McClintock Introduces Bill to Prevent Remote Control of Thermostats

Patterico's Pontifications ^ | March 09, 2008 | Staff

[jdm]

Bradley J. Fikes reports in the N.C. Times:

Home control of thermostats would be guaranteed under a new bill introduced in the state Legislature.

The bill would forbid the California Building Standards Commission from mandating thermostats that are remote-controlled by anyone other than the building’s resident. Called Senate Bill 1491, the bill by State Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, is in draft form.

Good ol’ Tom McClintock — my hero. Not much of a surprise that he’d be behind something sensible like this.

The California Energy Commission attempted earlier this year to mandate so-called “programmable communicating thermostats” in new and substantially remodeled homes. Utilities seeking to cut power consumption as shortages developed could have used a remote control device in the thermostat to override customer control. The device would not have been removable by the customer.

After an intense public outcry, the commission rejected the proposal at its Jan. 30 meeting.

McClintock’s bill would forbid the California Building Standards Commission from mandating such remote control. The commission has ultimate authority among state agencies over building standards. The bill specifies that voluntary installation of the thermostats could be allowed in a building standard.

Here’s hoping the bill passes. But let’s do more than hope. Call your legislator.

[NordP]

Thank you sooooooooooooooooooooooooo much!!!!!!!!!!!!

KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK, SIR!

[RKV]

He’s MY state senator. And a sharp guy.

[Koblenz]

The CATO institute is actually for this proposal of remote controlled thermostats.

There is enough generation in capacity in California, most of the time. But there are periods of peak demand. So when demand outpaces supply, you need to raise prices or cut demand by some other means or increase supply.

You can't really raise prices: most electric meters don't have the time you used the electricity. You could increase supply I suppose and maintain the fixed price infrastructure, but should you really spend a lot to build power plants that will be used for only a few hours a year in peak periods? Or should you have some other method to reduce demand?

It's not that simple of an issue. Since the electric company cannot vary prices by the hour, with demand, they have to perform some other type of load shedding.

[o_zarkman44]

Lights! Camera! Action! All controlled by the marxist central planning comission.

This deserves a co-ordinated toilet flush.

[TCats]

What a half-baked, Orwellian concept! Not to mention the lawsuits that will arise from overrides, mistakes and/or malfunctions of these devices. What's next, car deactivation when the price of a gallon of gas gets over a certain amount?

[PAR35]

The device would not have been removable by the customer.

That shouldn't be a problem for anyone who has worked at a large company. Want to get warmer? Put an icepack near the thermostat. Want to get cooler? A little more difficult, but a carefully placed cup of hot coffee can help. At home, you could probably use a heating pad or a hot water bottle.

[GeorgiaDawg32]

it IS that simple IMHO..once someone OTHER than the resident has control, how long before the slippery slope comes into play and the legislature MANDATES no setting lower than 80 in the summer to no higher than 65 in the winter?

give them an inch, they’ll take a foot, then they’ll take a yard..etc..etc..

[econjack]

So when demand outpaces supply, you need to raise prices or cut demand by some other means or increase supply.

This is the classic economic peak-load pricing problem. It is made worse in CA because you have so many tree-huggers who want to be cool when the weather's hot, but fight the building of new power plants. The same is true for CA gas prices, which seem to be higher than anywhere else in the US. It would seem to me that the way to solve the problem is to implement meters that can read the time and date of power consumption and charge more in peak-load times. People would quickly learn what it costs to stay cool under peak load conditions and the market would set new equilibrium prices for those times. Who knows, even the tree-huggers might get upset enough with the higher prices to let CA build a new power plant.

[craig_eddy]

Then they’ll take YOUR YARD.

[GeorgiaDawg32]

they can already do that..try not paying property taxes..:)

[gitmo]

That shouldn't be a problem for anyone who has worked at a large company. Want to get warmer? Put an icepack near the thermostat. Want to get cooler? A little more difficult, but a carefully placed cup of hot coffee can help. At home, you could probably use a heating pad or a hot water bottle.

When my wife and I were poor students, we scraped together some pennies and took a weekend at Myrtle Beach. We checked into our (cheap) oceanside hotel, and it was hotter than heck in there. The thermostat had no adjustments on it. The front desk said the thermostats were controlled by headquarters in Chicago and nobody was there who could adjust it. I couldn't find another affordable hotel to stay in.

I took a shoestring and tied Mrs. Gitmo's hairdryer to the crossbars in the suspended ceiling. It was blowing on the thermostat and we went to supper.

When we returned, it was very cool inside.

[Digital Sniper]

McClintock is what every Republican should be.

As an aside, I can't believe that anyone really signed off on remote control of their home's heating and air conditioning! I knew California was overrun with tyrannical socialists, but come on!

If someone had dicked with my thermostat to do that, the first thing I'd be doing when I got home was circumventing the system by either replacing it or by setting up frequency jammers next to the receiver.

[PAR35]

I wouldn’t recommend that for home use. But I can see the added enjoyment of letting them pay for the electricity twice.

[Digital Sniper]

The device would not have been removable by the customer.

Correction: not removable by the average customer. (Government seems to think that requiring special tools is enough to keep the rabble out. It's not.)

[jiggyboy]

Home control of thermostats would be guaranteed under a new bill introduced in the state Legislature.

When it's come to this, that legislators are proposing this kind of law, and need to, then representative government has died. California is lost.

[Koblenz]

Variable meters with the ability to record when the power was used would indeed be the proper solution. The prices could rise, even skyrocket, during peak times, and people could make their own decision about whether or not to turn off the air conditioning.

Some issues are menu costs. Basically, how do you know what the current price is? I'd say that for variable pricing meters to work, you'd need to have a thermostat that would allow you to automatically shut off the AC once the price exceeded a certain level. So you could say something like 68 degrees, but 73 degrees if it goes to 15 cents a kwh and above 20 cents, turn the AC off. Otherwise, you'd have situations where people wouldn't know what they were being charged.

That would of course involve a lot of retroffiting. But I wonder what it would cost versus a few new power plants?

[rolling_stone]

I had to stay in a place that was air conditioned and way too cold,vent blowing straigh across my bed. I complained and they said they couldn’t do anything about it but give me an extra blanket, I took the vent cover off and stuffed the blanket in it....it suddenly got warmer.

[nyconse]

Has it come to this...so much for electing Arnold? The state is more moon bat then ever.

[gitmo]

I had wondered how you would cope with the situation in the winter. I wouldn’t have thought insulation would do the job ... I was thinking maybe a bag of ice on the thermostat. Good job.