<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Tony,<br>
<br>
That's not quite true about old (mechanical) meters; they did
consume energy continuously because there is a voltage coil that is
permanently energised (you need to know the voltage in order to
measure watts). However, the voltage coil, alone, does not cause the
disc to rotate. Therefore, the energy supplier carried the cost (to
pass on in other ways). <br>
<br>
Old polyphase meters were notorious for the voltage coil going open
circuit and the meter not registering energy consumption. This was
usually picked up at the next meter read due to sudden decreased
consumption and this triggered a visit to see why. I lost count of
the number of 'dead' polyphase meters I found when I was
investigating supply abnormality complaints.<br>
<br>
One of the tasks performed by the section to which I was attached
was testing/calibrating kilowatt hour meters. This was performed
over a range of load levels to ensure accuracy.<br>
<br>
Of all the meter tests that were a result of a complaint about 'high
bills', only one meter, over a five year period, was found to be
reading high. Generally, meters ran slow as they aged, so a
complaint could result in an even higher account due to a
replacement meter working correctly.<br>
<br>
One investigation into decreased energy consumption, at a hotel, was
found to be a result of the consumer drilling a hole in the top of
the meter case and dropping a plastic knitting needle down onto the
disc to slow it down. The disc was quite well scored as a result.
Another was the neutral to the meter being cut, with a piece of
spaghetti tubing placed over the break. The bare ends were allowed
to touch, periodically, to avoid consumption dropping to zero. That
was an employee, and it cost him his job.<br>
<br>
You mentioned monitors. I recently took two dead CRT monitors to the
tip (I don't have a garbage service) and was informed there is a
(NSW) government enforced $5.00 fee per monitor to leave them at the
tip. How's that for a hidden tax? I wonder how many dead monitors
will now be given swimming lessons?<br>
<br>
Ray vk2tv<br>
<br>
On 11/12/10 08:56, Tony King wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4D02A1F5.1020505@people.net.au" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Darryl<br>
<br>
Just a bit of simple maths seems to indicate that smart meters are
not "green", i.e. energy efficient.<br>
<br>
The meters use 2 watts continuously, even under no load
conditions. According to the power company blurb there will be
around 7.2 million of them fitted which equates to a <u><b>continuous</b></u>
power grid load of 14.4 megawatts. The old meter consumed less
than a watt and then only whilst actually metering. When there
was no load there was no power being consumed. Total grid load,
less than half the new meters and probably nearer one quarter than
one half. As well, the old meters did not generate more RFI and
need unsightly towers all over the place.<br>
<br>
I don't think that the meters can be justified for "green"
reasons. In fact as a retired self funded pensioner, who goes to
bed at night and therefore has almost zero off peak electricity
use, the change means that I will probably no longer be able to
afford to run air conditioning on a peak period hot day and so
will be just another statistic in the "heat related" causes of
death. Not only that but salt is being rubbed into the wound by
making me pay for the dammed thing.<br>
<br>
<br>
The meters are not only not green, they are just an attack on the
most vulnerable section of the public by vested interests
misusing the green banner. I suspect that the power company's
profit margin is the greater driving force.<br>
<br>
<br>
I run a few computers here, most resurrected from garage sales and
other peoples cast offs. Most seem to have a 300 to 400 watt
power consumption not counting the monitors. I would suspect
however that this saves more global energy by recycling than being
able to buy lots of new low power systems, not to say I wouldn't
buy them if I could afford it . Better if the energy was saved at
my end but you have to be realistic about energy consumption
globally.<br>
<br>
<br>
Sorry for the rant, just don't get me started on the "savings" we
all get from installing compact flouro lamps ........
Sigh..........<br>
Regards from grumpy old man<br>
Tony VK3API<br>
<br>
<br>
On 11/12/2010 7:19 AM, Darryl Smith wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:D1D83FA240EA3440A9E0F4CF1FF1A647153EA6722C@VMBX131.ihostexchange.net"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Guys...
I will not make too many comments on the matter as I am now the chief engineer at <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.Greenbox-group.com">www.Greenbox-group.com</a>, and if you check out the URL you might find some interesting information. The following comments are personal comments, not related to anything...
Smart Meters have an accuracy of commonly 0.5% or 1%. From what I can see, most of the monitoring devices on the market have sensors that are no better than 2% accurate, with electronics that make things even worse. My guess is that given the AEMO rules for Meters in general, the two will *NOT* line up. And it will be the Smart Meter that is correct. There are very specific rules how to totalize electricity usage, and these do not tend to be followed by the after market units. I suspect that the error is much worse at the bottom end of the scale of consumption.
In order to reduce my energy consumption at home, I have done a few things... Firstly I replaced all my servers with a low end new dual core hyperthreaded machine running 4 GBytes of RAM and VMWare. On this I have installed about five different virtual machines. The software for this is free. I have also outsourced my email to sherweb so that I don't need to have redundant machines for email. I also have a few PC's that use about 5W each, and run them on USB thumb drives.
Anyone wanting more details can contact me directly. And, yes, I still work from home, but the business is just operating the background at the moment.
Darryl
---------
Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia
Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 Int] - 02 9618 6459
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.radio-active.net.au/blog/">www.radio-active.net.au/blog/</a> - <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.radio-active.net.au/">www.radio-active.net.au/</a>
-----Original Message-----
From: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ozaprs-bounces@aprs.net.au">ozaprs-bounces@aprs.net.au</a> [<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:ozaprs-bounces@aprs.net.au">mailto:ozaprs-bounces@aprs.net.au</a>] On Behalf Of Gary Stern
Sent: Saturday, 11 December 2010 12:14 AM
To: Australian APRS Users
Subject: [OZAPRS] smart meters ?
Thinking about, it should really be too hard to self monitor power consumption, total, circuit by circuit etc.... and even possibly work out power factors, I wouldn't doubt there is a setup somewhere on the market, usb to a computer and store everything, do your own calculations and then you could check these smart meters...
Any bets on their accuracy :-)
On 10/12/2010 11:53 AM, Tony King wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">By the way has anybody been fitted with a smart meter yet. I notice
that they use 2 watts of power continuously from the consumer side of the meter.
The man turned up here to fit one yesterday but went away without
installing it when I asked to see the certificate of compliance (or
it's
number) for
electromagnetic compatibility. They work on 2.3 GHz as far as I can
find out but I would be interested in any details ......
With heaps of RF originating here I can imagine swamping the things
receiver and leaving myself on permanent maximum rate charge or
conversely the thing jamming alll my receivers as in the reports on
the highly technical and reliable talk back radio shows of broadcast
interference......
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
OZAPRS mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a>
_______________________________________________
OZAPRS mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
OZAPRS mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>