The 'Radio Network of Things' Can Cut Electric Bills (Video)

We all love 'The Internet of Things.' Now imagine appliances, such as your refrigerator and hot water heater, getting radio messages from the power grid telling them when they should turn on and off to get the best electricity prices. Now kick that up to the electric company level, and give them a radio network that tells them which electric provider to get electricity from at what time to get the best (wholesale) price. This is what e-Radio is doing. They make this claim: "Using pre-existing and near ubiquitous radio signals can save billions of dollars, reduce environmental impact, add remote addressability and reap additional significant societal benefits."

Timothy noticed these people at CES. They were one of the least flashy and least "consumer-y" exhibitors. But saving electricity by using it efficiently, while not glamorous, is at least as important as a $6000 Android phone. Note that the guy e-Radio had at CES speaking to Timothy was Scott Cuthbertson, their Chief Financial Officer. It's a technology-driven company, from Founder and CEO Jackson Wang on down, but in the end, saving money is what they sell. (Alternate Video Link)

Comments

Illogical

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want my furnace to turn itself off at 2 am while I'm sleeping and it's 20 below outside. If everyone is using electricity at the same time, it's for a reason.

Re:Illogical

[mar.kolya]

The way energy markets are organized makes sure that you will not 'save money' no matter what.

Those monopolies will want their money. Even if you burn no fuel - investment has been made. And less you use - longer they can be charging you.

Take 'smart meters' as example. At no point people getting smart meters were paying less. They were using less, and using at 'cheaper' time. But energy markets 'suddenly' rose to accommodate for that and make sure energy magnates get their bonuses.

That was your first mistake

[Anonymous Coward]

We all love 'The Internet of Things.'

No, we don't.

Benefits are Overstated

[tapspace]

First of all, the government has acted irresponsibly with the powers it already has. Giving them the ability to remotely control our appliances is a terrible idea. We have to fix the problem with the unaccountable government and lack of societal trust before we start even thinking about these sorts of pie-in-the-sky, cooperative efforts which require a VERY high amount of accountability by those in control.

Second of all, even if the government can be trusted, the companies that will build these things will not take security seriously. I won't say maybe; I won't say possibly. Definitely. These things will definitely not be secure. Most companies still think they can just take a half-hearted crack at security, let marketing make it sound impermeable to the masses and act surprised when it comes out that the security was crap in the first place. It's pretty much the industry model at this point.

Finally, and most importantly, it's not even clear that smart meters will have the intended effect, that people adjust usage. As another commenter pointed out, when everyone is using electricity at the same time, there is usually a reason for that.

My fear is that these devices will be forced upon the public (they already are forcing the "smart" meters on us), and when the evidence is gathered that consumers don't adjust usage voluntarily, it will be done by force. And, the government does absolutely nothing to make me think this won't happen. Why should we, the public, accept this?

Glamor for Nerds

[Marginal Coward]

But saving electricity by using it efficiently, while not glamorous, is at least as important as a $6000 Android phone.

Especially if you're trying to pay off a $6000 Android phone.

Re:Silly assumptions.

[Skidborg]

I think you're massively overestimating the amount of temperature difference 30 seconds would make. If shifting the run time by couple by a couple minutes brought disaster, then opening the fridge would doom your food every time.