We may all live in a great big global community, but in my Blog, it's my world.
Published on February 3, 2011 By terpfan1980 In Business

Argh, talk about an idiotic idea.  Check out this article (headline is linked):

Outages could lift Pepco rates

If you read through a little of that you find that somewhere along the lines someone decided that it would be a good idea -- to encourage energy conservation -- if Pepco would be able to charge higher rates when less energy was being used. Huh? Did I write that correctly, you bet I did.  Apparently some politician(s) decided it would be a great idea if Pepco was able to charge more when customers used less of their product and that if that was the case it would encourage customers to, well, use less?!

What planet were these politicians on and how much did they receive by way or campaign contributions and lobbyist perks because I just don't see what they were thinking when they allowed what they seemed to have allowed.

First up, if you want customers to use less electricity you should be charging them higher prices for it.  When the customers use more or use the same amounts but pay higher prices for doing so what are they likely going to do?  Oh, yeah, use less... unless you have the current system where apparently you can get a bulk discount just for using more, yay!

Second, the lawmakers and Pepco should be encouraging customers to use less electricity as often as possible and there is no way in, well, you get the idea... that paying higher prices should be making customers want to use less.  Customers should be saving money when they use less electricity as Pepco would also be saving money by using less fuel and needing less power generation to do their business.

Personally I'm more in agreement with the Montgomery County (Maryland) politician that wants Pepco to be forced to pay customers for the outage time they have to suffer through.  Granted those customers should already be paying less as they had *zero* power usage during the outages, but it seems this screwed up rule/law allows Pepco to charge more instead.

Insanity, absolute insanity.


Comments
on Feb 03, 2011

I heard a story on the radio the other day where there was a city where they were having a drought and the City officials asked the people to use less water to conserve and the people did. What happened was because the people were using less the City was making less on their utility bills and they did not like that. So they decided to raise the utility fee to make up for the difference in saving. Basically people were using less water but paying the same amount. As you stated, who was the genius who thought that people would be OK paying the same money for less water? Of course this all goes back to the same logic politicians live by, people are just too stupid to see these things and so thats why they try to get away with it.

on Feb 04, 2011

Basically you are seeing the gross disconnect between real world and liberalism.   The same thing is being talked about with the gas tax as hybrids use less gas and therefore pay less tax (and government screams).  They just refuse to understand the law of supply and demand.  But as far as Pepco is concerned, they are already quasi government, so the relationship with politicians is incestuous.

If you want to ruin you community, elect a know-nothing liberal with feeling and caring and the common sense of an iguana.

on Feb 21, 2012

Dr Guy
Basically you are seeing the gross disconnect between real world and liberalism.

...


If you want to ruin you community, elect a know-nothing liberal with feeling and caring and the common sense of an iguana.

It's funny that here in Europe (or the Netherlands specifically) liberals are the right wing parties rather than left wing, and yet those two statements still apply.

on Feb 21, 2012

"Being an idiot knows no national boundary."

on Feb 21, 2012

It really should be a flat rate, if they actually wanted to encourage energy conservation.

 

The current system in place is just to normalize revenue ... which DISCOURAGES energy conservation.

 

and yet they want to market it as if it ENCOURAGED conservation ... fucking marketing

 

on Feb 21, 2012

Pepco is my energy provider. Awful company.

on Feb 21, 2012

Where'd this stupid idea come from?

 

Well, I'm guessing the CEO holds in his farts. By doing so, he forces them to travel up the spine and into the brain.

 

This is where most shitty ideas come from.

on Feb 21, 2012

So 12 cents per kilowatt is only if you spend exactly the right amount ...

and your f*cked if you have a blackout    (bad consumers! its your fault! you have to pay for the blackout! ...  )

on Feb 22, 2012

I've heard about such a thing but I never cared much about it. I never saw it in my local newspaper so I guess I believed it less.

 

But if these things are true....then it's just mindboggling.

on Feb 22, 2012

If you read through a little of that you find that somewhere along the lines someone decided that it would be a good idea -- to encourage energy conservation -- if Pepco would be able to charge higher rates when less energy was being used. Huh? Did I write that correctly, you bet I did.

Yeah, this is exactly what's happening here in Oz... the power companies and the government with huge advertising campaigns to encourage consumers to use less power, and as power consumption decreases annually the cost per kilowatt goes up, each and every July 1st... adding $30 - $40 to each bill until the next rise.

Shoot, we even have the Queensland Government offering householders a $50.00 Climate Smart pack that allows the consumer to substantially reduce their power consumption.  Yeah, that's right, the government charging us 50 bucks for a package to help it reduce the amount of power it has to output.  You see, the power companies are only resellers.  The state government actually produces the power and then sells the right to bill us to private enterprise, which has done nothing but rip us off ever since getting the right 7 - 8 years ago.

Thing is, they need not encourage power conservation too strongly to many, many households.  With the average quarterly power bill more than doubling in the last 7 to 8 years [wages/salaries/pensions haven't], many households cannot afford to run appliances or even lighting.  An old pensioner lady who lives not far from me now washes her clothes the old fashioned way, by hand, despite having a perfectly good washing machine in her laundry.  She showers every other day and has a hand wash on the off days because she can't afford the hot water... and she now cooks on a portable camping stove because she can't afford the power to run her electric stove.  And in Winter she is in bed at sunset because she can't afford lighting AND heating.

Yeah, it's a woeful situation, and there are thousands of households in her situation... not that the power companies or state government give a shit.  You see, despite using much, much less power than we do [2 of us], she pays roughly the same quarterly as we do because she is on a higher tariff than we are.  We pay 21c per kilowatt, she pays 28c per kilowatt.  Why is that?  It's because she lives in what is considered a more well-to-do area than we do... despite being only 2 streets away.  Yup, she is being ripped off, not because she is well-to-do or even has the propensity to pay, but because her address is somehow considered better than ours

Furthermore, she's not the only one being ripped off that way.  A guy two doors down from us pays 26c per kilowatt.  Why?  Because he is on a corner block with two street frontages, and therefore pays higher council rates, and this is how the power companies formulate the tariff rates...on how much land tax/council rates we pay... the higher your council rates the more you pay for power.

on Feb 22, 2012

Yeah truly, this is one area where the greed for making money for doing nothing at all just makes you want to say "@#$%^$*".  Shouldn't user pays mean like "paying an equivalent amount of money for an equivalent service"???

Actually I think we should start a world movement against this.  It's only in inaction that greedbags like these can thrive.

on Feb 22, 2012

StevenAus
It's only in inaction that greedbags like these can thrive.

I'm actually trying to get a collective bargaining thing together in my neck of the woods, and the best offer price-wise gets the deal to service about 3500 homes and several small businesses.  Hmm, I can bet there'd be several providers willing to cut other providers throats to get the contract, so I believe we will benefit from the process.  Thing is, I'm not going to be happy to stop there.  Once I have my suburb locked in I'll canvass other suburbs and hopefully the whole of Ipswich can benefit from cut rate power due to collective bargaining.

Small steps at first though, but I reckon the will be enough people interested in joining the scheme in my area, and from there who knows.

on Feb 22, 2012

starkers
from there who knows.

Just don't tell me "political office".

on Feb 22, 2012

DrJBHL
Just don't tell me "political office"

Nah, not me... don't wanna lose all my friends and have my family disown me.

However, I do want to push the idea of collective bargaining to bring down the price of electricity for as many households as possible.

Meta
Views
» 2097
Comments
» 14
Category
Sponsored Links