Energy news in general

Scot_39

MattMattMattUK said:

Doc_N said:

mmmmikey said:

Doc_N said:

mmmmikey said:

VoucherMan said:

HillStreetBlues said:

So those in Mid to South Wales will be subsidising those in London based on GB6  Who on earth cane up with those zones?

Some overpriced consultant I'd guess. Floating around for a while now, but not the first attempt. I wonder who objected to an earlier revision.

Hi, there seems to be some confusion around these zones. The zones aren't something that someone has decided on as such - they're essentially just what we've already got shown on a map.

The zones are National Grid zones. Everywhere within a particular zone has good grid connectivity to everywhere else in the zone. One of the main reasons that South Wales is in the same zone as London is that there used to be nuclear power stations on the Severn estuary with cables going into both South Wales and London. Because of this the routing of the pylons etc. is such that as things stand today it's easier to get energy between South Wales and London than it is to get it between South Wales and North Wales. That's where the cables are.

The zones only make sense if you look at where power was generated a few decades ago, and that's why investment in the grid is so desperately needed and in various stages of planning. Almost nobody disagrees with the fact that the zones are bonkers in relation to today's requirements and practically everyone agrees that new connections are needed.

Because the zones are bonkers and because of the way prices are set, some generators are making large profits and customers are paying over the odds. Zonal pricing will change that rule and save customers money whilst the new pylons etc. are built, which realistically is a 10 year project.

The difficulty is that not everyone will save the same amount creating an inequality, or post code lottery if you want to call it that. We are currently in the silly situation that although it's fair in the sense there are no zones, we're achieving that fairness by bumping up prices so that everyone pays the same as the most expensive zone. Good news if you're a supplier of course, which is why some of them are making such a fuss about it.

Hope this makes sense?

Indeed. And zonal pricing for a nationally necessary utility makes as much sense as the differential charging system that existed before the introduction of the universal penny post. Or Tesco charging more for Scotch sold in Cornwall because it has further to travel.

So is your view that in order to make things fair we should all pay the most expensive price that anyone is paying? And that in order to achieve that we should bump up the profits of energy generators? 

That is what we are doing today.

My concern, as a pragmatic money saver, is that we risk spending so much time debating who should save that nobody saves. To my way of thinking that would be a crying shame. If Scottish customers can save themselves a few quid whilst the grid is being upgraded I think that's great whether or not I save anything myself.

But each to their own.....

Of course not. It simply requires efficient regulation and an averaging formula. Neither beyond the wit of man, or woman!

None of that would encourage energy generation capacity to be installed closer to where it is needed, or for energy usage to move closer to where it is generated, it would not help alleviate transmission losses. 

Grid level (at the true grid level) transmission losses are a fraction of  total distribution losses.  I remember some old govt stats saying grid c1.7%, lower level distribution adds 5-8% on top.

It's obvioulsly going to get worse with distance.

And with extreme distances now needed comes with other complications.  Like need for HVDC and not AC transmission.

And given wind farm locations are in some cases off N Coast of Scotland - already 200m from Central belt popn. And 100s more miles from intended markets in England.

 In one extreme case Viking farm off Shetland built contingent on SSEN c250km / c150m HVDC link.

Hence wgl, egl1 and egl2 - with egl3 and 4 to follow.

AFAIK each hvdc link is likely to lose around 1.5-2% just for the convertor / invertor stations. 

And taking an extreme - energy from Shetland Isles Viking wind farm  - maybe via proposed Morray firth HVDC to support recently approved egl2 and egl3 if approved  - could go through that conversion loss 2 or 3 times.  As well, as 100s miles of AC pylons etc

Arguably renewables are being sited purely for the generators profit as politicians focus if not policy driven by the CfD wholseale pricing mechanism for over a decade on licensing - ignoring other costs. And of course political populism - with WM defacto banning on shore wind.

More wind more return for them.  CfD pricing doesn't look at grid costs or curtailment costs that we do alteady pay and for foreseeable will pay more of.

It's a fragmented and flawed approach - all arguably putting net zero emiission above users costs.

And attempting to do so on a cheap and nasty basis.  Renewables without storage.

And we pay through exponential growth in curtailment payments in recent years.  The not so publicised cost of the increasing percentage of wind power in our mix. 
Sold initially at CfD rates more expensive than Hinkley nuclear if Sizewell clause triggered as was planned to be.  So costing us all 1p/ kWh last Ofgem published estimate for cal wholesale..

Certainly during the if anything accelerating transition phase to net zero - not holding my breath for short term savings.

And would love to know what is happening to curtailment payments terms in contracts when renewables even at moderate output will soon have more capacity than UK demand ( summer c25GW - 5 GW core nuclear - with over 42GW renewables installed or licensed  - half of it again - like the 48% of 30GW wind hit over a year ago - in Scotland or waters above )

Notepad_Phil

mmmmikey said:
...

Edit: for clarification zonal pricing changes the price that energy suppliers pay on a region by region basis. There's no reason I can see that, subsequent to that, Ofgem couldn't add an extra layer of regulation to even out regional differences. Whether that is a good thing or not is a matter for another debate but my view it is a different debate. Some would argue they should already be doing that, others would shrug their shoulders and ask why whilst many will say it's a good thing if they benefit but a bad thing if not....

I've no idea whether my region would be better off or not, but to me zonal pricing would only make sense if it was done at the same time as the averaging out of the regional savings that people here seem to imply will occur and so everyone gained the same amount from any change. It makes little sense to me to encourage (even if only subtly) the movement of existing industries/people if certain areas gained an economic advantage from this zonal pricing rearrangement.

MattMattMattUK

Sea_Shell said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Doc_N said:

mmmmikey said:

VoucherMan said:

HillStreetBlues said:

So those in Mid to South Wales will be subsidising those in London based on GB6  Who on earth cane up with those zones?

Some overpriced consultant I'd guess. Floating around for a while now, but not the first attempt. I wonder who objected to an earlier revision.

Hi, there seems to be some confusion around these zones. The zones aren't something that someone has decided on as such - they're essentially just what we've already got shown on a map.

The zones are National Grid zones. Everywhere within a particular zone has good grid connectivity to everywhere else in the zone. One of the main reasons that South Wales is in the same zone as London is that there used to be nuclear power stations on the Severn estuary with cables going into both South Wales and London. Because of this the routing of the pylons etc. is such that as things stand today it's easier to get energy between South Wales and London than it is to get it between South Wales and North Wales. That's where the cables are.

The zones only make sense if you look at where power was generated a few decades ago, and that's why investment in the grid is so desperately needed and in various stages of planning. Almost nobody disagrees with the fact that the zones are bonkers in relation to today's requirements and practically everyone agrees that new connections are needed.

Because the zones are bonkers and because of the way prices are set, some generators are making large profits and customers are paying over the odds. Zonal pricing will change that rule and save customers money whilst the new pylons etc. are built, which realistically is a 10 year project.

The difficulty is that not everyone will save the same amount creating an inequality, or post code lottery if you want to call it that. We are currently in the silly situation that although it's fair in the sense there are no zones, we're achieving that fairness by bumping up prices so that everyone pays the same as the most expensive zone. Good news if you're a supplier of course, which is why some of them are making such a fuss about it.

Hope this makes sense?

Indeed. And zonal pricing for a nationally necessary utility makes as much sense as the differential charging system that existed before the introduction of the universal penny post. Or Tesco charging more for Scotch sold in Cornwall because it has further to travel.

Tesco (and other supermarkets) do charge different prices for the same grocery products in different parts of the country, on both a regional and local level. Food is generally more expensive in London, the South East, South West and East of England, but it will be more expensive in Chiswick than Clapham, more expensive in Wilmslow than Salford, more expensive in Edinburgh than Glasgow etc. 

The reason that stamps were fixed rate was because the differential pricing model was too complicated, confusing and discouraged use of a system the government was keen to grow. The if there were different regional pricing for energy that would be very easy to operate with modern electronic billing systems, it would not be confusing and it would boost the government's aims, whilst also lowering energy costs for the vast majority of households. 

I'll believe that when I see it.

You mean like suppliers offering ToU tariffs that save consumers money, fixed tariffs that are below SVT, EV tariffs, heat pump tariffs, smart export and import tariffs etc.? Or totally ignoring that we had some of the cheapest energy in Europe for most of the last forty years.

Sea_Shell said:
In 10, 15, 20 years time, will our bills be higher or lower than they are now, relative to inflation.

That is an irrelevant question. The question should be where will costs be if we do change things vs doing nothing. The latter will involve quite significant increases in energy costs as well as a significant risk of winter blackouts. The former choice, modernising and investing in the grid infrastructure, boosting generation capacity and potentially storage and decarbonisation of generation. If we do nothing bills will be higher, if we do something bills will be higher, we have failed to invest in the grid and generation for decades, catching up is going to have a cost and that cost is greater than if we had sustained investment over time.

The_Green_Hornet

More British households struggling with bills will resort to energy theft, campaigners say

Annual value of gas and electricity stolen from Great Britain’s grids already estimated at £1.5bn

The number of British households stealing about £1.5bn of gas and electricity every year is expected to rise as energy bill bad debts continue to set new records, according to fuel poverty campaigners.

The energy industry has warned that “desperate” households who are unable to pay their bills are increasingly resorting to tampering with their gas and electricity meters to avoid falling deeper into debt.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/apr/22/british-households-struggling-with-bills-will-resort-energy-theft

MattMattMattUK

The_Green_Hornet said:

More British households struggling with bills will resort to energy theft, campaigners say

Annual value of gas and electricity stolen from Great Britain’s grids already estimated at £1.5bn

The number of British households stealing about £1.5bn of gas and electricity every year is expected to rise as energy bill bad debts continue to set new records, according to fuel poverty campaigners.

The energy industry has warned that “desperate” households who are unable to pay their bills are increasingly resorting to tampering with their gas and electricity meters to avoid falling deeper into debt.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/apr/22/british-households-struggling-with-bills-will-resort-energy-theft

That article points out that those stealing from the network cost every household around £50 per year, other estimates put it at £70-90 per year. On top of that those who refuse to pay their energy bills cost us another £120 per year from the bad debts. son in effect around £200 of the "average" user's bill, or around 12% of the bill of those of us who pay is because of other people's criminality or refusal to pay what they owe. 

victor2

MattMattMattUK said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

More British households struggling with bills will resort to energy theft, campaigners say

Annual value of gas and electricity stolen from Great Britain’s grids already estimated at £1.5bn

The number of British households stealing about £1.5bn of gas and electricity every year is expected to rise as energy bill bad debts continue to set new records, according to fuel poverty campaigners.

The energy industry has warned that “desperate” households who are unable to pay their bills are increasingly resorting to tampering with their gas and electricity meters to avoid falling deeper into debt.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/apr/22/british-households-struggling-with-bills-will-resort-energy-theft

That article points out that those stealing from the network cost every household around £50 per year, other estimates put it at £70-90 per year. On top of that those who refuse to pay their energy bills cost us another £120 per year from the bad debts. son in effect around £200 of the "average" user's bill, or around 12% of the bill of those of us who pay is because of other people's criminality or refusal to pay what they owe. 

With the spiralling costs of energy, the problem is destined to increase too. The odd house exlosion, and all too often associated fatality, is likely to become more common if they are due to gas leaks caused by tampering wth the supply. I might be making false assumptions there because you rarely hear any conclusive evidence, but equally you don't get the gas supplier blamed for leaks and subsequent disasters.

Auti

I wish people who use energy without paying would realise their actions - which payers have to pay for -cause people who are just keeping it together to struggle even more! I would never dream of stealing and never have but know very very much counting pennies (literally) and raising children and paying their bill as well as mine seems to me stealing from the little my family have. 

Just to say my children have a good grasp of money, love of life and respect for others. 
Sorry if I have offended anyone - not my intention.

mmmmikey

Auti said:

I wish people who use energy without paying would realise their actions - which payers have to pay for -cause people who are just keeping it together to struggle even more! I would never dream of stealing and never have but know very very much counting pennies (literally) and raising children and paying their bill as well as mine seems to me stealing from the little my family have. 

Just to say my children have a good grasp of money, love of life and respect for others. 
Sorry if I have offended anyone - not my intention.

A good point very well made!

MattMattMattUK

Auti said:

I wish people who use energy without paying would realise their actions - which payers have to pay for -cause people who are just keeping it together to struggle even more! I would never dream of stealing and never have but know very very much counting pennies (literally) and raising children and paying their bill as well as mine seems to me stealing from the little my family have. 

Just to say my children have a good grasp of money, love of life and respect for others. 
Sorry if I have offended anyone - not my intention.

It is the same with everything, groceries are around 1.9% higher because of shoplifting, other retail about 3% higher, 6% of the insurance premium for car insurance is because of the losses caused by uninsured drivers, taxes are about 5% higher than they would be for the same revenue because of tax directly owed that is not collected, another 2-8% due to fraud and evasion, around 15% of the cost of credit card interest exists because people do not pay their debts. Those of us who pay our way are probably about 5-10% worse off because of people who do not pay directly. 

MeteredOut

Doc_N said:

mmmmikey said:

VoucherMan said:

HillStreetBlues said:

So those in Mid to South Wales will be subsidising those in London based on GB6  Who on earth cane up with those zones?

Some overpriced consultant I'd guess. Floating around for a while now, but not the first attempt. I wonder who objected to an earlier revision.

Hi, there seems to be some confusion around these zones. The zones aren't something that someone has decided on as such - they're essentially just what we've already got shown on a map.

The zones are National Grid zones. Everywhere within a particular zone has good grid connectivity to everywhere else in the zone. One of the main reasons that South Wales is in the same zone as London is that there used to be nuclear power stations on the Severn estuary with cables going into both South Wales and London. Because of this the routing of the pylons etc. is such that as things stand today it's easier to get energy between South Wales and London than it is to get it between South Wales and North Wales. That's where the cables are.

The zones only make sense if you look at where power was generated a few decades ago, and that's why investment in the grid is so desperately needed and in various stages of planning. Almost nobody disagrees with the fact that the zones are bonkers in relation to today's requirements and practically everyone agrees that new connections are needed.

Because the zones are bonkers and because of the way prices are set, some generators are making large profits and customers are paying over the odds. Zonal pricing will change that rule and save customers money whilst the new pylons etc. are built, which realistically is a 10 year project.

The difficulty is that not everyone will save the same amount creating an inequality, or post code lottery if you want to call it that. We are currently in the silly situation that although it's fair in the sense there are no zones, we're achieving that fairness by bumping up prices so that everyone pays the same as the most expensive zone. Good news if you're a supplier of course, which is why some of them are making such a fuss about it.

Hope this makes sense?

Indeed. And zonal pricing for a nationally necessary utility makes as much sense as the differential charging system that existed before the introduction of the universal penny post. Or Tesco charging more for Scotch sold in Cornwall because it has further to travel.

Fuel prices in the north of Scotland can be significantly higher that other parts of the UK (and even other parts of Scotland), reportedly because it has further to travel.

Is that zonal pricing?