Electricity meters
Comments
-
BB would not compromise his green principles M, shame on you
0 -
M, dont understand your irrelevant comment, we are talking about what we (those CTers in this thread) feel the Club should or shouldn't do, after all, any comment i wished to make about one of our long term sites in Spain (which has metered ehu) wpuld surely be deemed 'out of court'wink
forgetting continental sites or uk commercials, i think the club should reduce its footprint and offer a non-ehu option to reduce site and customer fees, in the way its direct competitor (CCC) does.i then choose to take up that option or not, as i see customer choice (within a site or organisation) as a good thing.
BTW, ive got a 'oversized service pitch' here but i dont use all the space (in fact we look tiny on this pitch).
we also have drainage and water.....oh, and Ehu and im using itwink
after all, Ive paid for it.....smile
but id rather have the choice to have it or not.....wherever we gosmile0 -
I am waiting for one of the pro meter contributors to come up with a detailed business plan detailing why the Club should proceed down this road. I appreciate that it would be difficult to provide costings but we might all agree that it would not be a cheap option especially in light of the fact the the Club would want to do a "proper job"
Some considerations:-
1) Should the Club set out to recover the installation costs by increasing site fees? The by product of this is that the majority of members would pay higher site fees when you added in the cost of metered electricity.
2) If not, should they divert current investment money to achieve a metered system. This would mean cutting back on more hardstandings, delay in the upgrading of toilet blocks and motorhome service points, and possibly missing the opportunities for opening new sites.
3) How should members views be gathered?
David
3 -
you say you think the club should reduce its (carbon) footprint yet you yourself do nothing to help that? A clear case of NIMBY? If you really believe in being greener you should practice what you preach rather than telling other what to do?
Anyone can all make excuses for our own excesses in using any sort of energy.
0 -
+1.
No one has yet answered this
people usually want 'greener' sites but do not want to pay for it themselves.
Also the club is not an offshoot of the green party, anymore than any hotel. It is merely a place to take your holidays.
1 -
Should the Club set out to recover the installation costs by increasing site fees?
That would certainly test how popular metered electricity was. Actually as electricity usage must be higher in the winter there might be more scope to drop price a little as it must be a large proportion of pitch fee. Without knowing if present charges take electricity usage into account with pitch fee bands it is difficult to know. Those who only caravan in Summer might well face an increase but for the fact that would possibly reduce pitch uptake.
I wonder why CC has not gone down the road of metering? Perhaps not a change to be in the forefront of
0 -
Ok but every extra single passenger flying means extra weight and therefore extra fuel (more weight = more lift needed = more thrust = more fuel) and more pollution so if you are really committed to being green and advocating everyone being greener then why would you go on a plane and add to the problem?
Also if you really 'green' then why tow or drive a huge MH as you suggest and not a bike?
0 -
Which is why it is an anomaly, and maybe even hypocrisy, for those of us who use LVs to pretend to be green.
1 -
I wonder why CC has not gone down the road of metering?
Interesting (if a little old) article here......
Back in 2008 they would have had 19000 meters to install, even if that could be done (parts/labour etc) for £100 a pitch then that's a cost of £1.9 million.
Whilst spending that 1.9 million now may reduce future operating costs, and that depends how much additional maintenance/admin/IT is required, I would rather they spent the dosh on new sites & upgraded facilities....
1 -
Of course the club could install all these meters and charge more for the electric to recoup the costs, but if the club is right and more people are turning to MH's and when Merve becomes king and we are all force to install a SP and refillable gas system there of course would be no need for electric after all as we would be self sufficient so the cost would have been wasted
0 -
I'm not sure that it's a legal requirement in the case of clubs to become limited companies, I doubt it somehow.
The main reason for any business to limit its liability is just that, to limit the liability of the directors in the event of things going pear shaped.
0 -
and of course pay per size of dog, could have different size bands which could of course vary with off peak, peak... just like for humans?
Also shouldn't twin axles and motorhomes pay double? after they are wearing out twice as much road surface and pitch as a single axle?
And why not a large dog will drink more than a small one, poo more so more to cart away and as you say twin axles wear the road out more....
2 -
Just as an aside (thread stray
)as i understand it the LPG that is used is of course a by product of OIL and as the future is not oil?how much more are the "off gridders" going to have to pay for their refillables as if oil not used price will go up
0 -
For the average member that uses CC sites I suspect a poor return (if any given that pitch users are passed the electricity bill in pitch fees) on their clubs investment. Certainly far from Win/Win. I struggle to see anything but a loss for CC
0 -
Thanks ET and please note I have edited my estimate to £1.9 million, without my reading glasses I couldnt count the noughts correctly !!
0 -
I think you are incorrect in the expense as well.
done some homework, A B737 uses an average of 3400 litres per hour, so with an average of 150 passengers (the range is 95 to 190 passengers depending upon model type) that is 22 litres per passenger per hour.
My towcar gives say 30 miles per gallon when towing, so travelling at 60mph for one hour will use 2 gallons or approx 10 litres per hour, with two people in it that is 5 litres per passenger per hour, with 5 it would be 2 litres per hour per passenger.
You may be correct about the jet being cleaner as I have no idea how to calculate that, I assume you do do you as you have made the claim?
1 -
+1 exactly
0 -
no because the rebranding may (stress may) bring in more members, which according to the club it has, and therefore may pay for itself in the future. Spending it on installing meters would bring in no more income at all and leave a great big £1.9 m hole in the club's back.
Also, as I have said before, maybe the club makes money by not having meters? If so why should it change?
0
