Archive for January 18th, 2010

h1

R I making smart grid sense?

January 18, 2010

Michael Giberson

I noticed when posting the previous item that one of the subject tags in the Knowledge Problem system was “smart gird.”  Not “grid”, but “gird.”  A simple enough substitution of the “i” and “r”, and, apparently, pretty common online.  Google yields a plethora of “smart gird” results (although it first redirected me to “smart grid”, apparently assuming that was what I meant to search for).  Online I find smart gird workshops, smart gird management software, smart gird updates, smart girds making refrigerators smarter, and even smart gird augmented reality.

So far no one has secured “smartgird.com”, suggesting an unexploited opportunity to become the online portal to this growing, vast and varied smart gird world.

Here is an easy way for writers to check themselves: after typing the term smart grid, repeat the following phrase: “R I making sense?”  If the answer is “I R”, then you’ve got it backwards.

h1

Smart meter benefits for low-income consumers

January 18, 2010

Michael Giberson

Much of the smart grid promise (and hype) implicitly suggests that the benefits will be scooped up by high-income consumers.  Who else is going to be buying “grid aware” washer-dryer sets with built in wi-fi connectivity integrated into internet-linked home energy managements system?

Still, the benefits won’t be limited to big spenders hoping to manage their energy use a little better.  One example: a new prepaid electric power service product being developed by First Choice Power for offer in areas of Texas with smart meters installed. Prepaid electric service is frequently easier to manage for low-income consumers because it does not require the consumer to make a deposit or pass a credit check.

Prepaid service is already available in the Texas retail power market, but the existing services face several difficulties with standard meters.  Without constant metering and information flows to retailer and consumer, consumers are charged in advance based upon estimated usage — both parties to the service are left with a bit of risk.   The result is a product that is costlier for retailers to offer and more difficult for the consumer to manage.  As one consequence, prepaid service is the subject of significantly more complaints than standard consumer service in the competitive Texas retail power market. (See this earlier post for a related discussion.)

Excerpts from the company press release:

First Choice Power today announced that it has launched a prepaid electricity service called Control First™. The service allows customers to sign up for electricity service with no credit check, no contract and no costly deposit, eliminating barriers to switching as well as providing customers with complete control of their electricity usage and payments.First Choice Power is the first affiliated retail electric provider in Texas to offer residential prepaid service based on actual daily usage from an advanced or “smart” meter, unlike other providers in the market that bill estimated usage.

“Control First is the first prepaid product that really lets customers take control of their electricity costs and manage their usage,” said Brian Hayduk, president of First Choice Power. “This is the next generation of prepaid products giving customers more visibility, more flexibility and more information so that there are no surprises at the end of the month.”

“First Choice Power’s Control First is a true prepaid product,” Hayduk said. “With Control First, you decide how much you will pay and when to make your payments. With no minimum payment requirements, you have the flexibility to best manage your budget according to the amount of electricity you use.”

The offer will be made more broadly available later this year as more customers are able to take advantage of the smart meter-based service. There are about 800,000 installed smart meters in Texas, with stated plans by transmission and distribution companies to install an additional 1.6 million in 2010 with more added in subsequent years to total 5.7 million in 2013. Customers must have an advanced meter to be eligible for Control First.

And prepaid is not necessarily just for low-income consumers.  As Lynne discusses in a post on prepaid service, prepaid service can promote consumer awareness and control over energy use and help consumers to reduce energy use.

h1

Whitman and Worstall: apply “new paternalism” logic to policymakers too

January 18, 2010

Lynne Kiesling

Glen Whitman has been posting excerpts from his Arizona Law Review paper with Mario Rizzo on the “new paternalism” for a while, and his most recent discussion has to do with the paternalist policy recommendations around the human tendency toward hyperbolic discounting. Hyperbolic discounting means that individuals tend to place more weight on nearer-term outcomes than might be deemed “rational” by some expected-value-based model, and the corresponding paternalist policy recommendation is to force people into the intertemporal substitution that increases the purported future benefit. There’s an enormous literature on this idea, and applications of this idea in many areas (including vehicle fuel efficiency, in which some people claim that hyperbolic discounting is a “market failure” — a claim that drives me completely batty due to its lack of logical content!), well beyond what I want to discuss here and now.

Whitman is making a more pointed argument, and an important one — if we cede this kind of decision-making to centralized policymakers and allow them to exercise the coercive power to force individuals into particular forms of intertemporal substitution, on what basis are we making that decision? If individuals in their private roles engage in hyperbolic discounting, isn’t it also logical to assume that policymakers are prone to hyperbolic discounting? And if they are, what are the implications of that tendency for the efficiency and the morality of the legislated, coerced outcomes? His post goes through several reasons why we should expect policymakers to have shortened time horizons, and I encourage you to read it.

Tim Worstall puts it much more colorfully than I am capable of:

So we should be shepherded to the right decisions by those wise enough to know what the correct, non-hyperbolic, discount rates are. That’s basically the libertarian paternalism for you right there. And as Whitman points out, that’s just great but who are the people who will be taking these decisions about what is the correct discount rate?

Yup, politicians. And do politicians take decisions based upon the correct discount rates or are they also subject to this hyperbolic discounting? Was that howls of laughter I could hear? Splutters of indignation perhaps? For yes, of course, when we look at how politicians actually run any of the long term schemes which they currently have power over we see that they’re vastly worse at this than we little sheep are. Look at civil service pensions, roaring out of control as far as the eye can see into the future because years ago it was easier to buy political support or buy off industrial unrest by promising what could never be afforded. The untold off-balance sheet promises that have been made that will impoverish our grandchildren just to get one politico or another through a difficult election. The hocking of the future in that every few year electoral scramble to get the right bums on the right benches at Westminster.

For the failure of this libertarian paternalism, the hole in this argument about hyperbolic discounting, is that we as individual humans may well be imperfect: but those who would rule us are worse by this measure. I know of no adult who lives their life with a final horizon of only the next election and I know of no politican with a horizon of longer than that next election.

Hear, hear.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 41 other followers