We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Warning that energy prices will rise
Comments
-
I'm pretty sure our elected representatives solved our energy problems by subsidising solar to the tune of 46p/unit (index linked for 25 years). Otherwise, they would surely have spent the money on something more useful...0
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »Wasn't that one of the points of privatising the energy sector?
Not really. You can't choose to buy your electricity from Drax because they are cheaper than electricity produced by Ratcliffe on Soar power station.
It's a vital industry so the government is trying to persuade energy companies to invest shareholders capital to guarantee supply - the rub is that the government also effectively determine what return they'll pay on that investment. Not only that but shareholders have to consider investing capital today in return for income over decades whilst the politicians struggle to see beyond a 5 year horizon. There's huge political risk quite apart from the usual commercial risk.
Overall though, I think the consumer has been well served by privatisation of the energy sector. I dread to think what we'd be paying if the sector was still nationalised plus we wouldn't be talking about the possibility of the lights going off - they'd already be off.0 -
I'm pretty sure our elected representatives solved our energy problems by subsidising solar to the tune of 46p/unit (index linked for 25 years). Otherwise, they would surely have spent the money on something more useful...
Ahh but if the govt rig the market enough with green regulations, compulsory smart meters, closing all coal and nuclear plants etc and push prices high enough then suddenly that 46p/unit will start to look a bargain......I think....0 -
And yet still the lies go on. The BBC's midnight news on Radio 4 just managed to spin the entire story as if the idiotic reliance of wind farms hadn't happened.
If there is a competitive problem surrounding gas fired power stations, it is that wind has been given such absurdly favourable sweetheart deals that no company can make a profit from burning gas.
The results? When the wind doesn't .blow, and because the eco-loons have forced the closure of coal plants (Germany, of course, is currently bulding 26 of them), there is no backup.
The figures speak for themselves. We are currently getting almost 19 gw from coal and 0.05gw from wind. On a day like today (typical cold weather high pressure conditions in the UK) the temperature plummets, yet the turbine blades remain motionless. At around 1pm today wind was generating around 0.1 per cent of the UK's needs, yet its featherbedding treatment means that no one can afford to build or run a gas plant.
Milliband was the fool who stepped-up this nonsense and Cameron has simply perpetuated the same suicidal policy. When the lights start to go out around 2015, I genuinely hope to see televised trials of the culprits. Always assuming the two hours of electricity a day we are allocated by 'smart' (sic) meters allow us to watch their well-deserved humiliation.
There is an additional problem.
Fast cycling on-demand Gas fired power plants are required to compensate for when the wind doesn't blow. These type of plants have so far tended to be more complex, more expensive, and less reliable than the traditional plant which is allowed to run for longer periods.
The Green agenda was always nuts, I'm just surprised it has taken this long to realise it.
The period directly after the GFC saw petrol consumption drop markedly. I'm surprised the Greens don't argue for recessions more often! They are very green events.0 -
The period directly after the GFC saw petrol consumption drop markedly. I'm surprised the Greens don't argue for recessions more often! They are very green events.
Perhaps it would be a better model to maintain the status quo than to have constant, never-ending growth?
If we had a static or reducing population, then we wouldn't need so much energy, especially given the improved energy efficiency of modern appliances and heating systems (something we would not have had without Green lobbying and taxes).
Imagine if we had the same UK population size today that we had in the 1970s, but with energy efficient products. There would not be a need to import all this extra energy.0 -
Really? - there are green votes, look at Brighton.
They don't have to buy "dirty" energy they can rely on on tallow candles instead.;)"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
Harry_Boyle wrote: »
Imagine if we had the same UK population size today that we had in the 1970s, but with energy efficient products. There would not be a need to import all this extra energy.
If we still had the same relative proportion of white goods, TVs, consumer electronic gizzmos and light bulbs just think how low our demand would be too."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
It's a vital industry so the government is trying to persuade energy companies to invest shareholders capital to guarantee supply - the rub is that the government also effectively determine what return they'll pay on that investment. Not only that but shareholders have to consider investing capital today in return for income over decades whilst the politicians struggle to see beyond a 5 year horizon. There's huge political risk quite apart from the usual commercial risk.
Overall though, I think the consumer has been well served by privatisation of the energy sector. I dread to think what we'd be paying if the sector was still nationalised plus we wouldn't be talking about the possibility of the lights going off - they'd already be off.
What risk is there?
Is their an alternative to electricity requirements on the horizon?
AIUI all new builds will need to be gas free soon so electricity is the only, mass, energy source.
Whilst governments "control" pricing to some extent they will always allow it to rise to meet cost +.
If it was still in public control, we would still have electricity and we would be paying roughly the same. We wouldn't be wasting the overhead of 6 different corporate structures, shareholder returns, marketing and administration of constant tariff switching etc."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
I guess the only given is the consumer will be 'stiffed' in the short term.
However, we have been given some sage advice by the Npower spokesperson I just saw on tv. "Consume less". It's a mantra we have been hearing more often of late.
Achieving greater efficiency is not easy or cheap however.
Of course they want us to consume less. Then they will put the prices up to maintain their profits and get the same, in fact more profit from selling us less of their product
Why sell 3 widgets for £10 each when you can sell 2 for £15.50 and who cares if one person goes widgetless0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards