Energy news in general

Chrysalis

michaels said:

Chrysalis said:

michaels said:

Scot_39 said:

Chrysalis said:

I see a news article on the BBC that energy debt without a repayment plan is still soaring.  Looks like a new stealth SC tax coming to write that debt off.  A tax to cover the perils of fixed DD?

Debt would be lower - if our energy bills did not include 

- the come Oct £215 in policy costs - up £58 /37% in 18 months 

- net zero costs - that just aded another £15 ex VAT on network costs in Oct on top of current costs.

 

Scrap policy costs - scrap VAT - even better scrap net zero - and bills would be £100s less.

And far less likely to have people in debt.

Govts - past and present - need to learn the lesson - fuel costs are far to high to keep the extra charges they deliberately chose to place onto them.

They should be trying to reduce them.

But rather than doing so - they have just lumped £10s more - ave cap up £35 - wholesale energy costs down -£15 ex VAT - the £51 diiference - largely govt policy.

And even those on WFD see these extras on their top line.  New recipents arent £150 better off - now only £99 if concume at median TDV.

The 3.4m on WHD before - share in the £51 extra - just as other bill payers do.

I would rather pay more for my energy and have a liveable planet for my kids, even if it means I can't afford ubereats, the apple tax, tattoos, Taylor Swift tickets or millions of other 'essentials'.

I am in a very small minority.

What about if it meant you cant afford to eat, pay your rent, and keep the lights on? Is that a more liveable planet and preferable?  I agree you in a small minority who thinks things like a 22billion carbon capture scheme is good value, and have enough comfort that the extra cost only affects luxuries.
I am a supporter of green energy but a cost/impact analysis should be done, and more targeted collection instead of equal per household, targeted on people like yourself with ability to pay.
Bear in mind where does this paying more stop? is there a limit, we already pay huge amounts even if you think its small.

We have a tax and benefits system to redistribute.  We should not distort energy prices if we think that current transfers are too low, we should increase transfers.  Does it really make sense that there is low vat on energy but there full rate on sweaters and electric blankets and double glazing and loft insulation, sending exactly the wrong signals?

There is issues there for sure, if there is a need to raise more tax for energy policies, then just increase VAT on energy or be up front on some other tax to fund it, its the government trying to be stealthy in what they doing.

Chrysalis

michaels said:

Chrysalis said:

stripling said:

Have a little graphic [ Ofgem data based on 'average' annual bill of £1,719] :

How does a supplier who is effectively a reseller, have operating costs similar to the network.  Some pretty good accounting there.  £69.25 allowances ia a stealth profit.  So the suppliers profits are effectively 2.5x higher than the image suggests.
Some serious issues in the market.  Move policy costs to general taxation, where it should be, government buy back of private energy, and we get rid of policy costs, allowances, supplier profit, significantly reduce supplier operating costs.
Then build state owned energy infrastructure, and we also get rid of network profits.
Problem is it goes against the rights for rich investors to profit of everyone.
Keep VAT which is ring fenced to cover the costs of the infrastructure purchases, cannot be used for non energy purposes.
The margins are insane, 37% margin on network, thats really abusive levels of margin, close to 50% on wholesale as well.  Polices are not really a cost to a supplier, they basically just a stealth tax collector for that, VAT we set aside as well, so margins for suppliers are if we take their word operating costs are legit but assume allowances is all profit circa 7%.

Not sure if you were unable to read my post re return on capital at National Grid being 5.7%.  Do you really think anyone would invest if the return was lower than the return available on zero risk government bonds?  Would you, out of the goodness of your heart, invest your savings at your suggested return of 1-2% when you could get a safe 5%?!

Personally I think the grid shouldnt even be owned by private investors.  That whole premise is wrong.  I have an issue with profits being made out of essential infrastructure.  So to me even 1% is too much, but if its comfortable double figures, that simply shouldnt be allowed to happen, now if that creates market conditions where no one will invest, its a clear sign the government should be the owner, same with things like wind farms, if investors only will invest with subsidies, getting paid when the energy isnt consumed, that sort of thing, then just dont have investors, and gov builds them instead.

wrf12345

I would go further, nationalize National Grid and get them to sell energy directly to the consumer (but only those with Smart meters to simplify the process as much as possible AND use intelligent AI (rather than the current junk) for customer services - that should get the average retail price down from 26p a unit to 15p a unit with no need for standing charges. 

MattMattMattUK

wrf12345 said:

I would go further, nationalize National Grid and get them to sell energy directly to the consumer (but only those with Smart meters to simplify the process as much as possible AND use intelligent AI (rather than the current junk) for customer services - that should get the average retail price down from 26p a unit to 15p a unit with no need for standing charges. 

Once again you demonstrate you have absolutely no understanding of the energy supply sector. There is not enough profit or possible efficiency savings to cut bills by 40% or more.

Why do you continue to make posts which you must know by now are factually incorrect, or if you do not know they are factually incorrect why are you unable to absorb new information so you can make informed comments?

wrf12345

Ancient AI Bots don't seem to understand the implications of only using Smart meters re efficiency, backed up by the new generation of hyper AI, getting rid of most of the personnel  and removing all the off-shoring of private sector profits within the retail industry. Tech is going to make retail energy obsolete so much better to get ahead of the curve.

MeteredOut

wrf12345 said:

Ancient AI Bots don't seem to understand the implications of only using Smart meters re efficiency, backed up by the new generation of hyper AI, getting rid of most of the personnel  and removing all the off-shoring of private sector profits within the retail industry. Tech is going to make retail energy obsolete so much better to get ahead of the curve.

I'm beginning to wonder if you're one of these bots. Ancient or hyper, others can decide.

debitcardmayhem

wrf12345 said:

Ancient AI Bots don't seem to understand the implications of only using Smart meters re efficiency, backed up by the new generation of hyper AI, getting rid of most of the personnel  and removing all the off-shoring of private sector profits within the retail industry. Tech is going to make retail energy obsolete so much better to get ahead of the curve.

That’s a big step in two posts, first “Intelligent AI” now “hyper AI” , whatever next Artificial Hyper Intelligent Nonsense.

michaels

wrf12345 said:

I would go further, nationalize National Grid and get them to sell energy directly to the consumer (but only those with Smart meters to simplify the process as much as possible AND use intelligent AI (rather than the current junk) for customer services - that should get the average retail price down from 26p a unit to 15p a unit with no need for standing charges. 

Governments are famous for making efficiency gains by shedding staff...not

They are also famous for making unsexy and often locally unpopular infrastructure investment over for example building new hospitals in politically important constituencies.

I am sure spads spend their whole time advising ministers to chose to put a line of pylons through the countryside rather than spending the same money on a new hospital ...

QrizB

wrf12345 said:

I would go further ... get the average retail price down from 26p a unit to 15p a unit ...

I've had a thought as to how this flight of fancy could work. Bear with me here!

Every smart meter has a master contactor that lets the supplier switch power on and off. And electricity is priced in half-hour chunks, and the price per kWh for each 30 minutes could be zero (or negative) or £1-plus.

So ... a suplier could launch a "choose your price" tariff. The catch being that your meter would only switch on for those half-hour segments where the price is equal to, or less than, your chosen number.

Choose a big number (30p, say) and you'll get electricity pretty much all the time. Choose a small number (5p) and you'll get some electricity on some days.

Do you think it would catch on?

Does anyone know of an energy supplier going cheap that we could buy to try this out? They'd need reliable back-end softwae which sadly rules out the red round option

wrf12345 said:

... with no need for standing charges. 

You could get away from standing chages by simply charging £200/yr as a fee for joining my new "pay what you want" tariff.

JKenH

QrizB said:

wrf12345 said:

I would go further ... get the average retail price down from 26p a unit to 15p a unit ...

I've had a thought as to how this flight of fancy could work. Bear with me here!

Every smart meter has a master contactor that lets the supplier switch power on and off. And electricity is priced in half-hour chunks, and the price per kWh for each 30 minutes could be zero (or negative) or £1-plus.

So ... a suplier could launch a "choose your price" tariff. The catch being that your meter would only switch on for those half-hour segments where the price is equal to, or less than, your chosen number.

Choose a big number (30p, say) and you'll get electricity pretty much all the time. Choose a small number (5p) and you'll get some electricity on some days.

Do you think it would catch on?

Does anyone know of an energy supplier going cheap that we could buy to try this out? They'd need reliable back-end softwae which sadly rules out the red round option

wrf12345 said:

... with no need for standing charges. 

You could get away from standing chages by simply charging £200/yr as a fee for joining my new "pay what you want" tariff.

We are part of the way there with Agile. Those with batteries can effectively set their own price limit and only buy when the price is right. It is rare for the price to be high all day long. Sadly, though, Agile wouldn’t appeal to many people as they just want to forget about how much electricity costs and use it when they want to. My wife, despite the benefits of significant savings in our household from Agile, tells me that her choice would be  a standard (variable) tariff. She wants to wash when she wants, cook when she wants and not have to think about it. 

So yes, your proposal would take away having to plan but it might come as an unwelcome surprise then when the oven switches off halfway through cooking tea. If you have ever had a caravan or motorhome you might have experienced something similar when you trip the breaker supplying your pitch. How many times have I heard “Why isn’t the oven on?”