4 ms·
> But let's say even $500 (it's probably cheaper) for something that lasts 8 years is still much cheaper than sending people to get the readings Probably true,
by phaer 3y ago
> But let's say even $500 (it's probably cheaper) for something that lasts 8 years is still much cheaper than sending people to get the readings
Probably true, but only as long as one can continue to externalize the cost of handling the resulting e-waste to future generations or at least current-day taxpayers.
- xxs 3y ago"e-waste" is, unfortunately, mostly a term used to deflect from the real issues with all the garbage produced. Shipping and installing the meters likely generates more waste than producing the meters, themselves.
- matt_kantor 3y agoI don't get it. Wasn't the cost of sending people to get readings externalized also?
- amanaplanacanal 3y agoIt was paid for out of your monthly bill.
- matt_kantor 3y agoRight, but that's also the case for the cost of handling the resulting e-waste. Maybe they meant "externalize" in the "externalities" sense—environmental damage, etc? If so that makes some sense, but for a full accounting you'd have to compare that to the externalities caused by all the people driving around to take readings (tailpipe emissions, adding to traffic, etc).
- phaer 3y agoYes, that's the meaning I had intended