[phaer]

> 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]

"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]

I don't get it. Wasn't the cost of sending people to get readings externalized also?

[amanaplanacanal]

It was paid for out of your monthly bill.

[matt_kantor]

Right, 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]

Yes, that's the meaning I had intended