HelperGuy Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 Heard from Ontario this morning that, even though his house burned to the ground, he checked his "smart meter" and found Ontario Hydro charging something like 2.1 cents/kWh to keep the meter running. Hydro charges for delivery of electricity, along with the electricity, and the meter, as well as being supplemented by the government for installing the equipment in new houses. Another fellow with a cottage who only has a fridge running while not there is consuming, according to him, about $15 every two months, yet paying $160 for the pleasure. I wonder how this compares with the CFE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 There is a minimum billing amount but at the moment I don't recall what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVGRINGO Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 The minimum CFE billing is 40 pesos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 ... my point being that with all the carphing about CFE's prices and service, one has to look no further than one's home town to discover much worse going on. Currently (no pun intended), the head of the tax-subsidized Hydro company pulls in $1.2 million a year in salary (about twice as much as the highest-paid executive at the most expensive private hospital in Ontario), while the company continues to harangue residents for more, more, more. Including items like the Debt Retirement Charge. My last bill here was subsidized in my favour by about 80%, which I think is remarkable, no matter how you look at it. And over the last eight years, power outages and brownouts have been fewer and lasted less time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giltner68 Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Subsidized nearly 80%. I and others will accept a BIG THANK YOU from you any time you're ready. Let me just add a bit of qualification, the subsidized rate was, and is, primarily designed to assist the poor citizens of Mexico to cope, for some reason I doubt seriously that you qualify in that category. As visitors we take advantage of many things daily, I try not to brag openly about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Solar Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Go easy there.....The rate is volume based, it could as easily be called an "efficiency discount" as a "subsidy"! The first two rate tiers (up to 250 kWh / bill) average about 1 peso / kWh, whereas DAC (500 or more) = 4 pesos, a big jump.....hence the "80% discount" Helper Guy is referring to. This is why we design solar electric systems to get folks down to this 250 kWh level, and not to replace their total usage - there is a scale of diminishing returns. Most folks are very happy to move from (typical / average) 3,000 pesos down to 300 pesos per bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Thank you, Go Solar: quite right. Gilt 68, who's bragging? I'm specifically saying how lucky we are; I guessed you missed that. But wait, just let me pull out my wallet and trot off to the CFE to give them some money back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCC Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 The fact is that even the "subsidized" low rates are higher than in many areas NOB. We have solar electric and our bill is under $300 Pesos per billing period. It used to be over $3000. PM for more info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecoons Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 CFE is an inefficient, corrupt government organization that generates power with largely oil-fired, primitive equipment because no one in the private capital markets in their right minds would lend it money to build up to date facilities. Theft of electricity is widespread here as well, often aided and abetted by CFE employees. Ironically, several years back there were serious proposals to privatize it but the excuse for not doing so was a private power fraud case in California that had its roots in state government interference in power markets. CA, also has very high electric rates relative to most of the U.S. Fortunately, in this very sunny place solar is a very viable alternative and as a result it is booming here. CFE isn't going to get any better but solar gives most of us an out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johanson Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 There is a minimum billing amount but at the moment I don't recall what it is. You are billed for a minimum of 50 KWH during a 2 month period whether you use 0 or 49 KWH. At the subsidized tarrif 1 rate, that is close to $40 pesos but if you are unlucky enough to be billed at the un subsidized rate like some of us are/were the minimum DAC rate per billing period even for no usage is about $400 pesos. To learn more go to here http://www.cfe.gob.m...cetutarifa.aspx My latest two month bill went up more than 80% to 182 pesos. Two months before, it was $101 pesos. My secret? photo-voltaic solar panels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Again, my point being that the definition of the word 'corrupt' depends on your frame of reference. From where I stand, Ontario Hydro is just as corrupt as CFE; the difference is the same as all NOB corporations: they hide in the open, protected by disinformation, government inaction, and obfuscatory excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 What Ontario Hydro does or doesn't do has no bearing on life in Mexico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Atlas: wrong again. Remember the original post? By the way, is it proper for someone to comment in a thread, and then later diss the thread? Hmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Your last post referred only to Ontario Hydro and other unnamed "NOB" corporations. Obviously the comparison between OH and CFE is over. We have only MC's assertion that CFE is corrupt. Inept and inefficient for sure. Corrupt? I don't know. Do you have any sources to cite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezzie Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Sorry but my OCD has kicked in. Ontario Hydro is no longer an entity but was split into 2 companies many years ago - Hydro One (which is the distribution network) and Ontario Power Generation (OPG) which takes care of the "hydro" (water) power generation, some nuclear and thermal (coal/gas) generation. The debt retirement charge you are referring to was the huge debt that the old Ontario Hydro amassed building nuclear power plants, etc. The debt is being repaid (sic) by the consumers of electricity in Ontario and there are some who say it will never be retired but just continue to build as more infrastructure costs get heaped on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Sorry but my OCD has kicked in. Ontario Hydro is no longer an entity but was split into 2 companies many years ago - Hydro One (which is the distribution network) and Ontario Power Generation (OPG) which takes care of the "hydro" (water) power generation, some nuclear and thermal (coal/gas) generation. The debt retirement charge you are referring to was the huge debt that the old Ontario Hydro amassed building nuclear power plants, etc. The debt is being repaid (sic) by the consumers of electricity in Ontario and there are some who say it will never be retired but just continue to build as more infrastructure costs get heaped on. Correct, or close enough to it; there were originally three other entities created, but they are all so closely intertwined (regardless of the goals) that there wasn't much point in going through all that information for my orginial question. Back home, we still just call 'em Hydro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Your last post referred only to Ontario Hydro and other unnamed "NOB" corporations. Obviously the comparison between OH and CFE is over. We have only MC's assertion that CFE is corrupt. Inept and inefficient for sure. Corrupt? I don't know. Do you have any sources to cite? No, it's not over, it's just wandered around, like every other thread on this board. I have no problem with that. And MC is correct as well, but what's the point of amassing a list of proofs when discussing a concept that is already part of the culture? Next you'll be asking the same about the CFE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 So, no souces? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giltner68 Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 The CFE cost of production is the third highest in the world (if you believe their numbers) now, there are only two things to explain that, inefficiency and possible corruption and this being MX, I leave it to your imagination. As to the 80% being a - what was the euphemism? - ah yes an "efficiency discount", pray tell what business in the world, other than government, would give an "efficiency discount" of 80% LESS than their actual cost of production? Now, I can see a discount, I've certainly given many in my years in business, for volume, for quick payment, for endorsement (call it cost of marketing) - - - but NEVER, do I need to repeat? NEVER at 80% less, or even 5% less than my actual cost, that's just plain stupid and I don't buy it for a minute. Retail i.e., Home Depot sells 100 Christmas lights for $1 as a lost leader to generate more business, but somehow I don't see the CFE as needing MORE business - or did I miss something, because as I recall some were claiming it was a "tool" to minimize usage the last time we hashed this out. Now, that being said, let's get to the core of the matter here and expose the cucarachas to the light - the ugly truth is that the actual cost of production is probably about half or less than publicized (still incredibly inefficient) - and charged. I have no way of guessing, but I'd bet every DAC user is paying for at least 1.5 -2 low end users and the rest is waste, inefficiency and plain old corruption - you do remember where we live? Let me tell you a little story about the CFE and "efficiency", or should I say Inefficiency personified, I have a short story to typify happenings right outside my gate. Two years ago a big storm felled a tree across the street onto my front gate bringing down a pole and the feed to the casita. It took the CFE 7 days to get out and disconnect the still live line and by then the weight of the tree had cracked the arch requiring rebuilding. They didn't replace the pole which had probably a 20' incoming service, instead they strung 100'+ diagonally across the street to another pole and because a tree was now in the direct line for connection to the service pipe they literally tied it to a tree limb - and yes, I do have pics and wrote a blog about it - only in MX. I bought, and brought, a clamping system from TX and replaced their handy work a couple of months later to make it safe, apparently not a high priority in their ethos. About a month ago two guys were digging out front, they said a new pole was being installed, ok. The street to the W of me is about two blocks long with 3 poles in perfect condition because they were never used (no houses) they replaced them with new ones and finally strung wire? I watched carefully assuming they would reconnect the casita service (now 100' of skinny wire) with a new 10' service as the new pole is right there - wrong again, they drove off in the distance leaving the "long wire" in place? Now, you and I both know that leaving 90' of extra skinny wire is inefficient for the CFE as every foot of wire adds resistance to what they're pushing down. And, being a bit skeptical of the good old CFE, I can't imagine this is the only place in MX where such an obvious, atrocious dumb mistake has been made. And 3 new poles to replace 3 perfectly good ones? (which BTW each took two guys two days to dig by hand?) And yes, if you're so cheap as to take advantage of the rates intended for poor Mexican families, I'd be proud of you to man up and ante up at the local CFE office - like some of the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 Yes, I have sources. At least two authorized papers, a Canadian newspaper story, and many, many websites with information. Unfortunately, allegations that haven't been brought to trial are an easy target for defenders and naysaysers, so I'll tell you what: Since you're all convinced CFE is corrupt (and I never said they are or aren't), you post your sources and I'll post mine. And Giltner, you're actually going to tell me that you've gone into the CFE offices and given them money back, because you don't want to "take advantage"? So how is that trip every other month, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 10, 2012 Report Share Posted January 10, 2012 I never said CFE is corrupt, only inefficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelperGuy Posted January 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2012 Semantics. Waste of time. Done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giltner68 Posted January 10, 2012 Report Share Posted January 10, 2012 Actually what I was saying was that instead of bragging about your taking advantage of the subsidy, YOU should make the trip, as it is I make the trip every 2 months via Bancomer. I believe you misconstrued my comment, you're the "helper guy" - how about a little "help" from you for the poor folks who I am subsidizing, join in, makes you feel all warm and fuzzy to know people are living off your payments - including some high CFE officials I'm sure. But, like all rich gringos, I'm just here to spread it around - and around - and around - oh, never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johanson Posted January 11, 2012 Report Share Posted January 11, 2012 Like I posted before, my last bill went up more than 80% from $101 to $182 or 183. And I want to complain. One thing for sure, the businesses selling solar panels have all kinds of business, because of the DAC rates are so high. It sure works for me. Now if I could only figure out how to get my SIMAPA rates down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.