I agree that the problem of the less well off is, or should be, a separate issue. Electricity billing and social welfare have been intertwined for a long time, which has led to price signals becoming muted and confused. I was merely pointing out that, within the confines of the current system, political action represents a balance between conflicting factors. It would be political suicide to raise peak rates high enough to provide a real financial incentive to load-shift, hence the balancing act that will please no one.

The solution IMO is to sharpen price signals through real-time feedback and billing innovations which eliminate the effects of amalgamation and delay. There are already tried and tested systems in place which do this, and they work because they are smart in a human sense, rather than only being smart in a technological sense. In combination with time-of-use pricing, these methods could be used to turn a blunt instrument into a precision instrument. Both the problems of the need for social considerations and the need for load-shifting can be addressed in such a way that they do not poltically confound one another. For details, see Part II.