Nannystateism...
 

From a California blog:

"What should be controversial in the proposed revisions to Title 24 is
the requirement for what is called a “programmable communicating
thermostat” or PCT. Every new home and every change to existing homes’
central heating and air conditioning systems will required to be
fitted with a PCT beginning next year following the issuance of the
revision. Each PCT will be fitted with a “non-removable ” FM receiver
that will allow the power authorities to increase your air
conditioning temperature setpoint or decrease your heater temperature
setpoint to any value they chose. During “price events” those changes
are limited to +/- four degrees F and you would be able to manually
override the changes. During “emergency events” the new setpoints can
be whatever the power authority desires and you would not be able to
alter them."

In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours
and will be overridden by the state of California through its public
and private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.

Nannystateism...
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
From a California blog:

"What should be controversial in the proposed revisions to Title 24 is
the requirement for what is called a “programmable communicating
thermostat” or PCT. Every new home and every change to existing homes’
central heating and air conditioning systems will required to be
fitted with a PCT beginning next year following the issuance of the
revision. Each PCT will be fitted with a “non-removable ” FM receiver
that will allow the power authorities to increase your air
conditioning temperature setpoint or decrease your heater temperature
setpoint to any value they chose. During “price events” those changes
are limited to +/- four degrees F and you would be able to manually
override the changes. During “emergency events” the new setpoints can
be whatever the power authority desires and you would not be able to
alter them."

In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours
and will be overridden by the state of California through its public
and private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.


A variation of this?

In other words, the Vice President of the United States is going to hold
secret meetings with the oil industry to determine how best to maximize
its profits over the next four to eight years at the expense of everyone
else.

Corporate nanny-state-ism.

Corporations uber alles.

Nannystateism...
 

HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
From a California blog:

"What should be controversial in the proposed revisions to Title 24 is
the requirement for what is called a “programmable communicating
thermostat” or PCT. Every new home and every change to existing homes’
central heating and air conditioning systems will required to be
fitted with a PCT beginning next year following the issuance of the
revision. Each PCT will be fitted with a “non-removable ” FM receiver
that will allow the power authorities to increase your air
conditioning temperature setpoint or decrease your heater temperature
setpoint to any value they chose. During “price events” those changes
are limited to +/- four degrees F and you would be able to manually
override the changes. During “emergency events” the new setpoints can
be whatever the power authority desires and you would not be able to
alter them."

In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours
and will be overridden by the state of California through its public
and private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.


A variation of this?

In other words, the Vice President of the United States is going to hold
secret meetings with the oil industry to determine how best to maximize
its profits over the next four to eight years at the expense of everyone
else.

Corporate nanny-state-ism.

Corporations uber alles.


It's my money and I should be able to spend it any way I want.

Nannystateism...
 

Legislation often has stupid revisions like this. It's good to see it
getting publicized.

It's not a bad idea to have devices in the home than can optionally take
advantage of managing signalling from the power company as to peak demand.
Tell people they'll get a break on the power bill and you'll certainly see
them play along. Try and force it, well, good luck. Given how trivial it
is to control an HVAC system you'll no doubt see immediate steps to work
around it. That and just imagine the nonsense of someone hacking the
signals used. No thanks.

But none of this has a damned thing to do with boating. Get it the **** out
of rec.boats.

Nannystateism...
 

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:45:54 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours and
will be overridden by the state of California through its public and
private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.

While I don't like, this might be a result of Enron. Remember all those
"rolling blackouts" of the early 2000s? Which would you rather have,
reduced control of your thermostat, or a blackout? If voluntary
reductions in power usage aren't working, what would you do?

Nannystateism...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
From a California blog:

"What should be controversial in the proposed revisions to Title 24 is
the requirement for what is called a "programmable communicating
thermostat" or PCT. Every new home and every change to existing homes'
central heating and air conditioning systems will required to be
fitted with a PCT beginning next year following the issuance of the
revision. Each PCT will be fitted with a "non-removable " FM receiver
that will allow the power authorities to increase your air
conditioning temperature setpoint or decrease your heater temperature
setpoint to any value they chose. During "price events" those changes
are limited to +/- four degrees F and you would be able to manually
override the changes. During "emergency events" the new setpoints can
be whatever the power authority desires and you would not be able to
alter them."

In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours
and will be overridden by the state of California through its public
and private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.



I wonder if the geniuses who came up with this idea have any data about how
homeowners already set their thermostats. I'd like to crank mine to 75 in
the winter, but I'd be a potato chip within a week, but then I'd need to add
humidity, and then I'd need a water softener, and it's all too friggin'
annoying. So, it's at 68-ish.

Nannystateism...
 

On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:47:48 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:45:54 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours and
will be overridden by the state of California through its public and
private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.

While I don't like, this might be a result of Enron. Remember all those
"rolling blackouts" of the early 2000s? Which would you rather have,
reduced control of your thermostat, or a blackout? If voluntary
reductions in power usage aren't working, what would you do?

Maybe build a few more power plants? Or properly use the ones they
already have in place?

Perfect example. $500 million 790 megawatt oil/gas plant down in
Killingly built by PG&E before they went under. That plant runs 16
hours a week to keep the turbines from deteroiating into junk. The
private equity group that bought it 5 years ago don't want to run it
because of operating costs (Union labor contract) and repairs only as
necessary. The plant is falling apart.

I understand that PG&E built several plants like this around the
country and all are in the same condition.

Nannystateism...
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:47:48 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:45:54 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours and
will be overridden by the state of California through its public and
private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.
While I don't like, this might be a result of Enron. Remember all those
"rolling blackouts" of the early 2000s? Which would you rather have,
reduced control of your thermostat, or a blackout? If voluntary
reductions in power usage aren't working, what would you do?

Maybe build a few more power plants? Or properly use the ones they
already have in place?

Perfect example. $500 million 790 megawatt oil/gas plant down in
Killingly built by PG&E before they went under. That plant runs 16
hours a week to keep the turbines from deteroiating into junk. The
private equity group that bought it 5 years ago don't want to run it
because of operating costs (Union labor contract) and repairs only as
necessary. The plant is falling apart.

I understand that PG&E built several plants like this around the
country and all are in the same condition.


"Private equity groups" for the most part are only interested in milking
out assets.

Nannystateism...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:47:48 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:45:54 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours
and
will be overridden by the state of California through its public and
private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.
While I don't like, this might be a result of Enron. Remember all those
"rolling blackouts" of the early 2000s? Which would you rather have,
reduced control of your thermostat, or a blackout? If voluntary
reductions in power usage aren't working, what would you do?

Maybe build a few more power plants? Or properly use the ones they
already have in place?

Perfect example. $500 million 790 megawatt oil/gas plant down in
Killingly built by PG&E before they went under. That plant runs 16
hours a week to keep the turbines from deteroiating into junk. The
private equity group that bought it 5 years ago don't want to run it
because of operating costs (Union labor contract) and repairs only as
necessary. The plant is falling apart.

I understand that PG&E built several plants like this around the
country and all are in the same condition.


"Private equity groups" for the most part are only interested in milking
out assets.

PG&E was forced to sell the plants as part of the energy deregulation. One
of those bills passed by the state legislature at the last minute with few
even reading the bill. They were built as peaking plants. Only run when
you needed to.

Nannystateism...
 

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 18:47:25 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:47:48 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:45:54 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours
and
will be overridden by the state of California through its public and
private utility organizations.

All your thermostats are belong to us.
While I don't like, this might be a result of Enron. Remember all those
"rolling blackouts" of the early 2000s? Which would you rather have,
reduced control of your thermostat, or a blackout? If voluntary
reductions in power usage aren't working, what would you do?

Maybe build a few more power plants? Or properly use the ones they
already have in place?

Perfect example. $500 million 790 megawatt oil/gas plant down in
Killingly built by PG&E before they went under. That plant runs 16
hours a week to keep the turbines from deteroiating into junk. The
private equity group that bought it 5 years ago don't want to run it
because of operating costs (Union labor contract) and repairs only as
necessary. The plant is falling apart.

I understand that PG&E built several plants like this around the
country and all are in the same condition.


"Private equity groups" for the most part are only interested in milking
out assets.

PG&E was forced to sell the plants as part of the energy deregulation. One
of those bills passed by the state legislature at the last minute with few
even reading the bill. They were built as peaking plants. Only run when
you needed to.

That's not how it was presented to the Regional Siting Council which I
sat on as one of two town representatives.