New National Analysis on E7 Price Increase - Ave 7.6%

EssexHebridean

If I asked you how your household budget was going, and whether you were concerned that you may have to use your overdraft in the future, you might well reply with an assertion that no, everything was perfectly well under control, and you have a pan emergency fund in case of any unforeseen situations which might arise. Should I then  take it that you are in fact in financial trouble and perhaps even in danger of insolvency? 😉

pensionpawn

If I asked you how your household budget was going, and whether you were concerned that you may have to use your overdraft in the future, you might well reply with an assertion that no, everything was perfectly well under control, and you have a pan emergency fund in case of any unforeseen situations which might arise. Should I then  take it that you are in fact in financial trouble and perhaps even in danger of insolvency? 😉

Most people insure aspects of their lives in many ways. Businesses have business continuity plans however normally they don't feel compelled to suddenly publicly reassure their customers that service will be uninterrupted at some point in the near future, and then state what they are doing differently to ensure that there will be no interruption. I'll offer you an analogy.... If regular rail commuters one day hear an announcement prior to departure stating that the train driver doesn't anticipate problems arriving in London today however we've taken some extra precautions on this particular journey by reducing the number of carriages and driving the train much slower, just on this occasion, are you suggesting that the passengers wouldn't raise an eyebrow or two? I mean, why mention it if it's not likely to happen?

EssexHebridean

pensionpawn said:

Most people insure aspects of their lives in many ways. Businesses have business continuity plans however normally they don't feel compelled to suddenly publicly reassure their customers that service will be uninterrupted at some point in the near future, and then state what they are doing differently to ensure that there will be no interruption. I'll offer you an analogy.... If regular rail commuters one day hear an announcement prior to departure stating that the train driver doesn't anticipate problems arriving in London today however we've taken some extra precautions on this particular journey by reducing the number of carriages and driving the train much slower, just on this occasion, are you suggesting that the passengers wouldn't raise an eyebrow or two? I mean, why mention it if it's not likely to happen?

That would be an unprompted announcement, rather than a response to a question.

If a media outlet approach the National Grid and say "Hey! We're planning to write an article around you readying the coal fired power stations for bringing online - it sounds to us as though this means the UK is on the brink of the lights going off - and that's the angle we plan to take - do you have any comment?" what do you think the NG's response should be? To ignore the media outlet, in spite of knowing full well that this particular outlet has a bit of an ongoing history around the energy crisis with alarmist, sensationalised and frequently inaccurate reporting? (Which sadly as we see here, an awful lot of people will believe because they have been brought up to believe that is a "credible" source and have not adjusted that viewpoint in spite of clear evidence that the contrary is often now true). Or to respond with a clear, factual statement around what is actually happening, and why? I know which I'd prefer - but then again I'm not big on frightening lots of vulnerable people just because it creates a bit of excitement... 

MattMattMattUK

pensionpawn said:

Most people insure aspects of their lives in many ways. Businesses have business continuity plans however normally they don't feel compelled to suddenly publicly reassure their customers that service will be uninterrupted at some point in the near future, and then state what they are doing differently to ensure that there will be no interruption. 

Businesses do have continuity plans, generally though the national media does not pick up on these. A good business will test as much of the continuity plan as reasonably possible, on the basis that if it is not tested then it should be presumed it will fail when needed. A business will generally tell employees, or other site users, when it intends to test, or part test backup generators, that does not mean that they expect the grid power to fail, it is part of making sure that if it does they maintain supply.

pensionpawn said:

I'll offer you an analogy.... If regular rail commuters one day hear an announcement prior to departure stating that the train driver doesn't anticipate problems arriving in London today however we've taken some extra precautions on this particular journey by reducing the number of carriages and driving the train much slower, just on this occasion, are you suggesting that the passengers wouldn't raise an eyebrow or two?

This happens with inclement weather, the driver will announce that the train will run slower, but does not mean that the train will not arrive, only very rarely does the train not arrive (at least in most countries with properly functioning train systems) but it may be delayed. The train network also does not have inbuilt extra capacity, it does not keep multiple trains and drivers on standby just in case one fails, it does not maintain multiple alternative routes to be able to divert around problems, where as National Grid does.

pensionpawn said:

I mean, why mention it if it's not likely to happen?

They are not "mentioning it", it is standard operating procedure, however the media likes to pick things up and hype them up for clicks.