🚀 go-pugleaf

Ah, the so-called "downward spiral of death".  I guess at some point,
things would have to stabilize; afterall, you can turn off the t.v.
and lights but few of us would want to uplug the refrigerator.  And
while lower demand could result in higher rates (to offset lost
revenue), at least there would be sufficient supply.

I was able to reduce my average household consumption to just 5 or 6
kWhs a day (this includes central air).  In fact, my energy and
distribution charges are typically less than half my total bill -- the
rest is the monthly account or meter charge.  Even if electricity
rates were to double tomorrow, I wouldn't expect to pay much more than
I do now.

Cheers,
Paul

On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 18:14:59 -0500, unidextr@msn.com wrote:

>On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:46:59 GMT, eldridp@sypatico.ca (Paul M.
>Eldridge) wrote:
>
>>I think it's pretty safe to say higher rates do promote more efficient
>>use.  Most people will reduce consumption by doing without (e.g.,
>>adjusting the thermostat or turning off unnecessary lights) or by
>>installing more energy efficient appliances.  If rates are low,
>>there's little economic incentive to do either.
>
>And when use goes down they will demand higher rates to compensate for
>the lost profits caused by the lower use!  I seen it happen with
>another public utility, where conservation was so good that the
>utility demanded (and got) a significant rate increase to be able to
>pay share holders dividends! (and management salaries and bonuses!).