How would you change the energy market?

Gilbert2

Wywth wrote: »

Remember it was you that originally brought the banking industry into this thread which is asking questions over how the the gas & electricity indutries should be run in future by saying:

Yes I did, I pointed out that nationalisation resolved one sector of the UK economy and it could do so again, with the energy market.

However, I have not made any tenuous comparisons, unlike you.

Gilbert2

Wywth wrote: »

Quess what, Northern Rock used to make a profit before it was nationalised.

Not quite, it did not make a sustainable profit, which is why it needed a bailout.

The model you appear to be championing was deeply flawed. Why would any business need cash intervention if it was simply making a profit?

Yet state ownership not only saved it but has returned it to profit.;)

Wywth

Gilbert2 wrote: »

Yes I did, I pointed out that nationalisation resolved one sector of the UK economy and it could do so again, with the energy market.

However, I have not made any tenuous comparisons, unlike you.

You are.

If they are not comparable, why introduce it in some form of tenuous argument to support the re-nationalisation of the gas & electricity industry?

Wywth

Gilbert2 wrote: »

Not quite, it did not make a sustainable profit, which is why it needed a bailout.

The model you appear to be championing was deeply flawed. Why would any business need cash intervention if it was simply making a profit?

Yet state ownership not only saved it but has returned it to profit.;)

I think you should look into the finer detail.

It always did make a profit. It almost failed due to a run on the bank because of the international credit crunch, nothing to do with it's profitability.

If it made a profit whilst nationalised, then please indicate how much money was made by the nationalisation of the Northern Rock by the government (source please!), and why it was then sold for a pittance to Richard Branson as the government were keen to cut it's losses sooner rather than later?

BBC business editor Robert Peston said taxpayers had injected £1.4bn into Northern Rock plc.
He added that, in addition to the immediate £747m the government would get back following the completion of the sale, there was the potential for the Treasury to receive a further £280m over the next few years.
The size of the potential losses contained in the bad bank part of Northern Rock is still uncertain and it still owes the Treasury £21bn.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15769886

Gilbert2

Wywth wrote: »

I think you should look into the finer detail.

It always did make a profit. It almost failed due to a run on the bank because of the international credit crunch, nothing to do with it's profitability.

You are the one that needs to brush up on facts.

Northern Rock did not fail due to the run on it, a run on a bank is simply a consequence of something else. And in Northern Rock's case, as with many other's, it was due to the collapse of the US sub-prime market.

Northern Rock had artificial profits, ie only on paper and when the collapse happened they were found out, as they had lent willy nilly to all and sundry.

They did not have any real money to meet their creditors when the loans were called in.

The run on the bank was simply depositors who wanted to get their own, real money out of a bank that was skint.

Therefore, the run was not the reason for their collapse and they essentially never made a profit as they were wiped out financially.

I'm not bothering with you any more as you don't know what you are on about.

simongregson

I think that retailers of energy should not be allowed to own energy production or wholesale operations. It is far too easy for a company like British Gas to put up prices blaming wholesale costs, where as a large producer of energy, Centrica it's parent company effectively sets these prices. The high wholesale costs prevent other companies from entering the market. The market has become distorted from the original idea of deregulation by the energy suppliers taking over retail firms until there are now basically 6 suppliers/producers who set prices

Cardew

simongregson wrote: »

I think that retailers of energy should not be allowed to own energy production or wholesale operations. It is far too easy for a company like British Gas to put up prices blaming wholesale costs, where as a large producer of energy, Centrica it's parent company effectively sets these prices. The high wholesale costs prevent other companies from entering the market. The market has become distorted from the original idea of deregulation by the energy suppliers taking over retail firms until there are now basically 6 suppliers/producers who set prices

I am no fan of the present distribution setup. However it is the world-wide market that sets wholesale prices.

Gilbert2

Cardew wrote: »

I am no fan of the present distribution setup. However it is the world-wide market that sets wholesale prices.

But it would be the state that would decide on what energies this country would utilise in the first place. A world wide market for certain fuel may be irrelevant.

Instead of private business making vast profit for shareholders, the state would consider only it's people and what is best for them.

Incidentally, we all know that the big energy firms will always increase bills when global wholesale prices rise, though they are rarely reduced when they fall.

They are gangsters who, all but admit to it, collude together, which is meant to be illegal.

Dave_save

If we are going to have energy 'suppliers' then that is all they should be. To be the final supplier of energy to the consumer in a competitive market.

This should only comprise:
1. Purchase of energy from the open markets
2. Negotiation on prices and terms of contracts with wholesale suppliers
3. Billing systems for the final consumer
4. Innovation in the above 3 areas

They should NOT be involved in:
1. Collecting of stealth 'green' taxes on behalf of government
2. Producing, selling and distributing energy
3. The distribution of grants/free products to householders on behalf of government

If we are going to have investment in new technologies for the future, it's absolutely stupid to have a connection between the energy supply industry and energy development and new technology industry. One is dealing with the today issues, and the other is dealing with the future

Oscargrouch

What gets me with Gas Bills is the complex way that has to be carried out to work out how much you owe. Why can it not be done like the Electricity; 1 digit on the meter = 1kWh @ whatever rate you pay(simple) Gas:

Working out your gas charges

If your meter measures in cubicfeet (where one unit is 100 cubic feet), we convert it into cubic metres by multiplying the units you have used by 2.83. We multiply the cubic metres by the temperature and pressure figure shown on the front of this bill, then multiply the result by the calorific value. We divide the amount we have worked out by 3.6 to get the number of kilowatt hours you have used, and multiply that by the cost of each kilowatt hour (kWh).

Quote above from an EDF bill.

Why not just tell you that each digit recorded on your meter is costing X ? :mad: