Home thermostats: Big Brother's next target?
By Darren Murph 
posted Jan 13th 2008 11:53AM
posted Jan 13th 2008 11:53AM
It's not like we haven't heard of a higher power invading one's home before, but apparently, a proposal set to be considered at month's end could allow the state of California to "require that residents install remotely monitored temperature controls in their homes next year." The Programmable Communication Thermostat (PCT) would feature a "non-removable" FM receiver which could be controlled by Big Brother in "times of emergency" to drop load in order for "utilities to meet their supplies [when] the integrity of the grid is being jeopardized." Of course, we are hearing that adjustments would only be made ±4 degrees, but we aren't so keen on one thing leading to another, if you catch our drift.[Via Digg, image courtesy of Drexel, thanks yoshi]
Sounds like nuclear power would be a much better solution.
FUSION Power would be the best NUCLEAR Power Solution but, because of big oil, nuclear power has gotten a BAD name. They really have people believing (through Hollywood) that our technology isn't good enough to prevent another Chernobyl - or, that all nuclear power plants explode like in "ALIENS".
As for this thermostat - you've gotta love the way the government can pass laws to require new technology that they can use to monitor everyone digitaly - and then pass a law that makes the requirement a "must", punishable by fine/imprisonment.
The National ID card is comin whether we like it or not, and pretty soon all our info is going to be completely digital.
Stop putting these people in positions of power?
The problem with nuclear is the billion of so half life of some isotopes you get from the castoff rods. At a bare minimum, you must store your spent fuel above ground for about 14 years before you can even think about doing ANYTHING else with it. The shortest half life of the most common isotopes is 10K+ years. F* U nuclear.
are you nuts??? there is no way that there is going to be a FUSION reactor built on this earth before the end of our lifetimes.
"you dont have the technology or resources to pull off a stunt like that so HAH."
"Then i'll fucking kill you..."
depends how old you are, i suppose:
http://www.iter.org/
I don't want to quibble but the chernobyl reactor exploded also, and although the explosion isn't a nuclear one it's certainly a bang that takes off the roof once enough heat and steam builds up, and then you get a pleasantly glowing cloud cheering up the neighbourhood - nay continent.
BigD is right - you have to make sure you can store the spent fuel somewhere safe before you even think about using nuclear power.
@Wwhat
The Chernobyl reactor was nothing like any of the other reactors out there. Plus as with TMI it was gross operator neglegance that caused those disasters. New reactors that would be built would be based on designs that include passive fail safes that make those situations impossible. In the event of a critical failure it would still be contained to the containment building which is the point.
I'm all for clean power sources but they aren't feasible yet. Those plants should not have been shut down like they were as there was no infrastructure set to take the load.
Nuclear is the currently the cleanest, safest, and most feasible power solution for the United States.
A pre-commercial prototype Fusion Power Plant is currently being built in France with the estimated finish time for 2013. There is also another one being built in Japan I believe. I can see them being built in my lifetime...
80 percent of Pakistan's power comes from Hydroelectric sources. Something to be learned there.
Hmmm... 80% of Pakistan's power would probably be about the same as 5% of the U.S.'s power. The per capita power usage is much, much higher. Too high to be able to power 80% of the U.S. on hydroelectricity, I'd wager.
The issue isn't so much HOW the reactor is built and managed; the issue is the long term disposal of the rods, where they are stored, and how they will be "secured".
Until there is a way to either recycle the rods (doubtful), speed up the half-life or send the rods into the sun (highly doubtful), we just stay at war and use the depleted uranium as shells! (/sarcasm)
This is more proof that Arnold Schwarzenegger was "elected to lead, not to read!"
-So here is our chance to kick some ass for mother Earth.
-I'm listening.
-Well, I've narrowed your choices down to five unthinkable options. Each will cause untold misery...
-I pick number three.
-You don't even want to read them first?
-I was elected to lead, not to read. Number 3!
---
-Don't worry, I have a solution for you, sir. In fact, I have five solutions. You don't even have to read them. You'll have deniability. I'll take care of everything. You know nothing.
-No. I need to know what I'm approving.
-Absolutely. But on the other hand, knowing things is overrated. Anyone can pick something when they know what it is. It takes real leadership to pick something you're clueless about.
-Okay, I pick three.
-Try again.
-One.
-Go Higher.
-Five?
-Too high.
-Three?
-You already said three.
-Six?
-There is no six.
-Two?
-Double it.
-Four!
-As you wish, sir.
(Option 4: Blow up Springfield)
I guess we have to sacrafice to save the planet. But Al Gore can still have a $30k per month utility bill. Sounds fair to me.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=nation_world&id=5072659
Sorry to burst your little bubble, but Gore has actually taken the 80-year old home, which was terribly energy inefficient (what 80-year old home isn't?) and has renovated it so it is only one of 14 homes in the nation rated as a Gold level energy efficient home:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22248699/
I realize it's a lot easier to have conservative radio show hosts to do your thinking for you, but you'll be a lot better in the end if you think for yourself and do a little follow-up.
You mean per year, right?
@Stuart...
So you want people to use the same thinking skills you used that bought into the myth of Global Warming...no thanks! Global Warming has been proven over and over to be a myth, it's not real, everythings on a cycle, including stupid people. They keeping coming back w/ a new scare tactic every decade or two. The Global Warming crazies are the same group of crazies that claimed we were entering a mini-ice age in the 70s, and the same crazies that shut down nuclear power development, and the same crazies that say we shouldn't drill a tiny hold in Anwar...they are and will always be 'the crazies'. What's sad, is that now people are starting to believe them rather than think for themselves and do a little research into their claims.
The day someone tries to control my thermostat (with or without a warrant) is the day they gun me down in my doorway.
@ Stuart
Sorry I can't give Gore much kudos seeing how these renovations took place AFTER being critized for the expensive energy. Should I give him kudos for buying carbon credits to offset his private jet usage as well?
Chris...you are a moron. And your children, if you have any, will someday condemn you as such for your backasswards thinking that is already pretty much being proven moronicly wrong. I get the whole of the scientific community is just wrong, right? Its just the right wingnut scientists that shrub has under his thumb who are claiming that global warming isn't real. Do us all a favor and go up to the arctic sometime in Winter and tell us global warming isn't real. Moron.
It is really sad to see so many people getting their information from talking heads, while ignoring the preponderance - overwhelming preponderance - of evidence from the scientific community that humans are contributing to global climate change on a massive level. I simply don’t understand the logic behind it. But for argument's sake, let’s say it is cyclical, and the world’s scientists are wrong. What have we accomplished by curbing pollution and carbon dioxide? Cleaner air. But what if the scientists are right and we do nothing? It is too frightening to allow.
And Chizzle, yes I do give them credit because in the same article that Turnersville initially links to, a spokesperson for the Gores said they were in the process of updating the home (scroll down, it’s buried quite deeply). So no, they didn’t start just because of the criticism, but because it was the right thing to do.
stuart, lets play a game of theory.
mass scientists come to the conclusion that global warming is real. like you said, if its not real, cleaner air. what if thats their thinking? what do they stand to collaborate al gores ideas of global warming? cleaner air, potentially reducing/stopping global warming, a nice big paycheck/grant
at the same time, a small but still in essence large(hundreds perhaps thousands?) disagree with the majority's opinion. why? perhaps if this scenario were to be true. those people would be taking the moral high ground, deciding and telling the truth that it is a farce.
like i said, i didnt say it was true. but think about it, what if it is true? now i do agree, cleaner air might not be a bad thing, and al gores witch hunt might be fine. but, lets take a local lake for example (and a canal in my home town)
lake(and canal) get heavily protested years ago to be cleaned, for boats of people who can afford a $50k boat to drive around say, lake michigan(same thing here except snow mobilers). they clean the lake, the lake being cleaned of seaweed, or just vegetation causes more sunlight to enter the water and deepr, causes more plant life to grow faster, larger, much better. causing a huge cycle of pointlessness. no big deal really? well its acceptable
now here in my town, and actually through out all of illinois the hennepin canal once was filled with downed trees, the pathways that run along it over grown and slightly wild like. these trees stopped snow mobilers from having fun on the canal, so them + EPA supporters said, lets clean it up. its been a while now... but its clean as hell most of the time. side effects like the seaweed? the fish population has decreased significantly, especially with combined factors of pollution and farm run off(same?) some species are nearly non existent in this canal now, when previously they were known to be some the most aggressive fresh water fish(we call them yellow belly/bullhead catfish im unsure its proper name). the fallen trees provided cover, safety nutrients(bugs&vegetation) for these fish and other animals
so now, thats one canal, on a relatively small scale(even though its like 100 miles long?) what if all this cleaner air stuff comes back to haunt us like the tree thing did? maybe it will be like the seaweed. it could be like a "perpetual cycle of maintenance" or it could be come a disaster. yes, i assume the pollution in the air/water all that stuff probably would cause more potential damage then then "disaster" scenario, but i think it should all be watched carefully.
Such a beautiful state under the complete control of marxist control freaks. What a pity..
I call it commiefornia
I actually have a similar device already installed in my home.
It is hooked up to my electric hot water heater and allows Dominion (Virginia) Power to turn it off at peak times. The plus side is that I get a $4/MONTH CREDIT on my power bill for having it (pays for local taxes).
It has been installed for 20 years without a problem.
Nice 4$ per month. Hey dude are you interested in getting the smart card. Th card will prevent you form buying stuff we don't want you to buy and we can all your life in our databases which he possibly sell for. But hey! you save 10% on everything you purchase.
part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRKYIwxbdQM
part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGRAVVR9aKQ&feature=related
I cannot believe you loose freedom for money.
Yea, you might say its just a thermostat... it always starts small.. then your garbage, electricity, and slowly increase until you have no more freedom.
wow Good_bytes, Mr. Scott here is saving energy, and you're lambasting him for it?
come on people, we're going to run out of energy soon enough, so what's wrong with turning your electricity down a bit?
Good_Bytes:
Where did you get this idea that electricity = freedom? I'm pretty sure there was no electricity when the founding fathers wrote the constitution and the bill of rights (or the declaration of independence, for that matter).
Electricity is a product, subject to the laws of supply and demand. Like anything else, when there's not enough demand and too much supply, you may not be able to buy it. I don't see how this is any different than going to a store at Christmas that's run out of Tickle Me Elmo dolls. Are you going to shoot up the store because they've taken away your "freedom" to buy that doll?
There's no "freedom" to buy *any* product. When it's available, you can buy it for the market price. If it's not available, you can't. End of story.
What this law would do would be restore that supply/demand balance. As it is right now, a few bad customers (those who set their thermostats to 60 degrees in summer) can ruin it for everybody else by individually using a little bit of a larger share of electricity than they need, which ends up taking away *all* electricity from *everybody* (including themselves) in the form of a blackout. This is much less fair, to all concerned (including the bad apples), than just upping thermostats remotely by a few degrees on emergency days. When there's a run on any other kind of product, it doesn't force the factories to shut down, but it does with electricity. This is just a way to keep the electricity "factories" (ie. power plants) running.
It's hilarious reading comments from people like yourself who somehow think the power to purchase products is a "right" inherent to our most basic ideals. If that's what you believe, then you've been seriously corrupted by right-wing propaganda. That is *not* the "freedom" this country was founded on. There's no guarantee anywhere in founding US law that says you have the right to purchase a product even when there is not enough supply of that product.
Rephrase that please before I start ranting to no end about liberal propaganda. We may be running out of OIL, not energy. Even that is debatable seeing as there are many untapped reserves left and 3.3 trillion tons of oil shale if it became possible to efficiently refine it.
Hmm, I too live in VA and have one of those gizmos hooked up. Although I'm not sure I get a credit. Maybe the apt complex takes that buggers.
However, I'm a fan if it means less rolling brownouts in the summer when they can't keep the power running. My mini-ITX (15 watts!) server has a UPS just for them ...
And what will be the punishment for people who tamper with these boxes? Fines? Imprisonment? Will their relatives be receiving a visit from a California SS officer bringing their ashes in a box?
Normally I hate Godwin... But I'm afraid that actually was a Godwin.
StreetStealth,
The law needs to be repealed since American is more and more closely emulating the practices of Nazi Germany. We just haven't reached the point where we start keeping track of the je....I mean the gays in this country via Real Id's all encompassing database. Give that a decade after its been established. Frogs in hot water, frogs in hot water....google it and learn why the people who are a paranoids in this country are the most likely to save it in the long run.
Why not allow public good will to assist in an emergency? Although I am writing this as a Brit, having lived in the US and monitored the news since, in time of difficulty, people will make sacrifices - such as various hurricanes, earthquakes and tornadoes. And likewise, here in the UK, we have a history of 'downsizing' in times of hardship.
A tragic reflection of where we are headed if human common sense and good will is to be replaced by the cold logic of technology and/or a remote entity distant from the citizen. How will they know who can survive with a lower temperature? I tell you, a database, so, people will defraud the system. A younger homeowner may fake their iD to pretend to be elderly. Etc.
I propose the following: In event of emergency, "Dear people of California, due to X event yesterday, I am asking that those of you able to please reduce your electricity consumption for the next X hours. Ideally, switch off all appliances and lights immediately after use. And why not do that all the time anyway to reduce your long term carbon footprint?" Etc.
I don't think trusting in the people to collectivly do the right thing would be as affective as one might think. I would expect an initial positive response but ultimatly I can see people getting desensitized to the situation and reverting back to normal usage paterns.
After Huricane Katrina hit there was some damage to an oil refinery which impacted the gasoline/petro production. The people's response was to purchase as much gasoline as possible until all the pumps were dry. This may or may not be applicable since you can't collect and carry electricity as well as fuel, but illustrates that ultimatly people are more concerned with themselves.
There are said to be problems with smog in the area where I live yet SUVs remain popular.
The main water resivior where I live has dropped by more than 17 feet in the last year due to draught conditions, but consumption of water did not reduce significantly until fines were imposed for using water out door.
So over all I don't think that trusting in "the good will of the people" is sufficient by itself.
They're already doing this in Canada (Ontario, that is) but it's an optional program. I think it's a great way to bring down the load when some people crank the A/C, especially when there is no one home. At the same time it's not a program I would opt for only because I'd rather have my own control over my cooling.
The radio in my garage--a technology that has had one hundred years to develop--turns to static if I walk in front of it...you really think the big 'ol government will be able to control a million thermostats within some time critical window dictated by changing power needs? Waste o' money.
On the other hand, maybe it'll be enough if even a small percentage of thermostats are responsive.
On the OTHER hand, hundreds of old people will die when a thirteen year old dismantles his thermostat and figures out how to spoof the signal.
Good points...also...you have to wonder how much power the state/fed government will waste monitoring and controlling these thermostats. All of those computers and other machines (plus the fm broadcasters) will require a LOT of power to reach that large of an area so densely populated as Cali.
I'm wondering if they can't use already existing FM transmitter towers. If you had to install a wireless control system in each home, this is not a bad way to do it... Radio transmitters already exist; say you just develop a thermostat that, when it receives a signal, boosts the temp by five degrees for thirty minutes, then resets it to normal. Then put a hardware key in the device and encrypt your signal on some unused FM frequency (between stations, for example, or even spanning multiple unused channels). Of course, none of that is hack-proof; it'd be fun to try and break.
Thermostat hacking, yum.
Bad idea. First of all, it will encourage people to use window air conditioners instead of central air, which is vastly more efficient. Secondly, it will encourage people to get fossil fuel heating instead of electric heating. Actually, fossil fuel heating, even now, is cheaper than electric heating on the individual level.
Sorry. Just have to go on my normal rant here. Where do you think the electricity is coming from? If you live in the US, it's likely the power is coming from a fossil fuel plant. Most likely burning coal; a fuel that is significantly more polluting than propane or natural gas. (Although environmental controls mostly negate this pollution.) So, before you go "YAY! Electric powered (insert name of currently gas-powered item here)", just remember that that power is coming from fossil fuels.
@ dramamoose:
AS good portion od Cali's power is hydroelectric- it comes from Hoover dam, as per the agreement with Nevada when the dam was built.
Apreche's mostly correct! This legislation will just increase the use of smaller heaters/air conditioners, which in most cases are less effecient. Smaller units are electric powered. Most electricity in the western states comes from burning coal.
Americans won't stand for being uncomfortable in our own homes!
This is terrible legislation which will not save energy, while making our lives less convenient and comfortable.
Couldn't one work around this by placing some type of object that gives off heat near the thermostat? Not that a true hacker would wave any trouble attaching a switch to a 3/5 wire thermostat to bypass the control all together.
Can you imagine if they set this up for flushing toilets? Hummm...big brother had better get out of the invasion of Iraq first, that would save alot more energy and money.
Many, many localities already have ordinances in place mandating low-flow toilets, and have for decades.
Government control, how sweet.
Next we an expect to have our vehicles monitored, then our eating habits, and our dental and medical records, and on and on... All of it in the name of 'the greater good' (as defined by the government of course.)
Next we have our vehicels monitored? Hmmm its already here!! I think all 2005 or maybe later not for sure have black boxes in them!!!
By the way i live in Texas and they tried to get R I F D tags installed in our registration tags for our cars but it was voted down yet the DPS was caught with a huge order of these very tags ready for shipment to our dps offices now what do you call that? If they werent caught we would probably have these as we speak and might anyways!!
I actually work for a utility that is using these T-Stats for energy conservation. Its funny but you would think with all the problems that California has with rolling blackouts and shit, they would have had a plan like this in place. Or at the very least start looking at other utilities and copy the plans they have. It should have never got to this point to make it a requirement. These are kinda neat though, the utility will have a website that you can actually change the temp in your house when your not there.
Looks like we are going on a similar direction down here in Buenos Aires, Argentina. We are currlently suffering regular blackouts, and the goverment blames the A/C, so they are planning to monitor the type and amount of aircos everyone has at their homes.
Having this said, I think it is invasive to our privacy to have goverment know this kind of things. I pay for the power I consume, and the solution is not to control how many aircos I have, or let some agency control the temperature of my house remotely, but look for alternatives in their side.
I welcome this Orwellian nightmare for I will be the man who makes a million dollars selling custom built Faraday cages to fit over these things.
In all seriousness the first poster above is absolutely right. The answer is clean, reliable, and safe nuclear energy. The French have been using it safely for years and if those cheese eatin' surrender monkeys can do it, so can we.
Wow, you truly do live up to your name.
HEY! Insult the French all you want....lay off the cheese. I love my Sharp Whiskey Cheddar. :-P
G. Orwell was off by a few years, but his REALLY BIG mistake was calling them Big Brother. My brother wouldn't care what I do! I didn't care what my sibling did, either.
The term is Big Mother. Mother will keep baby cozy and warm.
That seems like a whole lot of money and effort for not much gain. There's gotta be much more effective ways at reducing power consumption in times of need.
FM receiver? I'm sure that'll be hard to jam (per FCC rules)
There are currently over 20 tokamak fusion reactors in operation worldwide, they are experimental, but they do exist..
Note that the only monitoring going on is the thermostat listening for commands - it is transmitting nothing. Not very Big Brother-like, at least not in the Orwellian sense intended.
What Stuart doesn't tell you is the article he references is from Dec. 2007. He did in fact have a house that consumed MUCH more energy than the average house and it was not "conservative radio show hosts" that said so. The Associated Press reported the story and (shock) the Gores admitted it.
It's a lot easier to be hypocritical and blame others for not doing their homework, eh Stuart? Maybe you should do a little thinking and follow up.
oh that'd be f'n great. my room is always at least a few degrees colder than the rest of the house. haven't measured specifically, but when the rest of the house is comfortable, my room is cold. so by all means, control my home temperature with no knowledge of the quirks of my house.
of course, you'll just have to turn off the electricity to my house to get me to stop running my little space heater. neener neener neeeener
I don't really see the problem with this as long as it isn't directly monitored by person, but by system.
I live in one of the two major systems in CA where there aren't water meters. This means that we pay the same rate owning a home where we don't even live (between renters) as a person does who fills up their pool once per week.
That doesn't seem fair either, but managing things directly from person to person is sometimes the only way to make people do what they should- manage their use of resources.
I can't wait for the first time there's a glitch in the system and it turns off, rather than lowers, the A/C for everyone who has one of these in the middle of a 100 degree heat wave. Or turns off the heat in the middle of a blizzard.
Or better, when someone figures out a way to hack the system (I imagine it will take all of 15 minutes) and thinks it's funny to play with his neighbors thermostat.
You know IF it was wanted and needed to have such a global control then it would still only require a RECEIVER to limit the heat/cooling during such a grid peak, there's no need for it to actually transmit the set/present temperature at all for limiting.
So if this story is true and it does transmit then the purpose is not quite what is claimed.
An interesting idea that could help in times of dire shortage, but easilly bypassed by anyone with a bit of knowledge on low voltage switching systems.
Only people who *want* this sort of thing are likely to allow it to do it's job. The "Get off my lawn" crowd will soon find ways around it if it's forced upon them, and will likely just crank their A/C down a few degrees in a fit of spite after the fact.
Yeah until it becomes illegal to do so and the Thought Police, led by Al Gore, recycle your house and family.
It's clear this is one of those amusing shows of daftness of someone that got the power to submit proposals, but I doubt it even gets 2 votes.
On the other hand.. texas and alabama have outlawed dildos, for instance, so some daft proposals do get voted for in the land of the f***.
Perhaps everyone in CA should be required to use bicycle-powered generators for their home-energy use.
Wait and see the crazy things California will come up with after they ban personal firearms in the state. This is just the tip of the iceburg, say goodbye to freedom and liberty and say hello to an overtaxed nanny state.
Yep thats how they get you. They take your gun and then bam, suspend habeas corpus. No wait, the gun nuts in charge right now already did beat habeas into a coma, but still let people have guns.
So what happens to Grandma when they cut her AC and now she has breathing difficulties because of the increased stress due to the heat? +/- 4 degrees F can be pretty major for someone with severe health problems. Does the State of Kalifornia pick up the cost of her medical bills/death?
Besides all their power issues are their ( the state's ) own making. It's a total crock of bullshit.
Marxist state is right. The former soviet block use to do this kind of thing and people actually did die from cold.
$10 says your exempted if you use alternative energy...
Apparently you don't know what Marxism is. You (and the other ill informed right wingers on this board who've used it) get it confused with totalitarianism. Totalitarianism can be left or right, it is an earmark of a country ruled by a dictator (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, Ayatolla, etc.). Marxism is SOCIALISM (not communism, read a book on political theory to understand the difference). Socialism (and even communism) doesn't have to be forced upon the people. And even if it is, it need not control every facet of their lives. In fact true socialism is all about personal rights. While dictators, be they secular or religious, right or left, are never about personal rights. Thats why things like habeas corpus and requiring court orders for wire taps are important. They deter would be dictators.
Also everyone who thinks because 1984 was about a communist government Orwell was pro capitalist (and all the rah-rah bs that goes with it) realize he was a socialist. He hated dictatorships, no matter what their leaning. As any thinking person should.
btw my spelling is probably way off since I haven't slept, so please ingore my spelling and grammar mistakes
Proving once again that the environmental nut jobs in the government of Cali know that their population can be easily bent over. Seriously... I've been to California numerous times. They have more worthless desert out there than just about any state in the US. Build a nuclear plant or two out in that worthless, uninhabitable desert, and your problems go away. Even if they do melt down, who cares... the sand? People scared of nuclear are uninformed (or have seen too many movies). The other thing people forget is that nuclear power is not just plentiful, but cheap. Currently I pay just 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity that is largely generated by nuclear. All that aside, the big brother step is clearly in the wrong direction. It fixes the symptom but not the problem (population expansion requires more electricity). I don't understand how a state can expect to add millions of residents every couple years without an upgrade to the electrical grid and power pipeline. It's idiotic.
And where do you put all the spent, radioactive fuel?
This is the problem people like you always forget about nuclear power. The plant is only part of what's required. The other part is an endlessly-growing field of radioactivity somewhere.
Where are you gonna put that? You know, even in the desert, people own that land. Is your solution to kick those people out? Or just ask them to live next to a giant ball of radioactivity as they watch their land values plummet? All in the name of "less government control"?
Sounds pretty hypocritical to me.
Installing TWO thermostats, the monitored one unconnected to anything useful, would be about as easy a workaround as one could get. And probably would be one of the most common workarounds.
The answer is simple bring our troops home from iraq and the trillions of dollars that is being spent. then spend it on research for cleaner forms of energy! Wow some redneck from texas is smarter than the whole us government! O sorry i forgot im not smarter they know all of this its our citezens who are to dam lazy to stand up and do something about it! the elected government is owned by the oil companies and our current president sleeps with the saudi government!Sure is funny that oil prices have rose so much since our oil president has been in office ,also oil companies say they had to raise prices for many reasons like supply and demand,refineries lost in hurricane,many other excuses yet their profit margins rose the exact same percentage that prices went up hmm were is our government at when we really need some protection from domestic terrorsist!
By the way 4 color coded wire thermostats are not that hard to bypass even my 5 year old could put the red wire to the yellow wire and wow we have airconditiong!
O NOES!!!11! TEH CORRUPT GOVERNMENT IS CONTROLLING MAH THERMOSTAT!!111!! B1G BR0TH3R!111
Get over this, people. There is a very distinct line between a utopia and a dystopia, and the line is when the actions of the government cease to be for the common good. When the government starts to cross that line, that is when we need to start taking action, not as they are actually doing things to make our lives better. Definitely, there is a point where things go too far, but it's only once it reaches that point that we should be concerned. Trying to make everything the government does out to be some grand conspiracy only makes our lives all the worse, and then we start to miss the line between the good things the government does and the bad.
The common good would have been extending the run of the existing power plants until they had other means to produce the increasing power needs of the state.
Does that make it a dystopia?
The difference between this and what I eat is that what I eat doesn't adversely affect everyone around me. But if I'm cooling my mansion to 60 degrees and its threatening to kill the grid, possibly affecting millions of people, then a little government oversight might be required. But this is not the way to do it.
The way to fix this problem is requiring the electrical companies to make the grids stronger and more redundent. I (along with every single liberal I've ever met) would rather have the government regulate business more closely than regulate individuals (SG warning appeared on smokes decades before any smoking bans were put in place, for example).
Two words - faraday cage
I can't believe that people would put this spin on things. Would you rather have no power then a slightly warmer/cooler house??! This kind of device is intended to be used only when failure to do so would overload power plants kill cut power to all your appliances/gadgets.
I failing to see how turning your thermostat down 4 degrees makes the state Nazi Germany, or communist. Surely its a good way to round off peak loads and reduced the need for expensive underutilized peaking plants?
Instead of the cost of all the bureacracy and repairs and updates and equipment and aggravation to install, monitor, etc all the thermostats, how about giving people tax credits (or other incentive) to install solar power or to add insulation in their roofs (and walls) or better windows to reduce the overall electricity use?
What the hell is this?
Russia
Before we go extolling the praises of nuclear power, take a look at this article:
http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magazine.article&issue=soj0708&article=070810
Ridiculous! Someone above had it right, you in California have to stop electing the far left wing liberal crazies that come up with this stuff! Come on!
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&G) has been offering free digital thermostats to California customers for several months now. They'll even install it free. The catch being-- twice a year, they can lower your thermostat remotely during an energy crisis.
It's an intriging idea, but I'm not sure everyone would be welcome to have their temperature lowered without their involvement. As far as a law goes, I don't see this getting passed, even in California. Having someone else control your house or apt is just plain freaky. Imagine if the system got hacked and messed with the environmental controls for everyone.
Thank you, but no. I don't want my house connected to Skynet.
Not sure where all the nuclear talk comes from but...
I (until just recently) worked for a company that makes thermostats exactly like these (in fact, we were working with a metering company in California, so for all I know, this could be related).
This really isn't a big brother kind of thing. No one is monitoring your actions. This kind of system would be in place so that lets say on a hot day when everyone cranks their AC and overloads the grid, instead of a sudden blackout (meaning NO AC for a lot of people), the grid can automatically set back everyone's temperature by one or two degrees, and keep power going. Or it can be done in segments - rolling back temperatures in certain areas for a few hours then switching to another to balance the load.
This is a GOOD thing. It's intelligently controlling power, it's not invasive in any way (certainly less so than cutting off your power or a rolling brownout would be). And much better than building another polluting power plant.
"So what happens to Grandma when they cut her AC and now she has breathing difficulties because of the increased stress due to the heat?"
Um. What happens to her if there's a blackout in her neighborhood for 12 hours because the grid got overloaded when everyone around her (or, if you want to be a silly hating-the-man type - the big rich jerks in their huge mansions) turn all their thermostats up?
Isn't this the BETTER option??
what happened to wind?
And I'm so sure that our friends at the power company will keep track of those folks that have a MEDICAL NEED for a specific temp.
It's the suede/denim secret police!
They have come for your uncool niece!
Wow, so now Al only uses seven times more than an average home instead of twelve times. If he wants to impress me he could try living in a normal sized home instead of a freakin' mansion.
There is simply no excuse for the U.S. or the U.K.
They both have massive coastline....How about wind turbines on the ocean?
What about hydroelectric...yeah....no excuse.
We also have Alaska to store nuclear waste
We have installed in our new house, all they do is drop or increase the temperature by 1 degree when energy consumption is heavy. I mean its only 1 degree and it saves you a little cash.
We're in ur base, changin' ur temp.
Line from the upcoming movie: 2008: A Space Heater Oddity
"I can't allow that increase in temperature, Dave. You're already quite comfortable."
As people have said this is a small patch on a big disease.
The fact remains that California has a woefully inadequate energy infrastructure. It does not have enough generation or the means to transfer it where it is needed (high capacity transmission lines). The energy crisis in 2000 proves this. Minimal changes to the infrastructure have not changed the root cause. The politicians blamed Enron, and somehow they believe that Enron's demise saved their electricity system.
Until the environmental zealots that run the state understand that, they will just cross their fingers that their state's meager generation assets along with imported hydro power form the Northwest and coal/nuclear from AZ, NV, UT, and NM will save them.
The best solution to not increase carbon release, reduce dependance on foreign hydrocarbons, and increase supply is nuclear. What about the spent fuel rods? Why not do something that Calironia knows all about? Recycle! That may be the one thing the French have right. Incidentally, the US, Australia, and South Africa have the richest uranium deposits in the world, and I, for one, would rather send my energry dollars there than Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia.