Uber surge pricing on a basic living utility? No thanks. Same issue as with fuel - the wealthy people who are often the most wasteful with resources (driving Hummers and V8/10 SUVs and cars, private jets, etc.) are the ones who would be affected the least because the price wouldn't impact their habits. Meanwhile, a middle/low-class family would be paying 1.5x the rate to keep the lights on home.

Price based on monthly total use is the opposite of surge pricing.

If those wealthy people are happy to pay a 5x or 10x rate, you can use it to install tons of renewables (with batteries). That's not something to complain about.

> Meanwhile, a middle/low-class family would be paying 1.5x the rate to keep the lights on home.

If it's not low, middle, or upper class, who do you imagine is paying the 1x rate?

why remove the incentive for businesses to optimize their energy usage? They have as much if not more external costs as a residential home.

If anything it is most important to apply this to businesses. Most consumer choice related emissions, as it's often framed, is taken through the proxy of a business that hasn't optimised their energy output to this extent. This is all the more relevant when you consider that consumers often don't have visibility over the practices of the business that they're interacting with, and particularly that of the supply chain further down the line. Like are all these lit up signs really necessary for any businesses to function, do you think? Or are they just trying to stay visible in a sea of neon?

Exactly. How about offices that keep the lights on or half-dimmed all night, as well as the computers running? Businesses are often the most wasteful.

That's a good way to encourage the middle class to conserve. Subsidies are needed for the poor.