Alternative Power sources - True average Re: Smart use of SmartPower

Author

True average Re: Smart use of SmartPower

H Pinder

2005-08-24, 1:21 pm

Derek points out that the average is the sum of number of hours in each
period multiplied by the rate for the period and then that sum divided by 24
whcih results in 5.81 cents. That is based on using an indentical amount of
power in each hour of the day, and is the true average.
His reference to "high-mass, electric heating system" caught my eye because
today I was looking at an old communication leaflet from Toronto Hydro
dated Nov/Dec 1997 which announces "Introducing Powershift
Heating....Electric Thermal Storage Heating with Toronto Hydro's Powershift
time-of-use rate. Savings can be as high as 47%"
It no longer exists.
The right wing Harris provincial gov't cancelled all energy conservation
programs.
This one died, and I can't figure out why they don't bring it back. It was
simple technology which worked. It would shift the electric heating demand
to the lowest cost period [which a provision for over-ride in unique
circumstances].
They also had a time-of-use electric water heating option, which I think is
also dead; but if someone can correct me, I'd enjoy it.
The last time I phoned Toronto Hydro [under it's fancy new name, which I
can't recall] a couple years ago they said there were NO energy conservation
programs available and they had closed the office which helped advise people
on how to reduce electric useage and cost.
Yevrah in Toronto

>
> How do you work that out _without_ a time of use meter? At constant
usage,
> I get that to work out to ~5.8 ¢/kWh. Assuming that your utility has
> worked out "average" consumption patterns, I'd bet the "average" rate
would
> be much closer to 9 ¢/kWh.
>
> If you're using some sort of high-mass, electric heating system, your
> average rate is going to come out much closer to the bottom.
> --
> derek

Ford Prefect

2005-08-25, 10:21 pm

H Pinder wrote:
> Derek points out that the average is the sum of number of hours in each
> period multiplied by the rate for the period and then that sum divided by 24
> whcih results in 5.81 cents. That is based on using an indentical amount of
> power in each hour of the day, and is the true average.
> His reference to "high-mass, electric heating system" caught my eye because
> today I was looking at an old communication leaflet from Toronto Hydro
> dated Nov/Dec 1997 which announces "Introducing Powershift
> Heating....Electric Thermal Storage Heating with Toronto Hydro's Powershift
> time-of-use rate. Savings can be as high as 47%"
> It no longer exists.
> The right wing Harris provincial gov't cancelled all energy conservation
> programs.
> This one died, and I can't figure out why they don't bring it back. It was
> simple technology which worked. It would shift the electric heating demand
> to the lowest cost period [which a provision for over-ride in unique
> circumstances].
> They also had a time-of-use electric water heating option, which I think is
> also dead; but if someone can correct me, I'd enjoy it.
> The last time I phoned Toronto Hydro [under it's fancy new name, which I
> can't recall] a couple years ago they said there were NO energy conservation
> programs available and they had closed the office which helped advise people
> on how to reduce electric useage and cost.
> Yevrah in Toronto
>
>
>
> usage,
>
>
> would
>
>

That's a rationalization of his error in basic math, a simple average is
the sum of the given set of numbers divided by the number of numbers I
could just as easily say that the majority of time ( from 7AM to 10PM)
you are paying an average of over 7 cents a kilowatt, but that would be
skewing the numbers.....

Derek Broughton

2005-08-26, 10:21 am

Ford Prefect wrote:

> That's a rationalization of his error in basic math, a simple average is
> the sum of the given set of numbers divided by the number of numbers

Up yours! I made no error. _I_ pointed out that the numbers you gave were
insufficient to give the average you listed, and gave _two_ scenarios in
which the average would be either lower (the one you call my "error in
basic math") or much higher. You then explained that you were quoting from
the utility's web site and how _they_ got their average. _Their_ average
was taken in a completely unrealistic manner (mathematically _possible_ but
highly unreasonable).

> I
> could just as easily say that the majority of time ( from 7AM to 10PM)
> you are paying an average of over 7 cents a kilowatt, but that would be
> skewing the numbers.....

No, it wouldn't, because the utility chose those time periods specifically
_because_ the majority of the power would be used in that time period. If
everybody was on that time-of-use plan and didn't change their consumption
patters, I'm certain you'd find the average was well over 7 cents. Jim
Baber's "real world" example was almost 8 cents.
--
derek

Solar Flare

2005-08-27, 8:22 pm

"Weighted " or "unweighted" average?

Terms! boys.

"Derek Broughton" <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
news:dbe3u2-tl8.ln1@othello.pointerstop.ca...
> Ford Prefect wrote:
>
>
> Up yours! I made no error. _I_ pointed out that the numbers you gave
were
> insufficient to give the average you listed, and gave _two_ scenarios in
> which the average would be either lower (the one you call my "error in
> basic math") or much higher. You then explained that you were quoting
from
> the utility's web site and how _they_ got their average. _Their_ average
> was taken in a completely unrealistic manner (mathematically _possible_
but
> highly unreasonable).
>
>
> No, it wouldn't, because the utility chose those time periods specifically
> _because_ the majority of the power would be used in that time period. If
> everybody was on that time-of-use plan and didn't change their consumption
> patters, I'm certain you'd find the average was well over 7 cents. Jim
> Baber's "real world" example was almost 8 cents.
> --
> derek

LinkBot