- This topic has 15 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You’re not doing anything wrong. The problem is that the weather analysis pulls degree days for each bill period. In your case there is only one period with annual usage, so there isn’t monthly degree day data to generate a nice looking apportionment of the heating load. The usage then ends up getting apportioned across the months by number of days. I’m disappointed that this issue wasn’t exposed before release in VT. That chart is obviously a poor choice for the report in cases like yours. We are working on an alternative.
So where are we with this?
Lots of activity until it was finally obvious that there was a profound problem and now its *crickets*
Please advise.
We are meeting with EVT this morning to discuss alternative chart designs. Once a path forward is chosen, we should be able to get a patch out today or early tomorrow. Apologies for the delay.
Thanks for the update.
My hope is that a model can be developed that works for the entire state, and not just Chittenden County.
I think a useful consideration is to remember that it doesn’t have to be monthly to be useful. They do need to be tank fill-ups and not partial deliveries. Enter the date and usage from the delivery receipts you (the customer or fuel company) provides even if its just two deliveries as long as that covers an entire year. Many fuel dealers can provide an electronic fuel delivery history but will only do so with customer release. Also, many customers keep these records and most (all?) dealers leave a receipt when making a delivery.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.