MSE News: Consumer groups urge action on energy prices at summit

adwat

magyar,

They don't want to invest in new generating capacity because of the large capital investment as you well know.
How many new plants have been brought online in the last 10 years? Not many. Much easier to reduce the per capita usage and maintain existing plant as the cheapest and most profitable business model. For you to deny this is going against the evidence, and I suspect you well know that.

Renewables ARE funded by government (devolved EU monies actually), with a proportion also that the energy companies are allowed to skim off domestic tariffs.

And yes, you can just build a nuclear plant, France does so whenever consumption requires it. So did the UK back when we INVENTED nuclear power and were world leaders, however, the power companies want the government to underwrite new nuclear plant (in other words take on all the risk) leaving the companies to skim off massive profits. Understandably, the government is reluctant to proceed on those terms, so we have the absurd Mexican standoff that exists in the UK - increasing demand and failing capacity.

I think you need to get YOUR facts straight before lecturing others.

Bottom line : Energy is expensive in the UK compared to 15 years ago. It is now a significant burden on families across the country.

You seem happy to justify this situation, and I cannot understand your reasons for doing so. Maybe you're an overpaid employee of one of said energy companies?

magyar

I do work in the energy industry but I don't work for one of the Big 6. I specialise in finding investment funding for power stations.

New Generation: agreed that not that much has been brought online (other than renewables) but that's mainly because so much was brought online in the 1990s.
Renewables: you're just wrong. Read up on the Renewables Obligation and how it works. Nothing from devolved EU money at all.
Nuclear: you seem to know an awful lot about a subject which I can tell you for a fact has never been discussed between Decc and the utilities

My bottom line. Of course I'm not happy about the situation. I pay bills too. My point is that people want the 'magic pill', they don't want to do the boring stuff like use less energy.

adwat

I agree, all that individuals can do is use less - become more efficient, which was my original comment about having 15ft of loft insulation, but you suffer diminishing returns after a certain point. Once that point has been reached something has to be done to increase capacity.

We are a developed economy, have a good manufacturing base, and have the ability to manufacture new plant whether it be CO2 based, nuclear or renewable. To plug our energy gap we need significant extra capacity - not a few useless windmills, which are inefficient both in generating terms and financially.

The only way round this is for the government to fund and run new capacity - this would give the energy companies a run for their money and inject some much needed competition into the market. Either that or upscale the regulator by a couple of orders of magnitude, but that wouldn't solve the inward investment problem.

For a country that has large natural resources of gas, oil, coal, wind, coastal/estuary barrage, we as a population are comparitively energy poor - our usage is now approaching 1960's levels, which is hardly indicative of a thriving economy. Lack of cheap reliable energy hampers the economy, if we are to move forward as a country we need to solve this fundamental problem.

And also let's stop old people freezing to death every winter.

adwat

With regard to the government underwriting future nuclear plants :


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8618966/EDF-and-RWE-raise-fresh-doubts-over-UK-nuclear-plans.html



"The Government is planning to propose changes to the law giving financial support to nuclear power next week in a White Paper.
It is likely to introduce a subsidy that pays companies for generating low-carbon electricity that will be passed on to consumers through their energy bills. The changes are also expected to include payments to power plants for making generating capacity available, even if it is not supplying electricity all the time"

Dave_save

magyar wrote: »

My point is that people want the 'magic pill', they don't want to do the boring stuff like use less energy.

Most people on this site are well aware of costs, and how to reduce costs by taking energy saving measures (so no need to lecture us).

Indeed, most of us here have screwed every last ounce out of energy savings and we are now at the mercy of the cartel, otherwise known as 'THE BIG SIX'!

What I, and thousands of others would like to know, is how competent are these people who run our energy supply industry.

Just what are they good at?

Doorstep selling?... nothing but complaints.
Customer relationships?.. nothing to write home about!
Call centres?.. well errm, no!
Negotiating future prices with wholesalers?.. amateurish failures.
Confusion marketing?.. excellent in this area.
Investment in new technologies?.. patchy at best.
Green technology?.. pass the sick bag!

Do we actually really NEED people like nPower, Eon, SP and the rest when they all operate in exactly the same way, no difference between them, working in tandem, not competing, not innovating?

magyar

adwat wrote: »

I agree

And so do I.

adwat

magyar wrote: »

And so do I.

Nice arguing with you! :T

magyar

adwat wrote: »

With regard to the government underwriting future nuclear plants :


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8618966/EDF-and-RWE-raise-fresh-doubts-over-UK-nuclear-plans.html



"The Government is planning to propose changes to the law giving financial support to nuclear power next week in a White Paper.
It is likely to introduce a subsidy that pays companies for generating low-carbon electricity that will be passed on to consumers through their energy bills. The changes are also expected to include payments to power plants for making generating capacity available, even if it is not supplying electricity all the time"

That's not quite the same thing. Everyone knows that nuclear plant isn't economic without support. The original ones weren't, France's ones weren't and the new ones won't be.

Huhne - in his pre-governmental days before he woke up and smelled the coffee - said he would 'never support a nuclear subsidy'. So instead they brought in a 'low carbon support system'.

It's just political flannel. When you said 'no risk', I assumed you meant construction or operation risk, which no discussions have taken place on.

MiserlyMartin

adwat wrote: »

Remember that old Tory - Harold Macmillan - who said that Thatcher was wrong to be "selling off the family silver" when she started on her orgy of privatisation... turned out to be right after all I think. So much for "competition" and "private sector efficiency"... you gotta laugh, except thousands of old people will die this winter as a result of insufficient heating, so not so funny after all I guess.

Oh come on! When the utilities were government owned and run they were as inefficient as Prescotts two jags! Governments are no good at running anything efficiently. Privatising was the best idea, and you will be hard pushed to find many state run gas or electricity companies left abroad.

That said, I find the current publicity by Cameron insulting to peoples intelligence. And if everybody who was on the expensive tariffs who don't know/care were to switch to online tariffs that won't help - as it would drive up the price for everybody. Help you find the cheapest deal what rubbish. For once I agree with Caroline Flint, and that is amazing

harz99

magyar wrote: »

.

Can't confirm that the figures do include standing charges, but it would be very inaccurate if they didn't, so I assume that - since the two separate sources concur - that they did.

magyar wrote: »

It's just political flannel. When you said 'no risk', I assumed you meant construction or operation risk, which no discussions have taken place on.

Too many assumptions there.

harz99 wrote: »

Incidentally, in all the charts you have been posting to show the UK as having reasonable energy prices versus the other countries, are standing charges taken into account and do all the other countries even have them?

Is there an answer to the last part of the question, or is that another assumption (that they do have standing charges).