Average usage my **** said Jim Royle

Ultrasonic

arnoldy said:

In this instance it may be more appropriate to also have the median as well as the average.

From what I've read here I believe the Ofgem 'typical' is the median rather than the arithmetic mean (both types of average), but having rejected usage so low as to be deemed empty properties.

Ultrasonic

Oh, and my usage is well below the lowest use archetype, as a sole occupant of a three bedroom detached house and not on low income. Loads of people won't 'fit' the examples.

arnoldy

Ultrasonic said:

From what I've read here I believe the Ofgem 'typical' is the median rather than the mean (both types of average), but having rejected usage so low as to be deemed empty properties.

Thats useful, to understand the data the data sets the terminology and methodology used by Government/Ofgem need to be consistent and clear. 

Ultimately though where the rubber hits the road is taking responsibility for one's own energy usage. To this end it might be more useful for Government to publicise the costs of key usage and look carefully at the advice for heating (time and duration) and washing machines (including temperature), dishwashers, tumble dryers, hot water usage and so forth.

All it takes is to sit down and think carefully for an hour or so with a pen and paper and decide on, and write down, the household energy changes to reduce costs. Monitor, adjust and manage it as appropriate going forwards. 

brewerdave

Xbigman said:

Mstty said:

Xbigman said:

The lowest archetype on there is double my usage. 


Darren

Well you are a money saving whizz, I think for regulars here they do have their saving minds switched on. We don't fit into any of the architypes now we have started our energy reduction exercise 

Over recent years I have been continually amazed when posters come on this board saying they are 'low users' or 'very frugal' when they clearly are not. I'm now realising that my usage is not just low, it is exceptionally low and that I live incredibly cheaply. So cheaply I fall off the bottom of government charts. This seems to be because I am prepared to be inconvenienced more than others. The vast majority of people, maybe 99%, live completely convenience based life styles. A car is an essential, a dishwasher is an essential, a tumble drier is an essential. Then there are the things that, whilst not essential are so useful they are worth having, like a freezer. The number of people I know with either a fridge freezer and a freezer or a gigantic freezer is frightening. Its everybody. I've asked several how many kwh their FF and F use each year and not one had any clue and yet they all moaned about high bills. Just what is wrong with people?



Darren 

Maybe because that's the way "people" have been brought up ? I'm old enough to remember a much less comfortable life style in the 50s and to be brutally honest , I wouldn't want to return to it.
On your point about essentials ? Very few people outside of the cities have shops now within sensible walking distances so cars have tended to become essential and unless you want to go shopping every other day ,so have fridges and freezers.
I agree that some devices are pure luxuries eg large screen TVs and dishwashers whilst many of the people I know ,have abandoned the tumble dryer and returned to the washing line! 
I really can't see me adopting the lifestyle "recommended" by the likes of @HertsLad anytime soon!

k_man

The move to an increased (albeit potentially more representative) average could be double/multi edged:

The new increased media quoted cap £ value would be higher, so may spur users into action regarding looking at their energy usage.

The quoted kWh usage would also be higher, so normalises higher usage, potentially discouraging action.

The increase in both also may normalise an increase in usage (e.g. average was X, now is Y), making energy users think using more energy than previously is expected (what with our modern busy lifestyles...)


As with most things, the devil is in the detail, and headlines can't capture this.
The information is out there, usually to some degree in the body of the article, or linked articles. It does however take effort, and will, to research beyond the attention grabbing headline

As the main sources of information for many people seems to moving from news to social media, DYOR seems to be a dying art.

[Deleted User]

Ultrasonic said:

arnoldy said:

In this instance it may be more appropriate to also have the median as well as the average.

From what I've read here I believe the Ofgem 'typical' is the median rather than the mean (both types of average), but having rejected usage so low as to be deemed empty properties.

You’re spot on.  For electricity, the 2900kWh is the median given those rejections. The mean of the same dataset is just over 3400kWh.

[Deleted User]

Here's the raw data - Current means 2017 and Revised means 2020.


And the associated mean - what most people are thinking about when they hear "average"

Cardew

Contributions on this thread have concentrated on electrical consumption.

However the biggest variations reported on this forum are for the consumption of gas for heating/hot water.

Mention of this will bring out the usual 'I find 14C in living rooms comfortable!' comments. 

Mstty

@Cardew

Thanks for that table shame there isn't yet an all electric ASHP non economy 7. They tend to range fro 5000-10000kWh in my experience on here.

You made me laugh with the 14oC temp but then this is a board where extremely money saving is in full swing. 

Ultrasonic

arnoldy said:

Ultrasonic said:

From what I've read here I believe the Ofgem 'typical' is the median rather than the mean (both types of average), but having rejected usage so low as to be deemed empty properties.

Thats useful, to understand the data the data sets the terminology and methodology used by Government/Ofgem need to be consistent and clear. 

Ultimately though where the rubber hits the road is taking responsibility for one's own energy usage. To this end it might be more useful for Government to publicise the costs of key usage and look carefully at the advice for heating (time and duration) and washing machines (including temperature), dishwashers, tumble dryers, hot water usage and so forth.

All it takes is to sit down and think carefully for an hour or so with a pen and paper and decide on, and write down, the household energy changes to reduce costs. Monitor, adjust and manage it as appropriate going forwards. 

I agree. Historical usage and what may be more appropriate usage factoring in climate change and the current energy supply crisis are two different things.