31% increase on electricity daily standing charge, is this fair and just?

dunstonh

Fair

SnakePlissken said:

mac.d said:

dealyboy said:

... it's a flat rate.

Would you consider flat rate income tax fair? or council tax? or car tax? ... paying the same as everybody else.

It should be a percentage ... perhaps 5% to replace the VAT.

It's not really a flat rate though is it? I know they use the infrastructure excuse for more remote parts of the country, but why should someone in Edinburgh or Liverpool pay so much more than someone in London?

With the new rates, someone in south of Scotland or north Wales has to pay £60+ more a year than someone in east of England. Someone in the north of Scotland has to pay £75 more than someone in London. Particularly galling for those in the north who have not only colder climate and so need to spend more, but watch as all the surplus green energy is transferred south to those who are paying less.

Its not just the standing charge, its the connection charges for power generation in Scotland are higher than london. Yet majority of the  renewable generation is in Scotland, with another 10gw being added over next few years.

At least very soon, we will see a scottish grid controlled by a scottish government. Not a uk one that looks after its buddies.

Goodbye rip off UK!

Scotland without the cross subsidy from England is going to be an expensive place to live.

mac.d

MattMattMattUK said:

Most of the wind farms are in England, or off of England's coasts. There are vastly fewer dwellings per km of cables or pipes in the north of Scotland than in London, there are vastly fewer people per substation and the maintenance is harder to complete (adverse weather, distance from major conurbations etc.). Also whilst the infrastructure cost, reflected in the Standing Charge is higher in Scotland than in London, the per kWh price in Scotland is around 6% less, reflective of comparison is transmission losses over large distances (eg. there are no power plants within the M25 anymore), most are on the coast. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_offshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_onshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom

It doesn't matter how many wind farms there are, it's the surplus energy that matters, and most of the surplus energy is transferred from the north of Scotland to the south. And if it was all about population density, why indeed are people in the most populated area of Scotland going to be paying more than those in the north of Scotland? Why is someone in the midlands paying 10p more than someone in the east? Is there really that much difference between the two areas?

ariarnia

Fair

mac.d said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Most of the wind farms are in England, or off of England's coasts. There are vastly fewer dwellings per km of cables or pipes in the north of Scotland than in London, there are vastly fewer people per substation and the maintenance is harder to complete (adverse weather, distance from major conurbations etc.). Also whilst the infrastructure cost, reflected in the Standing Charge is higher in Scotland than in London, the per kWh price in Scotland is around 6% less, reflective of comparison is transmission losses over large distances (eg. there are no power plants within the M25 anymore), most are on the coast. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_offshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_onshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom

It doesn't matter how many wind farms there are, it's the surplus energy that matters, and most of the surplus energy is transferred from the north of Scotland to the south. And if it was all about population density, why indeed are people in the most populated area of Scotland going to be paying more than those in the north of Scotland? Why is someone in the midlands paying 10p more than someone in the east? Is there really that much difference between the two areas?

who said it was 'just' about population density? 

10 people sharing a bill are going to pay less each than 1 person paying the lot alone. if the bill is the same. but the bill for supply and maintenance in rural areas is higher than urban as well as there being less people to pay for it. 

if you want to actually understand the why that is then this is where ofgem explain it 

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2015/10/reg_charges_final_master_version_23_october_2015.pdf

including 

The North Scotland DNO receives a cross subsidy through the Hydro Benefit Replacement Scheme, so its customers face lower network charges than they otherwise would. This component is recovered from suppliers across Great Britain through a charge added to all units of electricity. The cross subsidy is currently around £41 per annum per household in North Scotland.

more info on that and why bills in the north of scotland would be even higher without it here 

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/hydro-benefit-replacement-scheme-and-common-tariff-obligation-statutory-review-2022

MattMattMattUK

Fair

mac.d said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Most of the wind farms are in England, or off of England's coasts. There are vastly fewer dwellings per km of cables or pipes in the north of Scotland than in London, there are vastly fewer people per substation and the maintenance is harder to complete (adverse weather, distance from major conurbations etc.). Also whilst the infrastructure cost, reflected in the Standing Charge is higher in Scotland than in London, the per kWh price in Scotland is around 6% less, reflective of comparison is transmission losses over large distances (eg. there are no power plants within the M25 anymore), most are on the coast. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_offshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_onshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom

It doesn't matter how many wind farms there are, it's the surplus energy that matters, and most of the surplus energy is transferred from the north of Scotland to the south. And if it was all about population density, why indeed are people in the most populated area of Scotland going to be paying more than those in the north of Scotland?

The standing charge in the north Scotland region is 51.08p, the standing charge in south Scotland is 50.67p, those on the least populated part of Scotland pay more not less.

mac.d said:
Why is someone in the midlands paying 10p more than someone in the east? Is there really that much difference between the two areas?

The West Midlands has a standing charge of 49.14p and a population of 458 people per sq. km. The East Midlands has a standing charge of 45.76p and a population of 312 people per sq. km. However whilst the East Midlands has a lower density overall it has more in specific conurbation, it is also, together with the East of England is the part of the country where the vast majority of the off-sea wind power is brought on land so some of the general network is classified as national rather than regional, even though it is used for both national and regional distribution. For comparison Scotland has a population density of 70 (51.08p/50.67p) people per sq. km and London has a population density of 5,596 (33.15p)people per sq. km.

dunstonh

Fair

It doesn't matter how many wind farms there are, it's the surplus energy that matters, and most of the surplus energy is transferred from the north of Scotland to the south.

It doesnt get that far south as distance from generation matters.

dealyboy

Rip off

It is a misunderstanding to think that the electricity standing charge does not go to the supplier, it does but to be used as stipulated by OFGEM.

It is also a mistake to think it is all about maintenance of supply.

I quote from E.ON Next ...
"Standing charges are a fixed daily amount that customers have to pay, no matter how much energy you use. This charge covers the cost of supplying your property with gas and electricity.
This however does vary by region due to the different costs to transport power to where you live.

The charge pays for costs such as government schemes to help reduce carbon emissions and fuel poverty, connections to and maintenance of the energy network as well as service administration charges. It's a bit like the line rental you have for your phone, but for your energy."

I have highlighted 'government schemes' for the green agenda and 'fuel poverty' providing subsidies such as the 'warm home discounts' to benefit claimants. Some might argue that these should come from general taxation. Is it fair that we all pay the same? the old age pensioner who has to decide whether to heat or eat and the person who has just been relieved of their LTA worries. Does anybody remember another charge, the Community Charge also known as 'the poll tax' that was a fixed amount that all adults paid until fairness determined that Council Tax was a better way.

ariarnia

Fair

dealyboy said:

costs such as government schemes 

including the cross subsidy for energy users in the very north of scotland putting a charge on all customers to lower the costs of a small number of people who would other have to pay excessive costs to be on the grid. 

and poll tax was arguably 'fairer' because it charged households based on the number of people using services. not unlike people who want network charges to be based on use of services. it was scraped because of politics not because of any merit or flaw of the tax principle. 

Astria

Fair

dealyboy said:

... it's a flat rate.

Would you consider flat rate income tax fair? or council tax? or car tax? ... paying the same as everybody else.

It should be a percentage ... perhaps 5% to replace the VAT.

Why should it be a percentage, the unit cost already covers the "Use more, pay more".

They could make it zero standing charge, and then increase the unit cost by 10p, meaning those who use more than 5 kWh per day would pay substantially more, but that's hardly fair either for those living in housing with only electric heating.

mac.d

MattMattMattUK said:

The standing charge in the north Scotland region is 51.08p, the standing charge in south Scotland is 50.67p, those on the least populated part of Scotland pay more not less.

I was looking at the new prices from April, where it's 61.67p in southern Scotland and 58.98p in northern Scotland.

ariarnia said:

who said it was 'just' about population density? 

10 people sharing a bill are going to pay less each than 1 person paying the lot alone. if the bill is the same. but the bill for supply and maintenance in rural areas is higher than urban as well as there being less people to pay for it. 

if you want to actually understand the why that is then this is where ofgem explain it 

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2015/10/reg_charges_final_master_version_23_october_2015.pdf

I was replying to MattMattMattUK's post where he talked about London being so much cheaper due to the number of homes served by a single substation, km of gas main, overhead line, etc due to very high population density compared to the rest of the country. 

I get the urban areas will have less costs than rural areas. So again, why is southern Scotland now more expensive than northern Scotland. These costs appear to be very arbitrary.

ArbitraryRandom

mac.d said:

I get the urban areas will have less costs than rural areas. So again, why is southern Scotland now more expensive than northern Scotland. These costs appear to be very arbitrary.

If you look at the ofgem report in the post you quote then you would have all your answers. It's not at all arbitrary; how it's worked out is set by ofgem and they tell the suppliers what to charge.