You mean the crazy power company that sends me fecked up bills every two months can now determine what I should be running in my own home? That seems to be what they're saying but that's crap. I'll never let them take me (or my pool pump) alive.

On another slightly different note - did you all realize that by getting rid of computers and data centers there really wouldn't be a power supply issue to be fixing.

If I were a utility and was a bit short on the quarterly revenue forecast there would be a temptation to turn all the kettles on for a bit of additional cash.

I'd be more worried about them turning things on to push up the bills. They wouldn't have to do it obviously - they could just get your thermostat to wait an extra five minutes before turning off.

Presumably this will be an "opt-in" scheme with incentives? A percentage off your bill?

Toronto Hydro already have a system to take over your central AC. All you get is a one time $50 credit.

http://www.torontohydro.com/electricsystem/powerwise/peaksaver/index.cfm

I can just see how this will play out... utilities push this remote management tech, consumers get pissed, smartypants electronics dudes develop a little box that sits on the main incomer cable to the distribution board and low-pass filters out anything but 50/60Hz line voltage, cost a few bucks.

Bye-bye remote device management via powerline - unless utilities can get consumer buy-in by demonstrating cost savings/user benefit -- AND that they won't f*** it up. And since they often can't even reliably get basic billing right ...

Hell -- will they have to encrypt the signalling on the remote powerline to stop local hackers/crims from monkeying with the neighbourhood's devices for kicks?

~R

do they consider to be non critical? Probably not the same as me, or anyone else.

In some countries (that don't use a/c's as excessively as most of the US does) this has been common practice for decades. For example, disabling washing machines and driers during cooking and lunch time. Usually, electrical power is also cheaper in those areas because they can control their peak usage and don't have to buy from other producers.

I can just picture the missus jumping to the kettle in the ad break for corrie...a few seconds too late and the power would've spiked. No brew for you.

She'd think she had worn out another kettle.

Swan and Tefal will be in on the act too.... 12months and 3 days since first switch on...pzzzzt

it's a conspiracy I tell thee, a conspiracy! :)

Not..... this has far to much potential for problems.

Imagine power companies making deals with kettle manufacture's to ensure their product gets better usage of the power.

Imagine if the system is compromised or breaks down, leaving god knows how many people without heating or hot water.

How about the elderly in wintertime, how is this likely to affect them?

Energy saving appliances that can be easily switched off or have a manual low power mode would be preferable. This way people have a choice as to what they have.

My parents are on a plan where the power company can turn off the hot water heater during peak usage, and they get a small credit whenever they do.

... they've been doing this here in South Africa for ages, known as ripple control. The only thing they control is the geyser, though, and I don't think it's through anything nearly as cool and high tech as this.

We've already reduced our "greenhouse" emissions by more than Europe, just by voluntary effort, nothing forced upon us by the gubmint. Just leave us alone, and we really do (mostly) take care of things. However, if they start turning off my water heater, I'm going to turn it back up to 190, so it'll still be hot when I want hot water. Will that save energy, or waste it? Law of Unintended Consequences.

Why would you want to sit in a shower for an hour? "Because I can" is no answer because I can kick the shit out of you. Unfortunately, this is considered antisocial and so I'm told I can't beat the shit out of people just because I'm bigger than them and a lot more nasty.

The only reason I like this idea is so that after the Great Zombie Infestation™, I can do some hacking, turn off all the accidentlaly left on lights and cookers etc. and save juice and stop brown/blackouts while the solitary power stations that are still manned/autonomous are struggling.

They don't charge me a penny for electricity

SchuItz: looked at Knut's website: I can't read it. It's all misspelled and I can't work out the code to decipher it. Regardless, if Knut wants to chip in on my utility bill he's more than welcome to comment on my power usage. Show me the money Knut - otherwise piss off.

Mark: I'm certain that your comment must have been a joke - either that or you a morbidly obese balding white man who regularly threatens people on the Internet. Spouting off about how "big and nasty" you are is gay - so you must be a big nasty morbidly obese balding white homo. I bet Knut could kick your ass.

Ooh, Knut read the article, complete with footnotes and corrections. Looks like the science is challenging, the ice is still melting, and Mr Godart is apologizing to the powers that know better. But thanks for the pointer, makes for interesting reading.

And to reply AC: Good for you if you managed to reduce your personal greenhouse gas emissions. The rest of the island surely didn't, but merely exported their emissions to China by buying foreign industrial products. Industrialized country --> servant's country; go GB, Go.

Just like the ISPs, they want you for a customer, but penalize you if you actually use it.

And the "Turning On Option" is scarier to me...

'cause they will run it when you are'nt there, just to run up the bill,

and when you return home (did they install an Occupancy Sensor?),

they go into conserve mode, and penalize you for minuscule increments of usage.

That is why I unplug "All Items Not In Use", and

That's why I keep the Ferrari up on blocks!

Yeah, that would be about the only reason to allow this.

Call me paranoid, but if you give a company the ability to control things in your house, they'll eventually find a way to make you pay MORE and not less. There is no such thing as a free lunch in this world, and the idea that a company will be altruistic in helping the environment is a load of BS.

I will not buy any device, nor live in any home or area which requires this. If it means I have to build a log cabin in the woods on my own, then so be it.

...wankers...

That'd be "demand outstrips supply", not the other way around.

If supply outstrips demand, then there is energy surplus.

When demand outstrips supply, the need arises to either increase supply (expand) or decrease demand (throttle).

If you're going to try to sound smart, at least put some effort in...

Well just goes to show how badly you can guess when you've got nothing but "what sounds right" to go on, doesn't it.

Almost entirely incorrect, and the one that was (middle age) is only right because, by definition, it covers pretty much half of the human lifespan, half of the remainder being far too young or far too old, so not all that accurate a forecast.

You even managed to get the reason wrong by that classic fallacy "the excluded middle".

It was a demonstration of how letting an individual "do what it likes and can get away with" is wrong for a social species such as mankind (or maybe that should be personkind as far as PCness is concerned).

But you excluded that as a possibility because you wanted me inferred to be either fat and all mouth and no trousers or to be gay.

The latter of which I find strange: most gay men take good care of their bodies.

Well, if there is a serious shortage of energy, not allowing people to use air conditioners or washing machines and so on at certain times would be reasonable. But there's no need to have such a shortage, and resort to such measures; just build more nuclear power plants. As eventually the voters will realize, but then that's perhaps the point of scaring people with such proposals.

My PoCo offers a "lifeline" discount for low- income folks (I believe it's $8.00 USD a month -- no great shakes, but every little helps). Suppose my PoCo enables such a remote- control system. During the summer, everyone is running air conditioning full blast. Does the PoCo decide to route power away from subsidized customers and to those paying the full fare? Do the county- and state- run nursing homes lose a bit of juice so the private resort- like (and priced) complexes can keep their golf carts charged and their jacuzzis running?

While there is definitely room for improvement in the conservation arena, there needs to be more education and incentive for customers to play ball; otherwise, as others have pointed out, people might react negatively to having the choices made for them.