The great electric rate swindle....

Cardew

grahamc2003 wrote: »

That applies to Nuclear stations (except they take 2 or 3 weeks to start from scratch) and a day or two may be necessary for the biggest coal, but in general almost all non-nuke stations are instructed to start and stop gensets during the day. There are various categories of the 'start' and 'stop' stateds though. The demand curve is met by a combination of many stations simultaneously ramping up, ramping down and steady state generation (ie when demand is rising to the morning peak, more will be ramping up than ramping down, and vv).
Cheap night prices are basically a way of using very cheaply generated power - the marginal cost of night-running stations is very low indeed (and stations are scheduled to meet peaks in merit order (that is rising marginal cost order), so at any one time, we have the cheapest generation. But the prices of nightime is a commercial decision, largely unrelated to cost as you say, there are big profits at 5p/kwh nightime use. The suppliers pay a variable price for every half hour for non-contracted generation, and this varies to very cheap at night (the system marginal price has been zero a few times), to very expensive at 5pm on winter's evenings, when the most expensive generation is scheduled.

Removing generating capacity, as will happen in a few years, like some old Nuclear (which have reached the end of their desiogn lives, and some big coal (which is madness since they are not near the end of their design lives) will see electricity prices rise rapidly, with generating capacity sometimes unable to meet demand (at which time the grid will have to decide which lucky thousands ofpeople get the powercuts).

One of the big problems we face is that the for all the concentration on solar and wind generation with their massive subsidies, our conventional generating capacity to meet maximum loading on the National Grid will not be reduced by a single kW. We could have every house in UK with solar panels and millions of wind farms and they could produce zilch!

J107

Well just wanted to have some input... Last year by luck my gas fire had to removed as it was unsafe. I decided to therefore use my builders opening (fire place) and reinstate my open coal fire, best decision I have made! Last winter I did NOT use my gas central heating (and we had some bad weather) I was and still am sitting in my sitting room nice and toastie with my open fire providing plenty of heat! The only regret I have is that I did not have a back boiler put in to run the central heating and hot water. I do not think there is any better value than coal central heating & DHW. If you compare it to gas, the minute you open a hot water tap or turn the central heating on it costs a fortune. Whereas with solid fuel you can have heating & hot water at no extra cost.

Why people decided to change to other heating systems I will never know? I look at chimney stacks and there is about three in use within half a mile of me, compared to nearly fifty odd chimneys either 'capped' or pots removed altogether. I wonder when I am passing and think yeah every house nearly had coal. For anyone concerned about the environment you can have a log burner with boiler attached that is carbon neutral and is 80% efficient which is the best efficient fuel and method of heating a home out of ALL the fuels!

Ji

davidgmmafan

grahamc2003 wrote: »

But your bills are no longer just to pay for the electricity you use. A higher and higher percentage is going to pay for a great swathe of 'green' subsidies - from fits, to loft lagging, to windmill construction to windmill operation, to windmills just existing (that capacity payment has just been announced), to cheap light bulbs, to carbon permits, to trading carbon permits (should keep plenty of city traders in Lambos for many years), to the renewable obligation etc etc - the list is seemingly never ending. These things simply don't appear from nowhere, they are paid for by you and me, these days in your energy bills. Wait till we see the unavoidable billions we have belatedly realised needs spending on Nuclear stations - I'm afraid we are currently in a cheap and available energy system (believe it or not) and during the coming decade we'll move into an expensive an frequently unavailable energy system, and there is nothing at all can be done to change that at this stage. People seemingly wanted inefficient generation in the form of solar panels, tens of thousands of windmills, etc - and the bills for those are now about to hit us.
Come back here in five years, and you'll then think these were the dream times, energy wise.

I've seen rate of 15 or 16 p per unit being talked about. Post (ridiculous) NPower price rise my online tariff is 9.10 pence per unit. So I'd take a rough guess if 'green' energy becomes the norm I'm looking at around 20 pence per unit for the supplier to make any money.

Green energy is sustainable in one sense, but at that cost in another way it isn't. We'll have lovely greene energy which only the five richest kings in Europ will be able to afford to use.

J107

Just wondering if anyone else has experienced over estimated bills from SCOTTISH POWER.

Just want to know if you have looked at a recent bill and you know your meters have been 'read' providing an accurate 'actual' reading and when you look at the bill SCOTTISH POWERnot only have the 'actual' meter reading but they have decided to 'estimate' it higher in order to get more on your bill. I just happened to notice this with my last bill and they nearly had an extra £30 odd off me until I told them I was not paying until they used the 'actuall' reading that they had got in the first place!

I think they must have thought they were being clever then they said they would have to get my meters read again. I asked 'Why?' they said they needed an accurate reading to provide an up to date bill lol! I said 'right then'. I knew they wanted to get another set of readings to justify the extra money they tried to 'estimate' on my bill. The problem for them, that I had been on holiday so they were lucky to get a couple of extra units. So they had to issue a 'new' bill which was cheaper for me.

Total waste of money in their part as it would have cost them more than the £30 they over estimated by spending money on a meter reader to call, then the time used to sort out the bill and post it back to me. A very 'sharp' practice by this company, and it's not their only one when it comes to getting money from customers that have not used the consumption to justify the extra money.

I am raising this matter with ofgem and the other regulator for this industry and would like to hear from others that have had the same type of problem just to see how widespread this practice is.

Thanks in advance if you have taken the time to reply. I will be doing another post on their Direct Debit 'practice'.

Again thanks,

Ji

J107

On from my last post is paying by Direct Debit with SCOTTISH POWER. I eventually caught on to another sharp practice again after having my meters read by a 'real' person. They would take one reading for say the electricity and then 'estimate' the gas although the gas meter had been read at the same time as the electricity meter. They would then 'over estimate' that reading and then they would follow it quickly up with a letter stating that they would have to increase how much I paid monthly to cover the 'estimated' charges. I would normally get a letter just in time BEFORE it was too late to allow them to 'increase' their payment. I stopped the Direct Debits and put them on a Standing Order payment. Funnily enough Scottish Power did not like this, so I eventually changed it to a 'whole bill payment' paying the bill on a quarterly basis then I thought they could not 'inflate' the bill because it would have to be based on 'actual' meter readings, guess what I was wrong (see post above)!

Now having been a loyal customer for 30 odd years, I am now changing my supplier. With Scottish Power they soon got 'heavy' if you did not pay them when they wanted (for whole bill) and what they got up to was unreal but when they owed me a £200 refund it was a right carry on to get the money from them, as I told then 'they did not like it when the shoe was on the other foot' meaning them owing me and not the other way round!

See my next post on the saga of 'Getting a Customer Refund from Scottish Power plc'.

J107

On from my last post.....

GETTING A REFUND FROM SCOTTISH POWER

I found out (after Scottish Power kept me in the dark for a while) I was due a £200 odd pound refund from Scottish Power. (They are quick enough to get on to you if you don't pay them, but when the shoe is on the other foot, they ((Scottish Power)) certainly don't like it). I found this out as they produced a statement for my account in September 2009, they 'posted' it in the mail in December 2009 (and yes because of the weather then it got delayed), which meant I did not get this 'statement' until the end of January 2010.

I was by that time furious with Scottish Power, so I contacted them about a refund, they had the cheek to ask did I not want to leave the money with them, I told them NO get the refund out.

If you had read my earlier posts you would have seen that my supply meters are well read. So Scottish Power decided that they needed my meters read AGAIN before I got a refund! The meter reader duly came and read both meters at the same time and what did Scottish Power do?

They issued FOUR cheques for the one refund. i.e. They sent fifty odd pound in one cheque and so on until I got the whole refund back.

There customer service is disgusting, Scottish Power as a company are disgusting in respects of the way they treat their 'customers'. Anyway I have taken action and now in the process of moving supplier. I had been a loyal customer but with that treatment enough was enough.

I have now lodged a formal complaint with the regulators (not sure if it will do any good).

So do you have the same over charging or bad customer experience with Scottish Power? If so can you drop me a line, please?

Many thanks

Ji

Farway

J107 wrote: »

Why people decided to change to other heating systems I will never know? I look at chimney stacks and there is about three in use within half a mile of me, compared to nearly fifty odd chimneys either 'capped' or pots removed altogether. I wonder when I am passing and think yeah every house nearly had coal.
Ji

You are probably too young to remember the thousands who died in the 1950s from "smog" related illnesses, and one could not see a few yards in front of you through yellow stinking fog, back when everyone kept warm & "toastie" with coal fires

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog

These deaths caused the Clean Air Act when whole areas of towns & cities were declared smoke free zones and only expensive "Coalite" type smokeless fuels were allowed to be sold in the area for domestic use

That was the main cause of the chimneys becoming unused as gas / electric fires took over, plus of course the sheer inconvenience of coming home at night & having to clear the hearth out and light another fire, which took ages to warm the room

PS I was there and do remember the smogs

J107

Where I live there were no 'smog' issue's that I know of, yes I am to young to remember that era however I was taught history so I did know about the 'smog' normally associated with large cities. I was brought up with a coal fire, and I can't remember a problem lightning a fire right enough we mostly had closed in fire types. I go out and get my coal in this weather and don't mind, just mind the stairs as they get a bit slippy but nothing more. I don't mind cleaning out the fire either. It takes about half an hour to see the lovely flames roar. I can even remember one of our properties having closed in coal fire which heated radiators and hot water and there were two open fires in two of our bedrooms (which were never used, that was until I as a boy decided to light the newspaper stuck up the chimney in my bedroom boy did I get into trouble) lol. However, I still say that coal for heating and hot water (or wood/logs) is the more efficient way to heat a home and provide hot water. Log fires/stoves are about 79% efficient and Baxi burnalls (coal fire) 80% efficient (which smokeless coal can be used on).

More and more people are re- opening fire places back up and putting the coal in as I have or log stove fires due to other forms of fuel being or getting very expensive.


Ji