Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
They do the math right on the bill. Actually the way I stated it is inaccurate. it shows 227kwh X 0.051700 = $11.74 but there is a base charge of $9.00/mo so it's close to twice that.
|
Soooo cheap... those might have been the prices a hundred years ago where i live but not today.
Here in Australia, in the lovely state of Victoria the prices are about 30 cents / kWh peak times and about half that during off peak times (11pm to 7am).
Then there is the daily base charge (supply charge) of around $1.10 per day, roughly $33 per month.
So your bill for the same kWh + a monthly supply charge here in Australia would be just over $100.
Makes having solar panels on the roof attractive even if to just reduce the amount of electricity drawn from the grid. Any excess that can be sold back to the grid is a bonus.
I put enough panels on the roof to cancel out our average usage plus enough so that the excess can be sold back to the grid and cancel out the monthly base charge.
It has been working so far with the last 2 years averaging $25 credit per month.
Oh and if you want green electricity, from a hydro dam or wind etc then you add somewhere between 5 and 8 cents per kWh to the price depending on retailer.
At the prices you are paying why doesn't everybody have an electric car.
And back to the cars aero design. Maybe they should have removed the side mirrors and replaced them with rear facing side cameras and some LCD monitors either side of the steering wheel.
Then they wouldn't need crazy shaped headlights to move the air over the side mirrors.
The cameras could be mounted way up front giving you a really good view down the side of the car and not much of a blind spot.
With so many people putting cameras on their cars and posting accident videos on youtube it won't be long before insurers catch on and start making it a requirement on the policy. May as well have them integrated into the design of the car.