But Lysyk said that only 5 per cent of utilities reported savings. The others said their costs were the same, or higher.

Nor did the meters do much for consumers, Lysyk found. The province claims the meters and time-of-use pricing should help customers save money, and lower stress on the system during peak demand periods.

When peak demand is reduced, there’s less need to build expensive generating stations that operate for only a few hours a day, and stand idle the rest of the time.

Those benefits have not materialized, Lysyk said.

For one thing, she said, the difference between peak and off-peak rates hasn’t been large enough to encourage consumers to change behaviour patterns. In fact, over the years, the difference has narrowed, providing less and less incentive to cut back during peak demand.

Earlier in the day, energy minister Bob Chiarelli had stood by smart meters. “Studies have shown people are saving money with smart meters,” he insisted in the Legislature.

But Lysyk wrote that it’s difficult for customers to even understand their bills.

Most power generators are laid not through a visible market, but through contracts with a set price schedule.

The cost of all those contracts is now rolled into a single, opaque ball and charged back to customers through a fee called the “global adjustment” that now makes up about 70 per cent of the energy charge on hydro bills.

Consumers will pay $50 billion in global adjustment fees in the period 2006 to 2015, Lysyk estimates.

How much is that? It would cover the 2014 provincial deficit five times.

Lysyk also slams the province for increasing the supply of electricity beyond what the province needs.

Ontario has always exported some power, but exports grew 158 per cent between 2006 to 2013.

The problem is that the electricity is usually sold at a steep loss: “The total cost of producing the exported power was about $2.6 billion more than the revenue Ontario received from exporting that power.”

The losses are made up for by Ontario ratepayers through the global adjustment fee.

Lysyk didn’t save all her criticism for electricity.

She also criticized the Ontario Energy Board for failing to monitor gas utilities as closely as it should.

The utilities, which are paid to deliver natural gas to their customers, are not supposed to profit on the commodity cost of the gas. They are simply supposed to pass on what it cost to buy from producers.

On the whole, Lysyk found, consumer gas prices are in line with commodity costs.

But she found that energy board staff rely almost entirely on the gas utilities for their version of what the commodity cost is: “Board staff seldom obtained source documents to verify the information.”

Complaints against gas marketers who sell fixed-price natural gas contracts declined by 81 per cent from 2009 to 2013, Lysyk found.

But she said the energy board could do more to help consumers by providing rate information from the various gas providers on its website.
http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/12/09/smart_meters_have_few_benefits_for_big_costs_ag_report.html
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
When the cottage hydro bill's energy component is 1/3 or 1/4 of the total bill (the other part is for 'delivery'), the system is fucked. What a scam.
 

John Henry

Active member
Apr 10, 2011
1,298
2
38
They didn't get my vote either but the Liberals got back in with a majority . Fancy that . This is what happens when people run away from the truth and they believe the bull that some parties like to deliver during an election . Thank you people of Toronto . Well done

With all of the scandals that the Liberals had and they got a majority ??? Goes to show you how many ignorant people there are these days .
 

UMustang

Member
Jan 16, 2004
267
0
16
So I come at this with a bit of knowledge given that I've worked in the industry, and on some of the projects that have been mentioned in the article.

Remember that smart meters were introduced in 2004/2005. The province had just been through deregulation and the blackout. There were threats of brown outs because of peak power consumption during the day. The problem in the province was demand, not supply. The Liberals had a promise to bring coal offline (which they EVENTUALLY did in 2011, 4 years late), which just made things worse. Bringing in a method whereby you could help curb peak demand made a lot of sense. It was being done in other jurisdictions where they had done the business case and it made a lot of sense.

Then the recession hit.

Manufacturing takes a nose dive, and with it does electricity consumption. All of a sudden, peak demand drops and we no longer have a demand issue; we have a supply issue. We have too much electricity! And it's not like we can turn the tap off. Most of our electricity comes from nukes and hydroelectric plants, both of which you don't want to take off line. Without the threats of brown outs and skyrocketing hydro bills (yes, it could be worse than it is now), why does a consumer want to use less? Hell, you really want them to use MORE so we're not selling electricity to the US at cut rate prices!

With respect to the IESO, they have jurisdiction over data validation and billing amounts, nothing else. Utility collects the data, sends it to the IESO, they make sure the data makes sense, bundles it up into time of use periods, and send it back for the utility to bill with.

But that's not the entire scope of smart meters.

With smart meters you can do so much more, given you have a ton of data AND the meters have additional functionality (such as notification of outages and remote disconnect/reconnect). Oddly enough, the auditor general overlooks those benefits of the smart meters.The problem is that the IESO's system is so limited in scope that the utilities are more or less forced to build their own duplicate system to get the most out of the smart meters! They're not supposed to get rate recovery for their systems, but I'm sure that they have found a way to do so in their filings.

Anyways, thought I would share
 

elmo

Registered User
Oct 23, 2002
4,722
4
0
here and there
So I come at this with a bit of knowledge given that I've worked in the industry, and on some of the projects that have been mentioned in the article.

Remember that smart meters were introduced in 2004/2005. The province had just been through deregulation and the blackout. There were threats of brown outs because of peak power consumption during the day. The problem in the province was demand, not supply. The Liberals had a promise to bring coal offline (which they EVENTUALLY did in 2011, 4 years late), which just made things worse. Bringing in a method whereby you could help curb peak demand made a lot of sense. It was being done in other jurisdictions where they had done the business case and it made a lot of sense.

Then the recession hit.

Manufacturing takes a nose dive, and with it does electricity consumption. All of a sudden, peak demand drops and we no longer have a demand issue; we have a supply issue. We have too much electricity! And it's not like we can turn the tap off. Most of our electricity comes from nukes and hydroelectric plants, both of which you don't want to take off line. Without the threats of brown outs and skyrocketing hydro bills (yes, it could be worse than it is now), why does a consumer want to use less? Hell, you really want them to use MORE so we're not selling electricity to the US at cut rate prices!

With respect to the IESO, they have jurisdiction over data validation and billing amounts, nothing else. Utility collects the data, sends it to the IESO, they make sure the data makes sense, bundles it up into time of use periods, and send it back for the utility to bill with.

But that's not the entire scope of smart meters.

With smart meters you can do so much more, given you have a ton of data AND the meters have additional functionality (such as notification of outages and remote disconnect/reconnect). Oddly enough, the auditor general overlooks those benefits of the smart meters.The problem is that the IESO's system is so limited in scope that the utilities are more or less forced to build their own duplicate system to get the most out of the smart meters! They're not supposed to get rate recovery for their systems, but I'm sure that they have found a way to do so in their filings.

Anyways, thought I would share
Thanks for the info. All works in theory, except that 1 in 6 installed meters are not transmitting, only 25% of the meters are installed and they are double the 1 billion dollar budget. The problem isn't the smart meters, the problem is this completely incompetent government. If they didn't manage to waste a billion on every project it would be comical. What was the line after the gas plant cancellations - something about it only being a cup of coffee a day or some shit? We can't drink that much coffee, out teeth will start to float.
 

GameBoy27

Well-known member
Nov 23, 2004
12,658
2,537
113
Thanks for the info. All works in theory, except that 1 in 6 installed meters are not transmitting, only 25% of the meters are installed and they are double the 1 billion dollar budget. The problem isn't the smart meters, the problem is this completely incompetent government. If they didn't manage to waste a billion on every project it would be comical. What was the line after the gas plant cancellations - something about it only being a cup of coffee a day or some shit? We can't drink that much coffee, out teeth will start to float.
You want more evidence of wasted tax dollars. Check out what's happened with the Debt Retirement Charge (DRC).

TORONTO - It’s that annoying, pesky line on your hydro bill.

“Debt Retirement Charge.”

Of all the e-mails I get, the most frequent and the most frustrated are about the hefty charge the DRC adds to your bill.

Homeowners, especially seniors and others on a fixed income, are angry.

They’re feeling it all the more as this brutal winter pushes heating costs to the stratosphere.

Many seniors bought their homes in the 1960s and ’70s, when the old Ontario Hydro told them to “Live better electrically.”

They heated their homes with hydro, thinking the low rates would continue forever.

Now they’re paying soaring prices, soaring taxes — and the infuriating DRC. You pay HST on top of the DRC.

The DRC came about as a result of the “stranded debt,” created when the old Ontario Hydro was split up into separate entities by the Mike Harris government.

In 1999, after a succession of bad decisions by governments of all stripes, the giant utility was in the red. The DRC was supposed to pay that down. But now it has been 15 years since the DRC kicked in.

Shouldn’t it be paid off by now — given that every hydro ratepayer in the province is dinged a significant amount of money on every hydro bill?

Well, no. It’s not paid off.

In fact, the Liberals quietly added $4 billion to it.

“Back in 2009, there was $4 billion added by the government that they didn’t reveal until after the 2011 budget,” says Tory finance critic Vic Fedeli.

The 2009, 2010 and 2011 financial statements show the debt to be low, but after that the Liberal government added $4 billion to the debt, he says.

“They borrowed against it for non-hydro use, and that’s why there’s still a debt,” Fedeli told me Tuesday.

“They used it as a piggy bank to borrow from.

“The most evil thing about it was that they didn’t disclose that until years later and retroactively put it in the annual report,” he said.

The DRC is applied at a rate of 0.7 cents per kilowatt hour.

I asked Finance Minister Charles Sousa if hydro ratepayers can expect to see a break in the DRC in the next budget.

“We’re making that repayment and we’ll outline in the current budget how that’s going to proceed,” he told me.

“I will refer to the budget when it’s released in terms of some of the initiatives that are being brought forward, including price mitigation and initiatives around energy sustainability and the integrity of our energy supply and the investments we are making to support a vibrant industry.

“And we have to be competitive,” Sousa said.

Sounds like a whole heapin’ helpin’ of bafflegab to me.

Then again, I’m way too cynical these days.

In his 2011 report, then-auditor general Jim McCarter noted that the original amount of debt the DRC was intended to pay off was $7.8 billion, yet there was still a balance, even though the government had collected $8.7 billion by March 31, 2011.

McCarter’s successor, Bonnie Lysyk, said last year that the amount collected has grown to $10.6 billion as of 2013 — even though the government claims there’s still $3.9 billion owing.

So, if you have a $7.8-billion debt and you collect $10.6 billion to pay it off, shouldn’t it be gone by now?

The DRC raises close to $1 billion a year in annual revenue.

It was initially planned to be paid off by 2012. The Liberals pushed that back to between 2015 and 2018.

It wasn’t supposed to be a permanent tax and was supposed to be dropped when the debt was paid off.

I think we’ve paid that off — big time.

It has to go — now.
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/25/hydro-debt-retirement-charge-has-to-go
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,490
11
38
When the cottage hydro bill's energy component is 1/3 or 1/4 of the total bill (the other part is for 'delivery'), the system is fucked. What a scam.
If you were talking city delivery I'd be with you, but isolated rural installations in sparsely populated areas are precisely those where you'd excpect to see high costs for running and maintaining wires long distances over rough terrain.
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,032
3,879
113
To my line of thinking (when they first installed the damn things) was that the whole thing was a cash grab.

No-one knows (or cares) what the 3 time frames are for the three types of billing. In the summer, you've got one set of time frames, and in the winter, a different set of time frames. In the summer, it's all about getting maximum bucks for AC use (so day time is peak time) and in the winter (when there are no AC units running), now all of a sudden peak time is evenings (when people come home from work and want to cook dinner)

They should have just adopted the new styled metres with newly constructed homes and let attrition take care of the rest.
 

Frosty

Active member
Sep 1, 2001
2,009
0
36
Toronto
The unions are the blame for the Liberals re-election. Just wait till we learn about what the teachers are going to get in return for their loyalties.
 

IM469

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2012
11,142
2,471
113
Sickening. Fucking thieves and those of you who voted them in are idiots.
And anyone who thinks that PC are equally adept of wasting money should look at the portion of the Hydro bill which is paying the billions run over by consecutive PC governments or the billions lost by the short sighted sale of the 407 to foreign interests.

I have voted all over the map and I have been plowed up the ass by all of them. I blame Hudak for giving the Liberals a majority government. If he was too stupid to win an election from the rotting Liberals - God help us with his government. I don't understand these deep blue & red supporters and their inability to remember past stupidity that wqe are still paying for.
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
If you were talking city delivery I'd be with you, but isolated rural installations in sparsely populated areas are precisely those where you'd excpect to see high costs for running and maintaining wires long distances over rough terrain.
3x or 4x? Maybe in Hudson Bay. But the Muskokas? Where does the power come from to service the Muskokas? Pickering or nearby power plants like Bruce or northern hydro-electric dams? Did they replace ALL the transmission tower/lines or are we using previously-built lines which costs should be sunk? Still seems unreasonable to me. (Someone also told me that if you're not a local resident, you pay more, but I wonder about that).
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
And anyone who thinks that PC are equally adept of wasting money should look at the portion of the Hydro bill which is paying the billions run over by consecutive PC governments or the billions lost by the short sighted sale of the 407 to foreign interests.

I have voted all over the map and I have been plowed up the ass by all of them. I blame Hudak for giving the Liberals a majority government. If he was too stupid to win an election from the rotting Liberals - God help us with his government. I don't understand these deep blue & red supporters and their inability to remember past stupidity that wqe are still paying for.

I wouldn't bring up the 407. Hydro is a bigger boondoggle.

At the time, the PCs made a billion dollars from the sale of the 407, even though it may have been short-sighted (perhaps they didn't think that many people would pay those tolls, or they were only concerned with balancing the budget in the short-term, which was partly achieved with that 407 sale).

Current governments still collect taxes from the private 407 revenues (it's not tax free - no foreign enterprise can repatriate profits here without paying non-resident taxes, etc.).
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
50,277
9,354
113
Toronto
They didn't get my vote either but the Harper conservatives got back in with a majority . Fancy that . This is what happens when people run away from the truth and they believe the bull that some parties like to deliver during an election . Well done

Goes to show you how many ignorant people there are these days .
Fixed your post.
 

saxon

Well-known member
Dec 2, 2009
4,756
519
113
Smart meters, the dumbest idea the Liberals have ever come up with. I love reading those stories in the paper about some elderly couple who gets a $20,000 hydro bill and they're told the system doesn't make mistakes so pay up or else.
 

IM469

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2012
11,142
2,471
113
I wouldn't bring up the 407. Hydro is a bigger boondoggle.

At the time, the PCs made a billion dollars from the sale of the 407, even though it may have been short-sighted (perhaps they didn't think that many people would pay those tolls, or they were only concerned with balancing the budget in the short-term, which was partly achieved with that 407 sale).

Current governments still collect taxes from the private 407 revenues (it's not tax free - no foreign enterprise can repatriate profits here without paying non-resident taxes, etc.).
Smart meters is a one time $ 2 billion lesson in stupidity (sadly I'm sure more innovative waste is to come) but the sale of the 407 is a supreme f*ck up that bleeds more money yearly from the tax payers who paid for it. The value of the 407 at this moment based on market value is ~ $ 10 billion. The conservatives didn't make a profit - they had a public asset that through government land acquisitions (billions not included in construction costs) gave it a major economic value far beyond the value of the assembled individual costs. Any semi-astute business man would realize that. I honestly wanted Harris and his minions jailed for fraud involving public assets. 407 a minor boondoggle ??????

F*ck the taxes ... the Ontario taxpayer should be getting benefits from all of the revenue. Stupid PC's ... stupid Liberals arrrrgh :mad:
 

stay

New member
May 21, 2013
906
2
0
judge's laughing
Wait do you think you have heard the while story... LOL

There was a program to switch out all the bulbs to mercury filled bulbs. Guess where those puppies are going. This was done because there was no money to build the power plants.

Unfortunately, most people don't use their heads when they vote and with a majority gov we will never get o the truth..
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts