If all customers save money, then utility company revenues will fall.

Who expects utility revenue to fall after they install a meter that lets them charge more?

If utility revenues fall, then who pays for grid build-out?
Business-forecasters Berg Insights, ABI, and Pike Research say smart grid will cost billions more.

How about long-term software contracts for grid operation?
Cisco, IBM etc are buying-up proprietary software needed to run the grid.
These companies expect monthly contracts, and will extend their exclusive ownership of software with each upgrade.

IBM collects 25 cents per-meter per-month to read smart meters in Ontario.
Is this cheaper than local meter readers?
Where are these IBM jobs located?
How many more local jobs will disappear after the grid is installed?
Where is the switch to your meter located?
The make-believe promise of 2-3% savings is a steep price to pay for selling-out your community.

European study shows customer information from smart grid has no long-term impact on consumption.
This implies that people feel consumption-cuts make homes and appliances less comfortable.
Smart meter is about less abundance, which lowers the value of all real estate.

How about smart grid opt-out plans?
Opt-outs mean rich people will never have their power cut, so the burden of peak usage will fall on less fortunate.
Yet everybody's job requires electricity to compete against the wealthy.
Who pays to resolve this problem after utility revenues fall?

Has anyone done research to see if customers want to sign-up, and sign-in at a website that knows who they are and negotiates price using game software?
Who pays when utility websites become a magnet for opposition?

The rosy promise of 2-3% savings if-you-buy-a smart-meter-today-that-lets-the-utility-charge-more-tomorrow is a poor exchange during the era of transparency and simpler living.

Gene Haynes 2008-9