Specifically, one that offered them incentives in exchange for some degree of remote control over the smart thermostats. Those customers, for example, get a $100 credit at sign-up, and $25 each year.
It seems that customers were aware of that because of the participation benefits
Far too much imbalance of information between vendor and customer intrinsic to the situation to allow this to be a legal agreement. I'm a fan of letting people make their own decisions, but letting them make their own decisions when there's no way they could make one with a positive expected outcome is just a legalized swindle.
Actually does seem like another valid framing to the consumer: this is insurance against an outrageous bill for you, it’s insurance against grid failure for us (and you)
Your thinking is especially confusing to me as I assume you are also a citizen of the land of the free, that usually favors self-sovereign and capitalism in all its flavors with all its consequences on much more apparent absurd levels? ;)
But back to topic, can someone just set for me into relation how "bad" that was it all? It sounds like this was more a sweaty luxury annoyance and not life-threatening? And then this outcry seems to be absurd.
Welcome to climate change and our general still accelerating resource wastage aa if there wouldn't be a future. In 20 years you will laugh about that, it'll only become much worse.
Here is $100. In exchange, if there is a shortage of energy, you will be a bit hotter or colder than you might normally want. You can quit the program at any time.
What is so complicated there?
This is no different than buying BBB rated debt or smaller company stocks. If this is too much for the average person, investment in nearly anything should also be banned.
A company is giving away money for you to sign up and the reasonable thing is to assume it will never happen?
The only reasonable expectation is that it will happen, just like the comment said.
source - live here and signed up for the program.
Do you guys realize that the alternative to things like this soon may be a blackout with much harsher consequences at some point?
Soon we won't have those fixed prize contracts anymore anyway, and it is then again up to your full control to spend your full month salary for AC on a hot day in crisis times..
Forget enforced conservation or blackouts, I choose a reliable power grid, obviously, and that means ditching worthless renewables and building out proven technology.
People who are sensitive to heat may need to cool down and 78 deg may not be cool enough.
My wife is particularly sensitive to heat, as in hospitalization is possible if she gets over heated for too long. She very easily triggers heat stroke symptoms. And some days in the summer it's "run the AC full blast" whatever the temperature is set at.
Sometimes that's even when we are down to 73 thermostat temp. Usually not that low but it has happened. 78 is frequently enough, but not always, many factors are involved.
I won't touch this tech with a 10 foot pole. We require full control of the environmental controls.