I do not like the idea of smart meters, I think they make you paranoid, I don’t like that I have no control over my information and feel it’s a very intrusive point of access. There are of course the potential health disadvantages but of course that will be played down because smart meters really don’t benefit us, they benefit the energy companies, else, they would not make such investment into a system that would cost them and ultimately us money and push customers away.
I would rather use another energy company than use a company that forces smart meters, they can gloss it up to make it seem like it’s for my benefit and the planets but I know it’s not.
I like bulb, their customer approach and their friendly manner is refreshing, but as soon as they start to push a smart meter on to me I’ll start to consider walking away, I’m a low user anyway and very aware of what I use so a smart meter for me is a moot point and I don’t need a device to tell me what I use. I’ve just downloaded their app to facilitate easier meter readings because I take photos of the meter readings anyway, I also save the photos as a record.
In some ways energy use thinking is a bit backwards, we have devices that use high energy like tumbler dryers, kettles and electric heaters, the realities are a lot of people have to use these, they don’t really have a choice, some people don’t have a garden to “air their clothes”. The industry produce newer models of these devices that are more economical but how many people can afford to tap into that benefit and buy a £400-500 condensing tumble dryer that is AAA+ rated. If energy companies were really concerned about reducing energy usage, instead of making people feel guilty about using energy and in someway impacting on the comfort of their lives and potentially their health by using smart meters, why not have a subsidy for low income people that probably use C rated devices like tumble dryers, on a daily basis in winter. Wouldn’t it be worth a study on this to see if a subsidy would be a positive move over the cost of a smart meter, wouldn’t the benefit of people not getting so stressed because that smart meter is clocking up money be a positive thing in lots of ways. How many people look prematurely old because of financial stress.
The irony to all of this is the low income earners do not benefit from improved, more effcient technology, the wealthy do, and they can afford not to. Yes, there is a trickle down effect; kind of, but by that time the devices benefits start to lose potency as the devices/machines become older and parts become less effective at doing their job, all of this then leads to smaller benefit and that can be removed all together due to replacement of parts this is the reality of trickle down devices and a cost implication and the loss of benefit the technology was originally intended to give the owner, it’s a bit of an "almost no win’ situation for people who need that benefit.
Call me cynical but leopards don’t change their spots and while bulb have a healthier approach to customers than almost all other energy companies and I find that a breath of fresh air and I applaud them for it, in the end, it’s that bottom line that counts because without a healthy bottom line there would be no Bulb Energy.
There is a huge cavernous difference between the abuse of customers and ultimately greed and making a profit to pay a wage and sustain a company for the benefit of all.