Hacker News Reader

Comment by trentnix | Hacker News Reader

I expect stuff like this will become compulsory in the near future. “For your own good”, of course.

Every jurisdiction already has a less-specific and mandatory version of this. When demand exceeds supply, they just start disconnecting loads from the grid, perhaps randomly.

Yep. They just start rolling blackouts.

Every jurisdiction also has some sort of plan to generate or acquire enough electricity so they do not have to engage in rolling blackouts under normal circumstances, and a hot afternoon during the summer certainly counts as normal. If there is ever a blackout someone has failed their job description.

Mine can do voltage reductions. But of course that's only good for resistive loads.

As far as I know, they've never done this, but it's a tool they have and test: https://www.ieso.ca/en/Sector-Participants/IESO-News/2021/12...

I prefer the price signaling than hard prohibition. In this case the utility company might charge a lot for what they consider unreasonable consumption, and that should spark "voluntary" savings.

We have this where I live for water: under 10 m3 per person monthly is very cheap. The 11th m3 could cost more than bottle water. Technically you can consume as much as you can afford, but almost nobody is watering the grass with potable water.

We may need a middle ground on energy soon. If european prices continue rising, energy costs will be higher than rent. Sure people will cut back, but I need heating, and lighting. Rationing will be necessary to preserve basic consumption ahead of conspicuous consumption by wealthy interests.

European conditions aren't normal though - given adequate time new sources will be brought online and a new normal will be established. The prices can't and won't stay as high as they are projected to be under crisis conditions, new supply is less expensive than that.

> given adequate time new sources will be brought online

Or in the French condition: existing sources will be brought back online

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/edf-restart-all-its-...

The problem with that is people don't monitor their usage. I'm sure some do but most I know just use power willy nilly and pay the bill at the end of the month. Doing this will result in alot of pissed off customers when they see a 5X increase in their bill.

All my work colleages bought at least one of (this)[https://www.amazon.es/dp/B07B6RYQXC] this year. From having a thermo and let it start and stop when it needed to, to track the cheapest hours of the day and let it run only for 90 minutes or so. Some of them installed a pellet stove advancing a winter with gas/electricity too expensive. Some installed a solar thermal collector (following my advise, I must say). Sadly, I couldn't convince anyone of installing PV.

I don't like prices going up, but I don't remember seeing any other way of pushing consumer restrictions as effective as prices. When something is scarce, its price must go up, and people start to ration or look for substitutes. Even government prohibitions/rationing tend to cause grey or black markets instead of consumption reduction.

"Price signaling" just prices poor people out of the market. Then they go into debt to pay the electric bill or suffer physically from the heat.

Is it not for our own good? The whole grid collapsing and needing a lengthy, expensive restart process while everyone goes without electricity sure doesn't sound like a better option. Even Texas bit the bullet to prevent that happening. We already have the power to do this by just imposing rolling brownouts and blackouts; this is the same thing but not nearly so bad as outright power cutoff.

If you start down this line then there are lots of rights that should be taken away from people.

If these people cannot be trusted to pick a sensible temperature for their own homes I don't see why you'd let them vote who gets to run the country.

It is not about what is sensible for your home. It is about what energy is actually available.

This is not an emergency program, it is planned for years in advance. If people sign up for demand management programs like this, utilities do not need as much power during peak periods, and that results in the construction of less power generation and storage. If no one wants to pay the price in inconvenience, the utilities simply have to build more capacity to cover these shortages and charge somewhat higher prices accordingly.

If the utilities are allowed to build more capacity or charge higher prices. I think both of these require government permission.

Wholesale rates are set in a free market for a variety of reasons, but it is true it is ultimately up to governments whether to let residents suffer in the heat or freeze in the dark, either by discouraging new, adequate generation or refusing to allow retail rates to rise to pay for it.

Because someone likes it cooler or warmer than you, they should lose their right to vote. Got it.

It's for our own good within a flawed system. I believe America should have more nuclear power. Politicians need pressure for this, especially where I am in California. Pressure on the electrical grid is political pressure. If that translates to action, it's the long term greater good.

Yeahyeah, nuclear is endless, just give me my resources for my lazy life forever, nuclear will save us all!

industrial and (gasp) uniformed services energy use is very large compared to residental; pointless, wasteful energy use by commercial small business and local government is rampant. Controlling individuals in their "pen" is simply exerting control against the group that has the least ability to push back / most helpless.

I get what you say, but I always keep in mind that usually very large companies or business doesn't spend for the sake of it: they spent to sell to us, the small individuals. I know some people that spend their sundays in the mart just because they have the thermostate set to 20ºC (70ºF) for free, something they can't afford in their homes. And the very energy thirsty aluminum sector is working to keep our freezers filled with beer cans.

But of course, when the municipality spends in watering the flowers in the highway, it's a bit more dubious who is benefiting.

I don't feel like I have that much control over companies that I buy from. If I would prefer that they ramp down energy use during peak times, how would I accomplish that?

On a prospective basis the alternative to this kind of demand management is to build more natural gas or nuclear power plants or grid scale batteries. There is no requirement to maintain an infrastructure that cannot handle a relatively ordinary hot afternoon during the the summer.

Snark is too easy. What do you propose for tragedy of the commons scenarios like climate change?

This has nothing to do with climate change, and everything to do with a tangential topic: energy generation. Colorado has more residents with larger domiciles than ever before, and the supply has not kept up with the demand. Additionally, almost all investment has been in areas that are inconsistent in their ability to provide energy when it’s needed.

Simply deciding for other people that they shouldn’t have access to energy because of your misplaced fears around climate change is a recipe for envy, bitterness, and significant societal unrest.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com