Sun claims 4 month freeze on April cap levels.

FreeBear

Section62 said:

[Deleted User] said:

tghe-retford said:

Putin knows that borrowing and inflation are our weaknesses and he also knows that keeping the war going over a long period of time will cripple the west.

The only way to conquer that is to invest in energy security in the short and long term and allow us to go our own way. Yet I hear nothing so far other than more borrowing and more inflation spread over a generation.

In the short term, I guess you missed the news about fracking and planning permission around wind? In the long term, I guess you missed the news about Sizewell? Maybe not enough but wrong to say energy security isn't being actively discussed and planned. And simply not possible by October.

Added to which, energy demand management is also part of the equation, which tghe-retford overlooks.

Whether that is delivered by rolling blackouts, or by TOU tariffs, will depend on the urgency of the need.

The obvious solution to managing demand is to get on and insulate homes to a decent standard. OK, it won't fix the crisis in the short term, but if we can reduce usage over the long term, we won't be so reliant on overseas supplies.

MattMattMattUK

wrf12345 said:

Sounds like the govn has been conned by the energy companies and consumers will be left with no choice but to stump up ridiculous standing charges and lose any option of fighting back against the energy companies (who are petrified that the "free" money going into people's bank accounts will not end up in their coffers)... not to mention that the govn spending more money will devalue Sterling and push up the costs of imports... and, er, energy (so the govn will have to spend more which will devalue Sterling which will...)! Then next year council tax will go up...

It is nothing to do with standing charges. There is a cost to operate the network which is what the Standing Charge is nominally to cover, the unit cost is supposed to cover the cost of providing that unit, plus a small (1.8% or less) profit. 

What the energy companies are possibly "petrified" of is people using energy but not being able to pay for it, meaning bad debts and the failure of the energy providers. 

It seems odd that you are complaining about a system which will subsidise you, when you are continually on here demanding to be subsidised. 

Section62

tghe-retford said:

Section62 said:

Added to which, energy demand management is also part of the equation, which tghe-retford overlooks.

Whether that is delivered by rolling blackouts, or by TOU tariffs, will depend on the urgency of the need.

Because every successful country runs rolling blackouts. Do that and Truss will lose the 2024 General Election.

It depends what other European countries are doing at the time.

There was a time where you might have said that no "successful country" would tell its citizens to stay at home and only go out for limited prescribed reasons.  It turned out that was what voters wanted.  Who'd have thought that?

Electoral popularity doesn't change the equation though, part of the solution in both the short and longer term will be a reduction in the amount of energy we consume, and managing demand has been part of government policy for decades.

Section62

MattMattMattUK said:

wrf12345 said:

Sounds like the govn has been conned by the energy companies and consumers will be left with no choice but to stump up ridiculous standing charges and lose any option of fighting back against the energy companies (who are petrified that the "free" money going into people's bank accounts will not end up in their coffers)... not to mention that the govn spending more money will devalue Sterling and push up the costs of imports... and, er, energy (so the govn will have to spend more which will devalue Sterling which will...)! Then next year council tax will go up...

It is nothing to do with standing charges. There is a cost to operate the network which is what the Standing Charge is nominally to cover, the unit cost is supposed to cover the cost of providing that unit, plus a small (1.8% or less) profit. 

Part of the wild speculation this morning does include a proposal that the cost of a cap freeze could be recovered over time through increased standing charges (a payback period of 20 years was mentioned)

That would be grossly unfair, as it would saddle people with a fixed additional cost on their energy bill to pay for other people's variable consumption now.

MattMattMattUK

Section62 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

wrf12345 said:

Sounds like the govn has been conned by the energy companies and consumers will be left with no choice but to stump up ridiculous standing charges and lose any option of fighting back against the energy companies (who are petrified that the "free" money going into people's bank accounts will not end up in their coffers)... not to mention that the govn spending more money will devalue Sterling and push up the costs of imports... and, er, energy (so the govn will have to spend more which will devalue Sterling which will...)! Then next year council tax will go up...

It is nothing to do with standing charges. There is a cost to operate the network which is what the Standing Charge is nominally to cover, the unit cost is supposed to cover the cost of providing that unit, plus a small (1.8% or less) profit. 

Part of the wild speculation this morning does include a proposal that the cost of a cap freeze could be recovered over time through increased standing charges (a payback period of 20 years was mentioned)

That would be grossly unfair, as it would saddle people with a fixed additional cost on their energy bill to pay for other people's variable consumption now.

One can argue that pretty much everything is unfair, which is why fairness is such an poor measure by any standards. I pay more tax than the average person, but less than high earners, one could argue that is fair, or not, some thing "progressive" taxation is fair, others think flat taxes are fair. The alternative would be to pay it out of general taxation which could be argued unfairly puts the cost on higher earners who may be the ones who could well have installed solar and battery systems. 

The key thing is that whatever happens needs to be economically sound, will not cause excessive medium and long term damage to the economy and will also help reduce consumption. I do not care about fairness as it is entirely subjective, practicality and function is the important part. 

Astria

So the £400 'gift' might now be withdrawn, and instead we might have costs frozen for 'at least 4 months'.

Call me skeptical but I think I'll keep my current fix and see what happens come October!

spot1034

FreeBear said:

Section62 said:

[Deleted User] said:

tghe-retford said:

Putin knows that borrowing and inflation are our weaknesses and he also knows that keeping the war going over a long period of time will cripple the west.

The only way to conquer that is to invest in energy security in the short and long term and allow us to go our own way. Yet I hear nothing so far other than more borrowing and more inflation spread over a generation.

In the short term, I guess you missed the news about fracking and planning permission around wind? In the long term, I guess you missed the news about Sizewell? Maybe not enough but wrong to say energy security isn't being actively discussed and planned. And simply not possible by October.

Added to which, energy demand management is also part of the equation, which tghe-retford overlooks.

Whether that is delivered by rolling blackouts, or by TOU tariffs, will depend on the urgency of the need.

The obvious solution to managing demand is to get on and insulate homes to a decent standard. OK, it won't fix the crisis in the short term, but if we can reduce usage over the long term, we won't be so reliant on overseas supplies.

We don't need to be reliant on overseas suppliers at all. The fact that we are is the result of two decades of mismanagement of our country's energy policy, and the blame goes right back to Blair's government.  That doesn't in any way excuse the complacency of those who have been in office more recently.

FreeBear

spot1034 said:

FreeBear said:

Section62 said:

[Deleted User] said:

tghe-retford said:

Putin knows that borrowing and inflation are our weaknesses and he also knows that keeping the war going over a long period of time will cripple the west.

The only way to conquer that is to invest in energy security in the short and long term and allow us to go our own way. Yet I hear nothing so far other than more borrowing and more inflation spread over a generation.

In the short term, I guess you missed the news about fracking and planning permission around wind? In the long term, I guess you missed the news about Sizewell? Maybe not enough but wrong to say energy security isn't being actively discussed and planned. And simply not possible by October.

Added to which, energy demand management is also part of the equation, which tghe-retford overlooks.

Whether that is delivered by rolling blackouts, or by TOU tariffs, will depend on the urgency of the need.

The obvious solution to managing demand is to get on and insulate homes to a decent standard. OK, it won't fix the crisis in the short term, but if we can reduce usage over the long term, we won't be so reliant on overseas supplies.

We don't need to be reliant on overseas suppliers at all. The fact that we are is the result of two decades of mismanagement of our country's energy policy, and the blame goes right back to Blair's government.  That doesn't in any way excuse the complacency of those who have been in office more recently.

Mismanagement of the UK's energy policy goes back further than just 20 years. Thatcher destroyed coal mining in this country and squandered North Sea oil/gas. She then went on to sell of British Gas and subsequent governments sold off the rest of the national energy companies. Blair was only one of a long line following Thatcher's policies (some say he was the best Tory MP in recent years despite being Labour).

Max68

Maybe it will give them a chance to claw back the billions lost in fraud over the Covid furlough scheme, but I won't hold my breath!  As said above it's mismanagement on a grand scale, but certainly not limited to energy policy.

deano2099

Malkytheheed said:

Assuming a fix until 2024, anyone estimate what, in real terms furlough and this are going to cost us? 

Furlough £70 billion, this £150 billion, Brexit £40 billion.