[HN Gopher] Smart thermostats inadvertently strain electric powe...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Smart thermostats inadvertently strain electric power grids
        
       Author : PaulHoule
       Score  : 97 points
       Date   : 2022-07-14 13:21 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (news.cornell.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (news.cornell.edu)
        
       | bob1029 wrote:
       | The power grid is a very complex thing, and I strongly believe
       | that demand management is an important component for stability.
       | There are ways we could better organize our HVAC fleets to
       | provide near-equivalent levels of comfort. The current proposals
       | really suck though.
       | 
       | Storage is a big deal that seems to be the focal point of most of
       | the renewable/non-renewable debate, but there are other concerns
       | that are discussed less frequently.
       | 
       | Having sufficient inertia in the grid is important as well. It's
       | like a low-pass filter for the desired grid frequency. The less
       | equivalent spinning mass you have, the easier it is for these
       | spikes to cause serious problems - Even if you have a gigantic
       | reservoir of water ready to spin up some turbines, you still need
       | to be able to handle all of the instantaneous events up to that
       | point, during, and following.
        
         | mikepurvis wrote:
         | I guess I don't know what's out there, but it feels like there
         | must be a bunch of industrial-type loads that could be pretty
         | flexible, and would absolutely benefit from a model where they
         | get electricity for a fraction of the price with the promise
         | that the utility can throttle them back by 80-90% at a second's
         | notice.
         | 
         | Think stuff that's naturally storage-oriented, like charging
         | forklift/AGV batteries, pumping something into a tank, boiling
         | a large kettle, etc. These are all potentially loads where the
         | convenience cost might be well worth a discount from the
         | utility, where the discount is maybe proportional to how long
         | the throttling can be-- some loads you'd only want to lose a
         | few minutes (so, basically buying the utility time to spin up
         | another turbine), whereas others you could lose for hours at a
         | time (actual load shifting).
        
         | mistrial9 wrote:
         | what I am reading here is that the first use-case for "smart"
         | remote is .. remote service disconnect. Profit goes Up. Second
         | use-case is better dossier building. "smart"
        
         | wongarsu wrote:
         | I wouldn't be surprised if "power plants" that just provide
         | inertia pop up. Basically flywheel storage, but with the intent
         | to keep the flywheel at a fixed saturation level to stabilize
         | the grid frequency.
         | 
         | But we are at an interesting point in time where "smarter"
         | devices make the addition of demand management easier than
         | ever, and at the same time less predictable power generation
         | makes demand management financially more attractive. We just
         | have to settle on the right mechanism: do electricity prices
         | stay simple, but the provider can control your devices, or are
         | electricity prices reflective of actual supply and devices
         | regulate themselves based off that.
        
       | russfink wrote:
       | Set your timer based on the last two digits of your house or
       | apartment number. If everyone did this, ... ?
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | Smart thermostats could really be a lot smarter, in particular if
       | you had a little bit of local battery storage, but even without
       | that it's possible to imagine a thermostat that could be set to
       | lower electric bills based on real-time monitoring of electrical
       | prices.
       | 
       | > "With few exceptions, when the load peaks, the price also
       | peaks. So, if you can move some of your electricity consumption
       | away from the peak times, real-time pricing will enable you to
       | save money by buying more of your energy at lower prices."
       | 
       | There are many ways to implement this but it might result in a
       | fairly pricey thermostat requiring an internet connection and the
       | ability to automatically switch from grid power to local battery
       | power as prices fluctuate. It would likely reduce demand
       | variation however.
       | 
       | https://extension.psu.edu/real-time-pricing-for-electricity
       | 
       | Some people have also rolled out notions like allowing utilities
       | to control thermostats remotely but I think that'd be very
       | unpopular for most people, it has too many dystopian Big Brother
       | connotations.
        
         | LeifCarrotson wrote:
         | Every house is already a battery, with significant thermal
         | mass. Unfortunately, this means that the is not real-time but
         | forward-looking: The thermostat needs to predict when load and
         | price will peak a few hours early, and turn the AC on before
         | that happens. If you cool the house down lower than necessary
         | in the morning, it will warm up through a high-load afternoon,
         | but stay comfortable, spreading the load and reducing usage
         | during that price peak.
         | 
         | Of course, if everyone does this on every morning when the
         | national weather service predicts high temperatures, you've
         | just moved the demand forward a few hours and not actually
         | spread it out.
        
       | praptak wrote:
       | Inadvertent mass synchronization is a known pattern and it has a
       | solution: jitter everything, even things triggered by events
       | which you don't think about as synchronized.
       | 
       | Your widget needs to fetch data periodically and the network
       | connectivity died. You'd be tempted to start fetching data right
       | away after it goes back, right? Okay, but if a huge network
       | provider gets back from an outage, you will have a problem - all
       | widgets in that region will start fetching data at the same
       | moment.
        
       | krallja wrote:
       | This is why one of the goals of the "smart grid" is demand
       | response: the loads and grid need to be able to react to each
       | other.
        
         | CoffeeOnWrite wrote:
         | Just curious, is there a term more inclusive than demand
         | response that accounts for generation-side factors like weather
         | and fuel economics/logistics?
        
       | konschubert wrote:
       | Considering how widely the price of electricity varies throughout
       | the day, we urgently need to translate this into end consumer
       | pricing in order to better shape demand.
       | 
       | https://energy-charts.info/charts/price_spot_market/chart.ht...
       | 
       | This doesn't mean that end consumers should pay spot prices - we
       | have seen where that leads in Texas. But having four distinct
       | prices for night, morning, day and evening might already achieve
       | a lot.
        
       | joezydeco wrote:
       | We've had real-time pricing in our area (ComEd/PJM) for over a
       | decade now, and we even have celluar+Zigbee-enabled smart meters
       | attached to all the homes. I even bought a gateway where I can
       | read my usage with pretty good resolution every 10 seconds.
       | 
       | But, still, none of the large thermostat makers offer any type of
       | integration to the local utility. Or even the local weather!
       | ComEd actually offers a box with a 3G modem that sits outside
       | next to the A/C compressor and will cycle it off when demand is
       | too high. But even that has no connection to the inside system.
       | 
       | Ecobee. Nest. Honeywell. Johnson. What's up with everyone?
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | My utility can (with an opt-in on my part) tell my Nest to go
         | into power-saving mode on a high demand day.
         | 
         | https://support.google.com/googlenest/answer/9244031
        
           | pfdietz wrote:
           | This is reactive; a better scheme is proactive: on a day when
           | the A/C demand is likely to be high, precool the house during
           | off hours to 60 F and then turn off the A/C.
           | 
           | Simply exposing homeowners to real time pricing would be
           | useful, even if nothing is done automatically with that
           | information.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Nest's does exactly that; there's a pre-cool phase.
             | 
             | https://support.google.com/googlenest/answer/9749812
             | 
             | > Once your thermostat knows the Rush Hour is coming, it
             | may pre-adjust the temperature in your home before it
             | starts. This is so less energy is needed to heat or cool
             | your home during the Rush Hour event.
        
       | taylodl wrote:
       | I really don't like the strategy of super cooling in the morning.
       | I prefer fresh air instead. I throw the windows open wide and let
       | all the cool morning air in. By midmorning I'm usually starting
       | to close those windows because the outside air is getting warmer.
       | By mid afternoon I'm closing all those windows and turning on the
       | AC and setting the temperature to 1 degree (Fahrenheit) cooler
       | than the current room temperature. I've found that temperature is
       | in the range of 78-84 degrees depending on humidity. Then the AC
       | kicks on and removes all the humidity and makes things
       | comfortable. In the evening when it starts cooling back down
       | again I turn off the AC and open the windows back up.
       | 
       | I'm paying 50% less in cooling costs than those cooling an
       | equivalent space as mine and I'm getting plenty of fresh air and
       | I'm still working comfortably. Heck, today is one of those days
       | where the highs are going to be in the low 80's and I probably
       | won't even need to turn on my AC. In fact it's already at the
       | high for today, 84, and it's 76 inside my house and I have a nice
       | breeze coming through the window.
       | 
       | Just another way how working from home is saving me money and
       | improving the environment.
        
         | codazoda wrote:
         | I don't want to pay for them but I do wish I had automatic
         | windows. It would be so nice if my windows automatically opened
         | if the temperature outside was a few degree's cooler than my
         | house and I was in "cool" mode. If it took the wind into
         | consideration, even better. My house cools off so nicely when I
         | open windows on opposite sides, but I have to remember to open
         | and close them at the appropriate times and I have to be around
         | to do it.
        
           | googlryas wrote:
           | Automatic windows seem hard, but you can accomplish this
           | "easier"(not super easy, but doable if you are a home DIYer)
           | by having a "whole house fan" + a make up air unit(basically
           | a vent that opens up when the fan turns on, supplying outside
           | air to replace the air the house fan takes away).
           | 
           | Fairly common to see here in Boulder and the front range in
           | older homes(before ubiquitous AC units), because it tends to
           | be cool at night + hot in the day during summers, so around
           | 5AM you can have the house fan turn on, cool your house, and
           | then you ride that throughout the day until the evening when
           | the temperature starts to drop again. Works quite well IMHO -
           | my first rental had a system like this as well as AC, but I
           | actually never touched the AC.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | This is why houses had awnings 100 years ago. You could leave
           | the window open and not worry if it rained.
        
             | corrral wrote:
             | They also had a bunch of other adaptations for better
             | Summer airflow. Large, open attics with multiple windows or
             | vents, open to the lower floors (no doors in the way), to
             | help hot air go up and out; high ceilings (an aid, not a
             | hindrance, to cooling, if you're not using AC); floor plans
             | and house placement that took prevailing winds into
             | account; larger windows for better airflow when they're
             | open, and usually on _all_ sides of a house, roughly
             | symmetrically (look at modern houses, lots of them have at
             | least one side with no windows); big, straight, end-to-end
             | hallways to let air blow through; and so on.
             | 
             | AC cooling efficiency requires abandoning several of these,
             | and others are simply not given much thought because they
             | don't matter if you're using AC all the time anyway. Which
             | is unfortunate, because it shrinks the parts of the year in
             | which going AC-free with windows open is viable.
        
           | Rayhem wrote:
           | Adaptive vents, too. Why cool the whole house when I'm going
           | to be in two rooms for the majority of the (hot) afternoon
           | before opening the window to the bedroom in the evening?
        
             | corrral wrote:
             | That's essentially what zoning is, most commonly used to
             | heat/cool different floors of a house separately without
             | having to have multiple furnaces and AC units. If I
             | understand correctly, you want the shut-off flaps or gates
             | as close to the blower as possible for maximum efficiency--
             | just shutting off the vents at the ends of the lines would
             | mess with pressure and airflow in the rest of the system in
             | undesirable ways.
        
             | moistly wrote:
             | I want floor vents that are wireless networked, coupled
             | with occupancy, CO2, and temperature detectors. They should
             | have the smarts to figure out when to open and close, such
             | that rooms are never stuffy, and never too hot or cold.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | If you setup water heater / cooled systems using the in-
               | floor (sometimes in-wall) pipes, they get that almost for
               | "free" - you can turn on and off zones very easily.
        
               | moistly wrote:
               | That's a fine idea when building a new house, but
               | untenable for a house that is not being thoroughly
               | renovated. My forced-air HVAC system is built-in, and
               | replacing the register vents would run me under $2K at
               | $100 a pop. Ripping up my flooring and installing in-
               | floor heating would cost me tens upon tens of thousands
               | of dollars.
        
         | conductr wrote:
         | I have a similar lows in the 80s. Except high is 105. I also
         | have a wife that likes it 65 (70 is our great compromise). I
         | don't think any of this precooling/ventilation hacks would work
         | for me. This time of year, even at night (thermal mass), if my
         | AC turns off the house temp goes up about 1F every 5-10
         | minutes. It's just brutal.
        
         | LazyMans wrote:
         | I predict in certain areas, "free cooling" systems will become
         | the standard. These are system which do just what you talk
         | about automatically. When there is a need for cooling and
         | exterior air is cool enough, supplement supply air with air
         | from the outside. This way your AC system load is reduced, or
         | if cool enough, the compressor doesn't need to run at all to
         | remove heat from your home by replacing it with cooler air from
         | outside.
         | 
         | Free cooling is already part of many commercial AC systems,
         | usually referred to as an "economizer".
        
           | giarc wrote:
           | I wish I had a system like that and have thought about it a
           | lot. I live in Calgary and today will be 28C and it will go
           | down to 12C at night. I wish my system could just run a fan
           | at 7am and draw in a ton of cool air to cool the house.
           | Instead my AC runs for 30 minutes or whatever. Seems like a
           | waste.
        
             | gedy wrote:
             | I'm working towards that with my Home Assistant
             | installation, using inside and outside thermometers. You
             | can trigger the fan based on the appropriate parameters,
             | time of day, temps, etc.
        
           | dimal wrote:
           | I've been wondering why my Nest thermostat doesn't already
           | have an option to do this. I can turn on the fan manually,
           | but it's not smart enough to do that automatically when it's
           | cooler outside than it is inside.
        
       | 6d6b73 wrote:
       | If the grid can't deal with thes thermostats turning on heating
       | in many homes at the same time, how will it function when we add
       | millions of electric cars to it?
        
       | ars wrote:
       | I had a Smart thermostat for a while, but removed it because it
       | was costing me extra energy.
       | 
       | My boiler is more efficient if it runs at low. But with the
       | thermostat allowing the house too cool off, the boiler had to run
       | at high to warm up the house in time. (I don't remember the exact
       | number it's something like 98% vs 80% efficient.)
       | 
       | This ended up using more energy, than leaving it to run at the
       | lowest possible output temperature the entire day.
       | 
       | When I googled this I found that Energy Star does not consider
       | smart thermostats to be energy saving.
       | 
       | I suspect the same will be true of A/C - letting the heat pump
       | run at very low all day will save more energy than high speed to
       | quickly cool the house.
        
       | labrador wrote:
       | It's a well known problem, so I'm surprised no one thought about
       | it ahead of time
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_pickup
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | There's also the semi-mythical "Super Bowl Flush"
         | https://news.arizona.edu/story/super-bowls-super-flush-just-...
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | Perhaps we should have a national "if it is yellow, let it
           | mellow, if it is brown, flush it down" ad campaign.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Australia has split flush buttons, with a half-size flush
             | possible. Haven't seen many here in the States; might be
             | good to require in new construction.
        
               | hyperman1 wrote:
               | I've found a toilet requiring 4 or 5 flushes before
               | things move. Otherwise they just go merilly around in
               | circles. It has 2 buttons, and a message to push the
               | right button and save the planet.
               | 
               | If there exists a hell for toilets, that one belongs down
               | there.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | That's another thing Australia one-ups us on; the toilets
               | are _vigorous_.
               | 
               | None of this slow swirly watch it spin away shit; it's
               | more like an airplane toilet in aggressiveness.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | You can buy toilets and toilet "tanks" that are
               | pressurized. They are incredible and probably can use
               | less water.
        
               | Jaruzel wrote:
               | UK has those too (is there a European directive for
               | them?)
               | 
               | In almost all cases they are shoddily built and break
               | really easily. I miss a proper metal lever based flush.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | They exist, but in my experience are unnecessary. Just
               | adds another component that can break, and saves less
               | water than simply not flushing.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | KoftaBob wrote:
             | Yeah very very few people are going to follow that, the
             | vast majority will find the idea disgusting and not nearly
             | beneficial enough to justify it.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Hence the educational ad campaign to inform and inspire
               | change. It is just for the home anyway, not public
               | restrooms.
               | 
               | And at the end of the day, even if the vast majority find
               | it disgusting, increasing water/sewage prices will force
               | the change sooner or later.
        
               | collegeburner wrote:
               | that is so patronizing. you can't "educate" when people
               | find something disgusting and saying that's "educating"
               | is arrogant. like if that's objectively people's
               | preferences you can't say your preference is right and
               | therefore you're "educating" them. and there's good
               | reason, it still smells. so no imma keep flushing it.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Obviously if it smells, you should flush. But in my
               | experience, my urine in the toilet bowl never smells
               | outside of when I eat asparagus. Perhaps it is a sign to
               | drink more water?
               | 
               | The education is also about water not being an unlimited
               | resource. I have no idea how educating or reminding
               | people of that is patronizing or arrogant, but to each
               | their own.
        
         | hyperpape wrote:
         | It does seem like there are a few details that are different,
         | because the thermostats will put sustained load on the grid,
         | whereas the TV pickup will not. That means that a couple of
         | nice technical solutions like adding jitter to the startup
         | times would solve the pickup problem, but not the increased
         | load at 6:00 AM.
        
           | yencabulator wrote:
           | > adding jitter to the startup times would solve the pickup
           | problem
           | 
           | There's minimal jitter in people's behavior when they are
           | explicitly synchronized by a television broadcast, and none
           | can be added within the constraints of broadcast television.
        
             | hyperpape wrote:
             | Of course. I was referring to adding jitter to people's
             | thermostats, which is not a bad idea, but would not solve
             | the entire problem here.
        
       | kevincox wrote:
       | How is this different from a regular timer thermostat which turns
       | on exactly at the set time?
        
         | cyril_st_john wrote:
         | The article suggests the difference is that smart thermostats
         | have the timer feature enabled and configured the same by
         | default, and most users do not change the defaults.
         | 
         | Even if most other thermostats have a timer feature, I guess
         | they are not all turned on and set to the same time by default.
        
         | bob1029 wrote:
         | I believe the smart thermostats are all synchronized with NTP
         | servers and are able to much more precisely coordinate their
         | activities as a side-effect.
         | 
         | Non-smart thermostats (even digital ones) usually drift on the
         | clock settings substantially over time.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | It isn't. The dumb timer thermostat my parents had in the 90s
         | would, if widely installed, cause the exact same synchronized
         | load problem.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | cshokie wrote:
         | Syncing the time over the internet would make them a lot more
         | consistent.
         | 
         | Our non-smart thermostat has trouble keeping accurate time and
         | drifts a minute per month or so. That would spread the load out
         | more because "6am" is a ten minute window.
        
           | furyg3 wrote:
           | This doesn't make any sense, though, as nobody turns on a
           | heater for 10 minutes. Even if there is drift of 10-15 mins,
           | there would still be a peak usage at 6:15 when all of the 6AM
           | 'starters' are sucking power from the grid.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | Imagine a grid supplied by a single coal-fired power plant.
             | When demand rises the voltage drops and the frequency
             | reduces, and the power plant has to start adding coal to
             | the fire faster to get the voltage and frequency back to
             | normal.
             | 
             | If the demand rises over the course of 10 minutes, you get
             | a small drop in voltage and the plant ramps up gradually.
             | 
             | If the demand rises by the same amount over the course of 3
             | seconds, you'll get a much bigger voltage drop and the
             | power plant has much less time to speed things up.
             | 
             | There's further complexity because real power grids are the
             | size of nations and have many power plants. If several
             | power plants notice the voltage dropping and increase their
             | production, a few seconds later you might have too much
             | power. Then they might respond by cutting their production,
             | and a few seconds later you have too little power and so
             | on.
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | > If the demand rises by the same amount over the course
               | of 3 seconds, you'll get a much bigger voltage drop and
               | the power plant has much less time to speed things up.
               | 
               | More than that, if the voltage drops too low, like from a
               | sudden large power draw, you could get a brownout or even
               | a blackout in severe cases. Voltage level is monitored
               | and wild swings indicate instability which trips various
               | safety systems.
        
         | delecti wrote:
         | I think thermostats "smarter" than a simple bimetallic strip
         | were relatively rare before modern internet connected
         | thermostats.
        
           | InitialLastName wrote:
           | Until recently, most of the thermostats I've seen in newish
           | buildings (in US northeast) since I've been aware of
           | thermostats (1995?) have been digital with clocks and timers.
           | 
           | Older buildings have had the electromechanical thermostats
           | you describe.
        
           | spogbiper wrote:
           | every apartment i've rented in the last 20 years has had a
           | thermostat with some kind of clock and program capability.
           | never used any of it, but I don't think they are rare
        
             | delecti wrote:
             | Interesting, mind if I ask where you are? None of the ~6
             | apartments I've rented had anything beyond a temperature
             | setpoint.
        
       | pjz wrote:
       | Other things (besides time & current inside temp) that a
       | thermostat could (should?) use: sunrise/sunset time, hourly
       | weather forecast, current & projected house power usage, current
       | & projected grid power usage
       | 
       | Note that almost all of those inputs are going to be identical
       | for people in the same area, so as others mentioned building in
       | some jitter is necessary.
        
       | yellow_lead wrote:
       | Smart thermometer manufacturers could solve this fairly easily by
       | randomizing the start time. Instead of them all turning on the
       | heater in the winter at 6am, they could i.e pick a random start
       | time between 5:30-6:30 by default.
        
         | pdonis wrote:
         | That just means the load peak is now at 6:30, when all the
         | heaters are turned on.
        
           | yellow_lead wrote:
           | It would be a smaller usage at 6:30, and not necessarily a
           | peak, since usage would probably surpass it right after
        
             | pdonis wrote:
             | _> It would be a smaller usage at 6:30_
             | 
             | Why? Won't all the heaters that turned on from 5:30 through
             | 6:30 be on?
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | Even if they're all on by 6:30, that gives the power
               | plant time to ramp up production to meet demand from
               | 5:30-6:30.
               | 
               | If everything is synchronized and everyone in a region
               | starts drawing lots of power at the exact same time, the
               | line voltage on the grid will suddenly drop below safety
               | thresholds and could trigger a brownout for that whole
               | region. The point being, randomizing power draw over a
               | period of time allows the grid more time to match demand.
        
               | pdonis wrote:
               | _> that gives the power plant time to ramp up production
               | to meet demand_
               | 
               | But the capacity isn't there, at least not if the
               | article's primary claim is correct:
               | 
               | "the peak demands are concentrated primarily when
               | renewable energy is unavailable"
               | 
               | It doesn't seem like the availability of renewable energy
               | will be much better at 6:30 vs. 5:30 or 6:00. So once all
               | the demand is ramped up, there would still be a capacity
               | shortfall.
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | I'm saying that even if the power were there, these smart
               | thermostats would still strain the grid by turning on all
               | at exactly the same time.
               | 
               | Power coming from renewables can exacerbate the problem,
               | thus requiring grid storage, but the problem remains even
               | without them.
        
               | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
               | This might be a regional variation for how people are
               | imagining this - I agree with you, living in a cold
               | environment my furnace takes 2-3 hours to get the house
               | up to temp, even longer in extreme (-30) cold, and will
               | still have prolonged on/off cycles after the house heats
               | up so that it's pretty much guaranteed to still be
               | running in case of a staggered start. Warmer climates
               | might be able to get things heated up in less than that
               | hour.
        
         | mikepurvis wrote:
         | Cron has a bunch of this kind of thing built in for stuff
         | that's known to touch the network, like automatically running
         | apt-update in the background. You don't want millions of Ubuntu
         | machines in each timezone all hitting the CDN within seconds of
         | each other.
         | 
         | I think Google Maps does it too with routing-- it adds a bit of
         | fuzz so that it doesn't send literally every car down path A
         | when there's a path B that's nearly as goo.
        
           | ciupicri wrote:
           | systemd.timer [1] also has AccuracySec, RandomizedDelaySec
           | and FixedRandomDelay.
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd
           | .tim...
        
       | namecheapTA wrote:
       | Commercial properties almost all have white roofs. Homes almost
       | all have dark roofs. I wish someone would do the math on how much
       | heat we're capturing into our houses because we want them to look
       | nice.
        
       | panarky wrote:
       | The issue described is wrongly attributed to smart thermostats
       | like Nest and Ecobee.
       | 
       | It's about any dumb thermostat that runs a schedule, so that HVAC
       | kicks in at, say, 6:00 am for thousands of homes and businesses
       | simultaneously.
        
       | sjburt wrote:
       | Seems like less of a problem for smart thermostats (which will
       | likely adjust to an odd-number start time based on your actual
       | patterns and the heating speed of your house) versus the clock-
       | based thermostats where everyone just had set it to 6am because
       | that was the default and it was a pain in the ass to change it.
        
       | toomuchtodo wrote:
       | Related discussion yesterday:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32088558
        
       | furyg3 wrote:
       | Isn't this the same if you have a 'dumb' thermostat set on a
       | schedule, which is presumably what most people have anyways? Even
       | if you have a 'really dumb' thermostat, presumably people are
       | waking up at similar times and turning on their heaters...
       | 
       | I sometimes wonder if the smartest thermostat isn't actually a
       | 'really dumb' thermostat on a timer. As in, you want it to be
       | warm? You have to get up and set the heater to 21C/70F, this
       | turns off after 4 hours (or when you lower it). This way if
       | someone hit snooze, their 'smart' thermostat isn't turning on the
       | heater at 6AM. If they usually are home at 7PM but have dinner at
       | a neighbors house, it doesn't think they are commuting home and
       | start turning on the AC...
        
         | bcbrown wrote:
         | That's essentially the system I use. I have it set to turn the
         | furnace on for an hour in the morning right before I wake up.
         | Other than that, I manually set the temperature when I'm at
         | home over the course of the day. It automatically resets at
         | noon, 4pm, and 11pm back to 63 degrees, so if I don't turn it
         | off before leaving, it'll still reset pretty soon.
        
         | tbihl wrote:
         | If your goal is to frustrate the user and confound planning in
         | the name of saving some energy, my understanding is that that's
         | the core feature set of Nest once you pair it to your utility.
        
       | evanreichard wrote:
       | Ecobee has eco+ which has "Community Energy Savings" [0]. It was
       | just way too intrusive. It seemed to be a reactive system vs
       | proactive. Technology Connections goes into this more [1], but I
       | believe they should be providing a system that proactively cools
       | when there is less demand _prior_ to an expected increase in
       | demand. Effectively using your house as a "battery".
       | 
       | When I had it enabled, I was _always_ too hot (in the summer)
       | during peak hours. Sorry, not sorry: I'm not willing to sacrifice
       | my comfort for the ~$10/mo incentive.
       | 
       | ___
       | 
       | [0] https://www.ecobee.com/en-us/eco-plus/community-energy-
       | savin...
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f9GpMWdvWI
        
         | tguvot wrote:
         | in reality it's hard (and probably expensive) to proactively
         | cool house with AC during summer at hot/sunny regions. I live
         | in a house with rather good insulation (the one mandated by
         | code) in south bay, yet all the walls getting rather warm and
         | even if you try to precool air with AC walls with bring
         | temperature back quickly
         | 
         | My solution was to install whole house fan which runs through
         | the night when temperature drops to 16C-14C. It allows to both
         | replace air with colder one multiple times and due to improved
         | air-flow to cool off the walls.
         | 
         | After I shut windows close at morning most of the houses stays
         | within comfort zone ( < 22C) till 6-7pm even on 40C days
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | If you can feel that your walls are warm I don't think that's
           | good enough insulation.
           | 
           | The whole house fan solution is great though.
        
             | tguvot wrote:
             | i have walls insulated according to california build code.
             | it's not really possible to add more insulation to them,
             | unless you rip them off and do spray in insulation.
             | insulated attic with radiant barrier and insulated floors.
             | i just checked with IR camera, most of surfaces in the
             | house are now 22C-24C. After a few days of 40+C walls ill
             | go to 25-26. some walls (south side of house) even higher.
             | There are few little spots where insulation doesn't sit
             | properly - it will be around 28C. The biggest offender is
             | skylight. Temperature near top of it can get to 60C.
             | 
             | Edit. I think most people simply do not realize what
             | temperature have internal and external walls in houses and
             | how it interacts (or counteracts) AC. If you will go to
             | read greenbuildings/passive houses forums, there are a
             | bunch of discussions about thermal mass of the walls
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _it 's not really possible to add more insulation to
               | them, unless you rip them off and do spray in
               | insulation._
               | 
               | Actually, it's possible to inject foam insulation into
               | walls without ripping them off. It goes in through small
               | holes, or through utility boxes. Plenty of companies do
               | that. I've even seen it advertised on TV in California.
        
               | tguvot wrote:
               | I know.
               | 
               | But injectable foam insulation usually going into empty
               | walls. I already have butted fiberglass in there. I don't
               | think it's viable to make laparoscopic wall surgery to
               | remove fiberglass . I did a quick google, and looks like
               | you can do injectable foam over fiberglass. But I am not
               | sure how much R it will add, but I am sure that for cost
               | of of injectable foam + wall repair, I can get another
               | hvac and run it for next 10 years...
               | 
               | I did consider recently to double walls on sunny side of
               | the house with few layers of foil backed foam boards.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | Do you have any actual numbers for what is up to code
               | insulation in California? California is a very temperate
               | climate. I wouldn't exactly expect their code to have the
               | highest insulation requirements.
               | 
               | Also, building codes should be considered the minimum.
               | 
               | I am keenly aware of how much thermal mass walls hold. My
               | apartment is 3 external walls that are constructed pretty
               | much only of a few inches of concrete, bare. The result
               | is that after a full day of summer sun, even though it
               | drops to 64 degrees outside at night, my air conditioner
               | cannot keep it 76 degrees or lower inside. It's crazy.
               | It's worse in the winter when I can feel the walls
               | sucking heat out of my apartment.
        
               | tguvot wrote:
               | >Do you have any actual numbers for what is up to code
               | insulation in California? California is a very temperate
               | climate. I wouldn't exactly expect their code to have the
               | highest insulation requirements.
               | 
               | R-15 for 2x4 or R-21 for 2x6. Not highest numbers in USA
               | I guess and after you buy house that already "exists",
               | it's expensive to change it.
               | 
               | >I am keenly aware of how much thermal mass walls hold.
               | My apartment is 3 external walls that are constructed
               | pretty much only of a few inches of concrete, bare. The
               | result is that after a full day of summer sun, even
               | though it drops to 64 degrees outside at night, my air
               | conditioner cannot keep it 76 degrees or lower inside.
               | It's crazy. It's worse in the winter when I can feel the
               | walls sucking heat out of my apartment.
               | 
               | Whole house fan is the way to go. If you can't install
               | one, I think a couple of strategically placed window fans
               | over night to create some air flow through the house
               | might work better than AC
               | 
               | I did some research on preventing walls from getting too
               | hot (my room wall on the outside hits 170F i think).
               | Narrowed it to
               | 
               | - Transparent paint with some particles that reflect
               | sun/reduce heat gain
               | 
               | - Awning
               | 
               | - Shade sail
               | 
               | - Trellis and grow some vine to cover the wall.
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | 2x4 walls are allowed at all? That surprises me, up in
               | the north they haven't been legal for decades now. Well
               | it is more you can't meet the rvalue with them, but still
               | even cheap houses don't get them
        
               | tguvot wrote:
               | no idea. Insulation levels are part of the code. It will
               | be used at least for cases "deep remodels" when house is
               | stripped down to skeleton
        
               | mulmen wrote:
               | > my room wall on the outside hits 170F i think
               | 
               | That seems unbelievable! Is that a typo?
        
               | tguvot wrote:
               | Nope. It's west facing stucco wall without shadow. It's
               | on sun through most of the day. With IR camera i clocked
               | it in range of 65C-75C multiple times (so it's maybe not
               | 170, but 165. hate C<>F conversions in head) . I had
               | inverter on this wall, and it simply died from
               | overheating. Same wall on the inside get's to 30C or more
               | if I don't run AC that blows on it. Wall is triple layer
               | stucco over plywood, R13 fiberglass and then drywall.
        
               | mulmen wrote:
               | That's amazing. Really shows the value of overhangs,
               | breezeways, and trees.
        
           | rsync wrote:
           | Whole house fans are really great.
           | 
           | It's cheating, a bit, to live in a place that drops 20-40 F
           | at night ... but even if we didn't, the ability to turn every
           | open window into an air conditioner is a great trick.
        
             | tguvot wrote:
             | Yes. It's really amazing. First thing that I did after
             | bought house last summer was to install whole house fan.
             | Due to it we used hvac to cool house for less than 36 hours
             | in July-October timeframe (only at days when temperatures
             | were above 40 for few days in a row or when night
             | temperatures didn't went down below 20)
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | I'm going to tear mine out. It helps a little, but it leaks
             | so much conditioned air when not in use i'm convinced it is
             | a negative overall.
        
               | tguvot wrote:
               | tear it out and put a new one. There are models from
               | airscape that come with motorized dumper doors with
               | insulation. When fan is off, it's sealed.
        
         | wil421 wrote:
         | It doesn't work. People use electricity at peak hours because
         | working people and families are on similar schedules. We all
         | get home from work or wfh office, start cooking, and doing
         | other things because we have time after work/school. Not to
         | mention 5pm is usually the hottest part of the day so ACs run.
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | It does work, though. Nest's program pre-cools to get you
           | through the hottest hours without having to kick on the AC,
           | moving some of the region's demand from the 4-6pm slot to the
           | 2-4pm slot.
           | 
           | I find myself going "huh, it's getting a little warm" at
           | about 5:45pm, at which point I check and remember it's a
           | "Rush Hour" session.
        
             | rblatz wrote:
             | Does precooking really work? I'd assume it would have to
             | cool my house down below 65 to keep it below 80 all
             | afternoon. 111+ days are brutal in certain rooms even with
             | both ACs set to 76.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > Does precoo[l]ing really work?
               | 
               | Depends on the shape of the temperature graph for the
               | day, the power of your AC system, your insulation, etc.
               | 
               | If your on a day that doesn't get below 90 and gets above
               | 110 during the hottest part of the day and your AC is
               | barely rated at the minimum recommended for your square
               | footage and you have average insulation, no, and even
               | regular AC use is going to be marginal and your AC is
               | probably going to frequent service.
               | 
               | (And the things that make precooling work better also
               | will make your AC work better and, for the most part,
               | more energy and maintenance cost efficiently when you
               | aren't precooling.)
               | 
               | If you live in a place where you frequently need AC,
               | aside from decent insulation, getting an overrated, high-
               | efficiency unit (which seem to be correlated for
               | residential units, probably because both drive up cost,
               | and there is a correlation between people looking for
               | more capacity and people concerned with efficiency) is a
               | serious quality of life improvement.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _Does precooking really work?... 111+ days are brutal_
               | 
               | Not every solution works in every situation. That doesn't
               | mean it doesn't work, it just might not work for you.
               | 
               | (Posted from a location that was 108deg last week.)
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | I would not expect this sort of solution to be super
               | useful in a place that gets 111 degree days, where AC is
               | literally keeping folks alive. You'd probably get more
               | benefits from a housing code that requires extended roofs
               | for shade, light colored exteriors, etc.
        
               | smileysteve wrote:
               | The last 30 years have been a renaissance of insulation
               | and energy efficiency. Pre cooling, fan recirculation,
               | humidity consideration, time of use observance may only
               | delay/reduce a few cycles per house per day, but in
               | aggregate, that's significant.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | The silly thing is that I can simply adjust my thermostat to a
         | lower temperature, so that the effective temperature is the
         | same as without this program.
         | 
         | As an example, if I set it to 74, then when Energy Savings
         | kicks in, it may set it to 76, which is too warm for me. So I
         | simply set the "standard" temperature to 72, and it will set it
         | to 74.
         | 
         | I use the same energy as without this program, yet I get my $25
         | energy savings rebate.
         | 
         | Silly.
        
           | sokoloff wrote:
           | It seems like maintaining a higher delta-T from ambient would
           | require more energy, not the same amount. You are still
           | shaving the peak demand with this approach, so the $25 could
           | still be earned.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | I'm not following. Peak event is, say, from 3-7pm. All my
             | Ecobee does is set the thermostat to be a few degrees
             | higher in that time period.
             | 
             | So as soon as it hits 3pm, I change my thermostat to a
             | cooler temperature, so that the final temperature is what
             | it would have been without this program.
             | 
             | Pretty much _exactly_ the same usage as without enrolling
             | into the program. Same  "spikes", etc. Without the program,
             | it would be set to 74 continuously. With the program, it's
             | set to 74 before 3pm, and then at around 3pm (or just
             | before), I set it to 72 so that it will continue at 74.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | I did not read "standard temperature" to mean "a thing
               | that I manually adjust twice per day on a fixed schedule"
               | but rather "I set it 2oF colder in April and leave it
               | that way until November".
               | 
               | If you are willing to make 60 thermostat adjustments per
               | month at 42C/ each, you earned that $25 in my book.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | Energy savings events in my area are rare - only a few
               | days of the year and very predictable (usually on a "hot"
               | day). It's not a burden.
               | 
               | Prior to this program, the local utility company would
               | merely announce the hours of peak events, and recommend
               | minimizing energy usage as much as you can tolerate.
               | They'd calculate how much less energy you used, and give
               | a credit commensurate to that amount. I used to just
               | chill at a nearby library during those hours (no kids in
               | those days).
               | 
               | With this program, all they do is check that I
               | participated often enough to exceed a threshold, and I
               | get a fixed rebate (regardless of how much I exceed the
               | threshold). And I effectively get that rebate by not
               | saving any energy, and with little effort on my part.
               | 
               | It's silly.
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | That's fine, really. The utility's concern is predictability
           | and burst capacity, not raw usage, so they know when and how
           | many https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaking_power_plant to
           | turn on, which may take a while.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | Not sure I follow. If they just want to know in advance,
             | then they don't need to modify the temperature at all,
             | correct?
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Lowering the load helps avoid needing the more expensive
               | short term plants from coming online.
               | 
               | Whether you go from 76 to 78 or from 66 to 68, you're
               | helping avoid the burst in demand they'd get.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | That's true, assuming I changed the temperature setting
               | prior to the event, and I likely won't time it perfectly
               | (nor would I want to).
               | 
               | The real thing is: These events last for hours. If what
               | you say is true, then wouldn't altering the thermostat
               | for a small period (e.g. 30 minutes) suffice?
        
         | copperx wrote:
         | > but I believe they should be providing a system that
         | proactively cools when there is less demand _prior_ to an
         | expected increase in demand. Effectively using your house as a
         | "battery".
         | 
         | Isn't this exactly what they do? That what the Nest does when
         | there's going to be a spike; it cools the house.
        
           | Kirby64 wrote:
           | The nest does this, but it's not very effective. We're
           | getting the 'rush hour' stuff right now (it's 100-105 peak
           | right now) and the Nest does the following:
           | 
           | * Sets the thermostat 2 degrees cooler (74) ~1 hr prior to
           | the rush hour time (3:30-5:30)
           | 
           | * Sets the thermostat to 4 degrees warmer between rush hour
           | timing.
           | 
           | Problem is, with the current heat my house cannot be cooled
           | down to 74 1 hour prior, and even still... it floats up to 80
           | degrees by ~4:30-5PM anyways and the AC kicks back on. Then
           | it takes until ~10PM or so to get BACK to the 76 set
           | temperature. This is a relatively modern house (built in
           | 2010s), so it has modern insulation, sealing, etc. It's just
           | ACs aren't really sized for being able to wildly swing
           | temperatures and maintain temp. When it's 100+ degrees
           | outside, they're sized so they run basically constantly when
           | the sun is out, so slipping temperature means you're playing
           | catch up for the rest of the night.
        
           | evanreichard wrote:
           | > Isn't this exactly what they do? That what the Nest does
           | when there's going to be a spike; it cools the house.
           | 
           | I don't have any experience with Nest, but the Ecobee seemed
           | to just increase the cool set temp when there was demand. I
           | didn't experience any proactive cooling.
           | 
           | Interestingly, in the Ecobee Community Energy Savings FAQ I
           | linked above it says:
           | 
           | > [...] your thermostat may precool your home prior to the
           | event to make sure you're comfortable.
           | 
           | But I never experienced this. I wonder if its energy provider
           | dependent.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | Nest's does this; it cools below your set temperature in
         | advance of the "Rush Hour" for a few hours.
         | 
         | https://support.google.com/googlenest/answer/9244031
        
           | supportengineer wrote:
           | This feature actually makes my house uncomfortably cold.
        
           | hwbehrens wrote:
           | In my experience, it was not nearly sufficient. If your AC is
           | appropriately sized (or undersized) for your house, you can't
           | just drop several degrees in 2 hours during the hottest part
           | of the day. Going from 78 to 72 to 84 in set temp looked more
           | like 78 to 77 to 83 in practice. Granted this was in AZ in an
           | older house, so extremely high outdoor temps combined with
           | marginal insulation didn't help.
           | 
           | If they pre-cooled the night before it might be a different
           | story.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | I think a poorly insulated old house in Arizona is probably
             | one of the worst-case scenarios here. Maybe there should be
             | a configurable or learning-based pre-cool length, though.
        
         | moralestapia wrote:
         | >Sorry, not sorry: I'm not willing to sacrifice my comfort for
         | the ~$10/mo incentive.
         | 
         | Hey, but at least you don't use plastic straws, right?
        
           | saurik wrote:
           | Why would you expect someone who isn't willing to sacrifice
           | their comfort for a $10/mo incentive to sacrifice their
           | comfort for a $0/mo incentive? Deciding "I don't like this
           | person's ethics" doesn't mean "this person is suddenly
           | inconsistent": you need to check your knee-jerk responses :/.
        
             | kennywinker wrote:
             | Well, for one thing people will often do for free things
             | they wouldn't do for money. Imagine choosing between "i
             | will pay you $10 to come to my party" and "i'm having a
             | party, will you come?".
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | Parties are supposed to be fun, so if someone offers to
               | pay you to come to a party, that sends a signal that the
               | party is not, in fact, going to be fun at all--otherwise,
               | why would they pay you?
               | 
               | On the other hand, paper straws are a shitty product that
               | are unsuitable for use, but if I was offered a
               | significant discount on beverages that were served with
               | them...well, I wouldn't take it, but I could imagine
               | someone who was desperately broke considering taking it.
        
               | kennywinker wrote:
               | See, what you said is exactly the problem i have with
               | mainstream climate solutions. The choice shouldn't be
               | paper straws vs plastic straws. The choice should be no
               | straws vs straws. Similarly, the question shouldn't be
               | "can I run a/c slightly off peak" rather it should be
               | "how can I run less a/c". This applies all over the
               | place. Electric cars have lifetime emissions that are
               | lower, but in the same ballpark as ICE cars - if everyone
               | switches to electric and changes nothing else, we still
               | have climate change.
        
           | baxtr wrote:
           | Someone who works at a bar told me recently that they
           | "discovered" long tubular pasta (forgot the exact name) to be
           | the best organic straws.
           | 
           | PS: You're welcome.
        
             | mcronce wrote:
             | The bar I frequent uses straws made of biodegradable
             | material derived from sugarcane - they last a lot longer
             | than paper straws, but ultimately are water soluble and
             | will dissolve after a day ish if submerged. They obviously
             | cost a lot more than plastic, but the user experience is
             | just as good without the forever waste.
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | From an ecological point of view it really depends how
               | much carbon is emitted during manufacturing & transport.
               | 
               | Landfills aren't actually _that_ bad when it comes to
               | getting rid of waste. If you expend more carbon using the
               | "eco-friendly" straws than using the normal ones then
               | it's not worth it overall.
        
           | namecheapTA wrote:
           | The plastic straw thing confuses me. I'd like someone to
           | explain to me how anything besides the random runaway straw
           | gets into the ocean. I live 60 miles from the ocean. We're
           | people throwing them into storm drains that flow to the delta
           | that flow to the ocean? We're people in San Francisco
           | traveling to the beach and throwing them into the ocean?
           | Couldn't we focus on not littering instead of legislating
           | things like straws?
        
             | gedy wrote:
             | Plastic trash is mostly from a few sources in Asia. China
             | and Indonesia iirc.
        
         | bedast wrote:
         | I have an ecobee and keep it in a fairly dumb scheduling mode.
         | My primary use, as of now, is to integrate with home assistant
         | so I can have data at hand to make future decisions on energy
         | and system usage.
         | 
         | I tried something similar with Nest but holy crap is it a pain
         | in the butt to integrate with home assistant, and keep the
         | integration functioning.
        
           | evanreichard wrote:
           | > [...] integrate with home assistant so I can have data at
           | hand to make future decisions on energy and system usage
           | 
           | This is actually what I've been doing. I haven't done
           | anything actionable with the data yet, though. Beestat [0]
           | has some great data break downs as well.
           | 
           | On a similar note: My house is only a single zone and I've
           | been manually adjusting the dampers when fall / spring come
           | around. When I find some time, I want to try to build
           | something that will automatically adjust the dampers based on
           | where I am in the house to create a pseudo multi zone setup
           | with Home Assistant.
           | 
           | ___
           | 
           | [0] https://beestat.io/
        
         | MonkeyMalarky wrote:
         | Like heating/cooling your house more in advance of demand? It
         | would be neat if they could enable/disable demand on a rolling
         | basis where AC runs for one subpopulation for part of an hour
         | then for another subpopulation the next part.
        
           | Robotbeat wrote:
           | You don't need to do that with any kind of precision. Random
           | starting and stopping has the same effect over a large number
           | of households.
        
           | celticninja wrote:
           | or you know, dont live in the desert e.g Phoenix Arizona, or
           | if you do decide to live in the desert then realise that's
           | your choice and dont add to pollution and climate change by
           | trying to cool down a desert with AC.
        
             | xyzzyz wrote:
             | Do you also recommend that people don't live anywhere it
             | snows? I mean, heating up in winter uses even more energy
             | than cooling down in summer.
        
               | seiferteric wrote:
               | It's funny that I have seen several anti A/C articles and
               | several pro Heat Pump articles in recent times, do you
               | think they know these are the same things in reverse? At
               | least A/C is often used in sunny locales were solar can
               | be used effectively.
        
               | MonkeyMalarky wrote:
               | Same thing in reverse but where I live, in the summer I'm
               | cooling from 30C down to 20C and in winter I'm going from
               | -18 to 18.
        
               | mulmen wrote:
               | Were they from the same people?
        
               | wiredfool wrote:
               | AC is more than 100% efficient in heating the
               | environment. This is unfortunate, but thermodynamics will
               | win in the long run.
               | 
               | Heat pumps are more than 100% efficient at heating the
               | house, which is what we want, and one of the places where
               | we are on the same side as thermodynamics.
        
               | doubleunplussed wrote:
               | In the long run ACs are exactly 100% efficient at heating
               | the environment. The extra heat is only temporarily
               | displaced from the building being cooled, and will leak
               | back in eventually.
        
               | kennywinker wrote:
               | There is heat generated by the system, and heat generated
               | by the power generation used to power the system. It's
               | definitely not a neutral system - that'd be
               | thermodynamically impossible ( increasing entropy without
               | external energy)
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | If you power the AC with 100% solar shouldn't there be no
               | extra heat generated?
               | 
               | As in you're merely absorbing some of the heat from the
               | sun to then move existing heat around?
               | 
               | Frankly, even without solar power it wouldn't generate
               | "extra" heat directly over a long timescale, it would
               | only accelerate the release of existing "heat" currently
               | trapped in oil/gas/nuclear/etc.
        
               | seiferteric wrote:
               | Fair enough, but direct heating of the environment is not
               | of practical concern since it's effect is minuscule
               | compared to GHG's. Point being, solar output is well
               | correlated with A/C usage, which is a nice benefit and
               | all that solar energy would be turned to heat anyway...
               | so might as well have it cool your house :) Heat pump in
               | the winter on the other hand, not so well correlated with
               | renewables.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | Navarr wrote:
         | Google is currently doing a proactive system called "Nest
         | Renew"[1]. This system is more focused on using clean energy
         | vs. dirty energy - at least for me (where there is no rate
         | difference based on time)
         | 
         | [1]: https://nestrenew.google.com/
        
         | r3trohack3r wrote:
         | Ecobee integrates with SRP in my area and does exactly what you
         | describe. They know my billing plan (Time of Use - Demand) and,
         | from my understanding, will coordinate with SRP ahead of a
         | conservation event to pre-cool my house by up to 2 degrees
         | before raising it by up to 4 degrees when attempting to
         | "flatten the demand curve" of the grid.
        
         | jjtheblunt wrote:
         | Our ecobee (Phoenix, so HOT) does the precooling and is buggily
         | aware of the expensive time window for electrical rates.
         | Arizona Power just shrunk the expensive time window, not sure
         | how that made sense, but the ecobee seems to not know, nor is
         | there any way i could find to inform ecobee of the new shorter
         | expensive time window.
         | 
         | I've had two Nests before, and two Ecobees, and they both were
         | fine, in general, but for the next house not sure which I'd
         | prefer.
        
         | bfgoodrich wrote:
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | Nest has an energy saving feature that feels like it is trying
         | to boil the frog. We normally keep the thermostat at 78F
         | (~25.5C), but over the course of a couple of weeks it ticked it
         | up to 79F, then 80, then 81, and now 82F (~28C). I had to go in
         | and manually adjust the schedule to get it back to something
         | reasonable.
        
           | hyperdimension wrote:
           | An interestingly more literal use of the analogy. I like it.
        
           | LazyMans wrote:
           | Where do you live? I'm just curious because I can't imagine
           | living at 78F anymore.
        
             | s1artibartfast wrote:
             | Seems pretty normal to me. Maybe not as refreshing if you
             | come in out of working in the heat, but fine for being a
             | desk jockey.
             | 
             | Temperature Comfort is largely a learned behavior in my
             | humble opinion
        
             | jrs235 wrote:
             | In Wisconsin we set the AC to 78 in the summer. We tried
             | doing that when we moved to Florida. Couldn't do it. Had to
             | go down to 72, 74 max, because of the humidity. There's
             | just too much moisture in the air and we have to set the
             | thermostat that low to make sure it gets removed from the
             | air.
        
             | jffry wrote:
             | I'm not OP but I live in Washington DC, where our summers
             | are definitely hot and humid. I keep my apartment around
             | 78F to 80F. I use a dehumidifier to keep relative humidity
             | around 50-55%, which corresponds to a dew point of ~60F
             | which is low enough to still feel comfortable instead of
             | "sticky".
             | 
             | On especially hot days, I will raise the setpoint higher,
             | and use a small fan to circulate air around where I am
             | spending time, which is very effective when humidity is not
             | too high.
        
               | hachari wrote:
               | A dehumidifier is essentially an air conditioner that
               | dumps heat back into your living space.
               | 
               | What you are doing sounds inefficient.
        
               | jrs235 wrote:
               | Yep. They're adding heat to the inside of their home.
               | They need to use an AC unit to remove the moisture and
               | pump the heat outside.
        
               | jffry wrote:
               | I do have an air conditioner (well, an air-source heat
               | pump), but it doesn't adequately remove enough moisture
               | before the indoors gets too cold. It's possible this is
               | not properly sized, but I cannot change it because I
               | rent.
               | 
               | In my case I did some tests, and the additional power
               | usage of the dehumidifier is way more than offset by the
               | power savings I realize by running the air conditioner
               | less frequently. This only works because the dehumidifier
               | enables me to be comfortable at a higher indoor
               | temperature.
        
               | jffry wrote:
               | The dehumidifier does use power and produce heat which
               | must be removed from my apartment by the air conditioner.
               | 
               | Because it's less humid, I can maintain a higher indoor
               | temperature and still be comfortable, meaning the air
               | conditioner needs to run less.
               | 
               | Do I use net less energy? In my case, yes, but your
               | mileage may vary depending on your equipment, insulation,
               | etc.
        
             | google234123 wrote:
             | 78-80 doesn't feel to bad in a dry climate imo
        
               | jandrese wrote:
               | I live in a fairly humid area, but the AC helps to drain
               | the moisture out of the air so it's still livable.
               | Ceiling fans on a low setting can also help you feel
               | comfortable, especially if you don't have the sun shining
               | on you.
        
             | lfowles wrote:
             | 78 at my thermostat means some rooms in the upper floor
             | might be 84+!
        
             | popcube wrote:
             | Is it too high or low? I am interesting about condition
             | settings of foreign!
        
           | chamanbuga wrote:
           | Holy, while in Toronto I set the thermostat to 68 and
           | complain if I see it cross into the 70s. Thanks to the wind
           | tunnel I'm in, I'm able to turn off the AC every 2-3 days for
           | 1-2 days. Conventional wisdom tells me this is more costly
           | than just keep the AC running all the time at a stable
           | temperature, but, I don't really care about the cost saving
           | over personal preference.
        
       | NelsonMinar wrote:
       | Thundering herd, but for thermostats. A little randomization of
       | the default setting would go a long way to smoothing out the
       | spike.
        
       | cratermoon wrote:
       | Sounds like they need to program them with something like
       | exponential backoff and retry with jitter. Do the smart
       | thermostats have any information on grid demand? IF not, then
       | they could just be programmed to apply some random time shift +/-
       | a few minutes (or however long) to spread out the demand and
       | lower the spikes.
        
         | sporkland wrote:
         | Came here to propose jitter as well:
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jitter
        
       | indigomm wrote:
       | Don't smart thermostats take into account how long it takes to
       | change temperature? Mine certainly does. Since each building will
       | have different properties, they effectively have jitter already.
       | I therefore don't see this as an issue.
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | Energy companies like to complain about demand spikes instead
         | of doing their job and managing the grid properly. Like if
         | bakeries were complaining that they have to get up at 5 to bake
         | bread because people want it in the morning or something.
        
         | mdasen wrote:
         | There will certainly be some jitter, but it'll be like rush-
         | hour traffic. Sure, some people get in a little earlier or
         | later and they leave from different points, but the result is
         | that we still have traffic that peaks. I don't think the issue
         | is that everyone is turning it on at the same time.
         | 
         | For example, let's say that people have dumb thermostats and
         | they turn them down 2 degrees overnight - because you don't
         | want to turn it down too aggressively since it won't warm the
         | place before you wake. They wake up and turn them up 2 degrees.
         | There's jitter so it's not all at once. The home heats up over
         | the next 20 minutes and the heating turns off. Let's assume
         | that everyone wakes up evenly distributed between 6am and 7am.
         | The grid is handling 1/3rd of customers (or less) at any given
         | time. By minute 20, 1/3rd have turned on their heat, but by
         | minute 21 the first 1/60th of customers have their systems turn
         | off.
         | 
         | By contrast, let's say that people have smart thermostats and
         | they turn them down 6 degrees overnight. The thermostats
         | likewise introduce jitter and we'll say they evenly distribute
         | over a 1 hour period. Given the greater amount that they need
         | to warm the place, they'll each be on longer - let's say for an
         | hour even though degrees aren't linear. Half of them start in
         | the first half of the hour so by minute 30, you're dealing with
         | half of the customers running their heat - but because there's
         | longer to go to heat up a place 6 degrees, none of them are
         | shutting off. At minute 31, now 31/60ths of customers are
         | running their heat. Then it's 32/60ths. This continues until
         | we're at all customers with the heat on simultaneously. We'll
         | be at 50/60ths usage for 20 minutes which is 2.5x more load
         | than the other example.
         | 
         | This principle holds regardless of different building
         | properties or increased jitter. A greater percentage of people
         | will have their heating systems on at any given time in the
         | morning due to this.
         | 
         | This is important because it means that it increases the
         | likelihood that utilities need to run so-called "peaker plants"
         | that are more costly to operate and pollute more to handle the
         | load.
         | 
         | Sometimes utility companies offer incentives around avoiding
         | this problem. I believe some California utilities have
         | incentives for charging your electric car overnight when the
         | load on the grid is minimal - because it's cheaper for the
         | electric company to supply electricity then. Likewise, it would
         | be cheaper for the electric company to supply electricity for
         | heating then. Some electric companies have off-peak rates. Some
         | electric companies have incentive programs where you can enroll
         | your smart thermostat with them and they can shut off your AC
         | for an hour when they're trying to shed load (you can override
         | it, but it can help them shed load from lots of people who
         | don't notice a degree or two change).
         | 
         | No, everyone won't be turning on their heating at the same
         | time. However, if everyones smart thermostats run the heating
         | system for 2 hours in the morning rather than 20 minutes in the
         | morning because they more aggressively manage the overnight
         | temperature, there's going to be a lot more overlapping
         | running. This usage will overlap with other peak-hour usage
         | like hot water heaters, toasters, microwaves, stoves, and
         | businesses opening up - compared with overnight heat usage when
         | businesses are closed, people aren't showering or making food,
         | etc.
         | 
         | The answer is probably smarter smart thermostats. They turn
         | themselves down overnight, but then the electric company
         | manages the overnight temperature so that they don't face a
         | morning rush to heat and have to use peaker plants. This would
         | be done with consent of the users and within ranges specified
         | by the users and to the user's benefit in terms of saving money
         | - ie. the person wouldn't have to pay more just because their
         | heat was kept a bit higher overnight and it wouldn't be kept
         | above their comfort level. Likewise, users could opt into a
         | program where they might be able to save money (say $5-10/mo)
         | with the note that during peak times their home might heat up
         | more slowly than it otherwise would - if it would normally take
         | an hour to go from 60F to 68F, maybe it takes 1.5 or 1.75
         | hours. Again, that would allow the utility company to shed load
         | while not inconveniencing consumers too much and providing
         | adequate compensation for what is an inconvenience.
         | 
         | Electrifying our heating can mean that our heat starts coming
         | from sources like wind and solar rather than gas and oil.
         | However, it'll also provide some challenges around peak-time
         | usage. These aren't insurmountable problems, but they do exist.
        
       | gwbas1c wrote:
       | Probably makes more sense to incentivize residential batteries
       | that can help take the strain.
       | 
       | The batteries can charge when there's a surplus of power on the
       | grid, and then absorb the load when everyone turns on the heat/AC
       | at the same time.
        
         | aaron695 wrote:
        
       | navi0 wrote:
       | As one of the authors of both the Zigbee Smart Energy Profile v1
       | [0] and the pre-IEEE seed that became P2030.5 Smart Energy
       | Profile 2.0 [1], we did anticipate this and included a randomized
       | modifier to any demand response or price signals coming from the
       | grid to provide the "jitter" discussed in other comments.
       | 
       | The problem here is that these thermostats have NTP-synched
       | clocks and come with default schedules out of the box and failed
       | to consider the importance of staggering over a 5-min time
       | period. It's understandable from a consumer acceptance standpoint
       | ("I set it to start at 6a, why did it turn on at 6.03a?!"), but
       | that could be solved with some messaging.
       | 
       | Better still would be for future thermostats to be required to
       | connect to the Internet and to the grid's price signals or
       | utility's servers in order to receive rebates. This would see
       | them base behavior on pricing signals, which would include a
       | device-specific random offset to the price taking effect.
       | 
       | Resideo (formerly Honeywell Home) acquired some very cool tech
       | that would solve this issue, too. Developed by Whisker Labs
       | (formerly WeatherBug) It combines a weather feed with a custom
       | thermodynamic model of each home to adjust the start time of each
       | setpoint. This provides both energy savings and more comfort. For
       | example, if it's an abnormally cold Feb day, it would start the
       | heater earlier to reach the desired setpoint rather than a normal
       | thermostat starting at a precise time and hitting the setpoint
       | later in the morning.[2]
       | 
       | Final fun fact: ~40% of smart thermostats never get connected to
       | the Internet. Many people are price insensitive enough to buy a
       | communicating thermostat and just slap it on the wall without
       | bothering to program the Wi-Fi settings. There are sneaky ways
       | some manufacturers and ISPs are trying to overcome this, though
       | it's a borderline dark pattern. [source: I used to work for a
       | large ISP's connected home ecosystem team]
       | 
       | [0] https://zigbeealliance.org/wp-
       | content/uploads/2019/11/docs-0...
       | 
       | [1]https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/2030.5/5897/
       | 
       | [2] https://www.resideo.com/us/en/corporate/newsroom/all-
       | article...
        
       | cosmotic wrote:
       | This problem is entirely industry created. The tech to mitigate
       | has been around for what seems like 30 years. There's just no
       | industry cooperation.
        
       | s3ctor8 wrote:
       | If a smart thermostat is turning on at a factory set "default
       | time", I wouldn't consider it to be doing its job of adjusting
       | the timings based on your usage habits.
        
         | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
         | I don't know how the smart thermostat is supposed to know your
         | behaviour unless you tell it, which means taking it off the
         | default. I had to tell my thermostat explicitly when I wake up.
        
           | ctdonath wrote:
           | With room occupancy detection, it should start modeling
           | likely HVAC needs - able to predict accordingly, and adjust
           | power use & timing jitter accordingly.
        
             | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
             | Ah, that's another level of smart than I was thinking of
             | and requires integrating motion sensors, but I do suppose
             | that would enable it.
        
       | TeeMassive wrote:
       | I work on a project where we design devices that offload certain
       | power intensive devices from the local grid when the current is
       | getting too close to the power limit of the transformer's limit
       | so they don't have to send someone in the field every time.
       | 
       | We have a minimum 15 minutes delay before powering back on a
       | device that was powered off.
       | 
       | I've raised the issue where there could be a problem where there
       | might be a ressonance effect with our devices and similar smart
       | grid devices from other sources due to the 15 and n x 5 minutes
       | delay being ubiquitous.
       | 
       | For now we came to the conclusion that this not an issue, but I
       | still think this is an easily avoidable catastrophe that can be
       | easily mitigated by adding a random offset to the delay.
        
       | nick238 wrote:
       | One of my existential worries before IoT devices were at least a
       | _little_ security-aware, was if there was a large coordinated
       | attack where someone would constantly power on /off tens or
       | hundreds of thousands of AC units in a region causing a blackout
       | like the 2003 Northeast blackout.
        
       | twawaaay wrote:
       | Seems like a problem that can be easily fixed with a software
       | update.
       | 
       | Just add a little bit of jitter into start time.
       | 
       | Do people need their thermostats to be punctual? I don't think
       | so...
        
       | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
       | Keep morning clothes on an electric blanket with a smart plug
       | timed to turn on before you wake up. Get out of bed and put on
       | piping-hot pants. Timer on your coffee maker makes either coffee
       | or tea (put tea bags in the coffee pot) as you wake up. Make a
       | hot breakfast in the microwave (oatmeal for me). No need for a
       | thermostat change for hours.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-14 23:01 UTC)