tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post7027177008269562155..comments2023-10-25T07:29:40.789-02:30Comments on UNCLE GNARLEY: What the Members Opposite Don’t UnderstandDes Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02566013585647491614noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-16595299407641860642013-02-17T10:42:41.951-03:302013-02-17T10:42:41.951-03:30We are paying Joan Shea's boyfriend a $100.00 ...We are paying Joan Shea's boyfriend a $100.00 an hour for his appointment as Chair of the Board of directors for Nalcor. He sells beer for a living. This government is dishonest, deceptive and STUPID!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-29760144304643121882013-01-14T21:12:10.769-03:302013-01-14T21:12:10.769-03:30You say the single greatest media failure of the e...You say the single greatest media failure of the entire Muskrat Falls 'debate' is not holding the political leadership accountable, that they could say anything and not be challenged. So true, and it continues. I watch Debbie Cooper, of CBC daily talk about the proposed rate increase of 7.2 percent. The application, Section 5 page 5-1 says 6.0 percent in customer rates, (which averages residential and commercial). For residential customers, the average 'increase' will be approximately 7.2 percent. So Debbie seems correct, except it reads "the average increase", not the "rate increase". Page 5-16 reads DOMESTIC: The Company proposes to increase the Rate1.1 energy charge by 7.9 percent. This increase is is approximately 0.7 percent higher than the average increase for the Domestic Class'.<br /> So what is the difference? It's this: the power bill we get has 3 components: basic charge for your meter, which is just over 15 dollars; the energy charge, now at 11.17 cents per kwh, and the HST at 4 percent for heating. They have left the meter charge unchanged. They propose to hike the energy 'rate' by 7.9 percent, but because the meter component is unchanged , the average increase comes to 7.2 percent, even though the 'rate' is actually 7.9 percent. <br /> But consider the difference. Current cost of 11.17 becomes 12.05 cents at 7.9 percent rate increase. So forgetting the meter charge, which is unchanged, the RATE INCREASE IS 7.9 percent.<br /> The average electric heat customer uses 1563 kwh per month on average, so 18756 kwh per year. At present this costs $2095.04 for energy. If the increase was 7.2 percent it would be $2245.88, a increase of $150.84. At the actual rate increase proposed of 7.9 percent it would be $2260.54, a increase of $165.50, an extra $14.66 per household. With about 170,000 electric heated houses, this is an EXTRA 2.49 MILLION dollars than the figure 7.2 percent suggest. Is that trivial? Is 7.2 therefore misleading? Now add the 100,000 residential non electric , and that little 0.7 percent adds probably another million to their revenue. And this is just one example of the way of presenting figures by the power companies. Doesn't 7.2 percent increase sound better than 7.9? So devise a way to say 7.9 is 7.2 and the public will get less aroused, and who would think it could add almost 4 million? Will Johnson alert us? And meanwhile many commercial customers will see a decrease in rates, some as much as 6 percent, while some have increases. And big commercial users get as much as 28 percent discounts if they use a lot of energy! Please correct me if I'm wrong. Wouldn't want Debbie misinforming the public . Winston AdamsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-44448405502634081002013-01-14T15:24:13.644-03:302013-01-14T15:24:13.644-03:30I agree wholeheartedly
DGLI agree wholeheartedly<br />DGLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com