Energy prices held but standing charge up

matt_drummer

silverwhistle said:

 It's no use telling people to tighten their fuel spend if one element cannot be altered.

What are you saying, there's no point someone trying to reduce their energy costs because they will never be able to get it to zero as there is a standing charge?

That's ridiculous, if you use less you will pay less.

matt_drummer

silverwhistle said:

Of course there are fixed costs, but as ever in this country the poorer are penalised for being poor. The costs to supply a heavy user are more than they are for a low user in terms of generation capacity and network reinforcement and I'm not sure the balance has been struck correctly with the recent standing charge increases. It's no use telling people to tighten their fuel spend if one element cannot be altered.

How does the standing charge penalise the poor?

The costs to supply every user are the same, my wires and cables are the same as my neighbours.

If they use more than me, they will pay more than me.

If I use more than them, I will pay more than them.

The standing charge has got nothing to do with how much money you have or haven't got.

The poorest are helped in other ways, lots of people got more help than I did.

What is important is the total cost and how much people who need help get.

Scot_39

markin said:

1000's of DNO and NG employees will be wanting/getting a 10% pay rise so some costs will never come back down, Then the is the price of wire, transformers, fuel, and any new vans they need.

Maybe in the grand picture its only a small % ?

Not to mention 100s of miles of new or upsized overground transmission lines and undersea / underland HVDC connections - to join up new renewables - and get the power from high generation locations - to high use locations.

Schemes like EGL1 and EGL2 - new HVDC links - Scotland to England etc.

Part funded by power firms, part funded by National Grid etc.

All ultimately paid for by consumers (or tax payers or both)

Scot_39

sevenhills said:

Scot_39 said:

sevenhills said:

So it's wrong to state that the consumer has to pay a standing charge, but there are charges that the supplier needs to recoup.

It's really symantics in the end.

It is different at the moment because the government are controlling energy prices. 
But once that has ended, there may be more tariffs suitable for low users.
Is that a good thing, because all the different pricing tariffs confuses the consumer.

Not sure about low users per se.

Many lowest users posting here - I guess are or were actually relatively wealthy people - who have spent £1,000s if not £10,000s of their own money - into ASHP, Solar, Battery etc.

But suspect there is likely to be a push towards social tariffs in the next year.

Partly for political reasons - and partly to stop the extra benefits payments.

To coincide with the end of £900 via benefits systems and the end of the PAYG DD price matching (initial proposal via EPG) - unless prices drop to pre Ukraine levels - and I see no one suggesting that would be the case yet - in fact others (admittedly perhaps with vested interest) stating not in next few years.

EssexHebridean

I was on zero standing charge gas tariffs for years - worked a treat for me - on average we rarely use more than 2kWh of gas per day - so it worked out far cheaper for us to have no SC and just pay for the gas used - albeit at a higher rate. For a good while we had a direct debt in the region of £2 a month - indeed, the most significant issue was finding suppliers who were able to set it that low! 

So, you may wonder why I’m not joining the ranks of those whining about standing charges? Surely it should be a no brainer for me? Well - yes and no. As much as the lower costs would be lovely, I do ultimately understand that there are costs involved in supply, and it’s fair that I pay my share of those costs.  The current situation with the SC also has another advantage for me - as it means that suppliers don’t baulk at taking me as a customer when they realise how low my use is - at one point a few years ago only 2 suppliers came up on comparison sites for our gas supply - the use meant the rest simply weren’t interested. (The two were Scottish Power and EDF - otherwise known as a rock and a hard place!)

markin

People already have to pay to upgrade to 3 phase, And i think its the same for most of Europe if they still have a 20A main fuse. So its already pay up if you use more.

As most of the uk is already 80A that service level its long paid off, But we do all get the joy of paying up for going green, installing HVDC, and Storage.

ariarnia

matt_drummer said:

ariarnia said:

sevenhills said:

MattMattMattUK said:

charliewhatsit said:

Just had an email from EDF where I'm on the variable rate for now.    Daily standing charges are up which makes a mockery of the energy price guarantees, although the total estimate for energy is roughly the same for now.  Looks like they are preparing for lower wholesale prices but boosting  their standing charges to compensate to future proof their revenue when the time comes.  Any comments anyone?  I shall .definitely be looking at the competition when the time comes with an eye on standing charges.

The energy suppliers make no profit on the standing charge, they have to hand it over to Ofgem, network operators and the government.

A few years ago you could get a tariff without a standing charge. Did the network operators receive no money?
How suppliers set standing charges alongside the unit rate are commercial decisions.

you can still sign up today to a 0 standing charge tarrif. theres 2 i no of. 

here's an example quote from utilita (your price would depend on your region) 



you pay the first rate for the first 2 kwh of energy each day then the 'saver' rate for the rest. you would have to work out for yourself if its more expensive or cheaper for you but normally the ballpark is the house has to be empty/using less than 1kwh for 75% of the year to be cheaper than the variable under the price guarentee. 

at the rates above a 'average' user (2900 kwh of electric and 12000 of gas on a 'normal' seasonal curve) would pay about £2650 so about £150 more than a tarrif with the standing charge. 

https://join.utilita.co.uk/

I do that with loads of solar panels and batteries but who is this really any good for, especially the people who have an issue with the standing charge?

yonks ago (maybe 10 years) we had a 0 standing charge for our gas only. because we use gas for 4 months of the year (nov-feb) and even then we use half the 'average' then we worked out it was the best option for us. 

but i think they pulled 1 fuel only 0 rate tarrifs a long time ago and it wouldn't work out the same for both fuels (even as low users we would pay more than a normal single rate tarrif) 

also i think they're good for holiday homes that are only used during the summer months. or maybe houses empty for renovation/divorce/probabte. but very small market i agree. 

Section62

matt_drummer said:

silverwhistle said:

Of course there are fixed costs, but as ever in this country the poorer are penalised for being poor. The costs to supply a heavy user are more than they are for a low user in terms of generation capacity and network reinforcement and I'm not sure the balance has been struck correctly with the recent standing charge increases. It's no use telling people to tighten their fuel spend if one element cannot be altered.

How does the standing charge penalise the poor?

The costs to supply every user are the same, my wires and cables are the same as my neighbours.

...

That might be true for you, but isn't true in the general case.  The costs of supplying different consumers, even neighbours, can vary quite widely.

Furthermore, what might be regarded as 'fixed' costs of the main distribution network including transformers etc are dependent on how each of us uses energy.  If we all consume more then more work is required to upgrade the network.  If we all consumed less then upgrade/replacement work could be postponed or cancelled.

Shifting the balance between fixed charges and variable charges is one of the policy tools politicians have to influence consumer behaviour.  E.g. The fixed costs of owning a car (VED, Insurance, MOT, Servicing) are known to make it harder to reduce car use, even when policy tools like the fuel duty escalator were used to discourage usage. People take the view that they are paying already so may as well use it, for the 'small' extra cost of fuel.  High standing charges for domestic energy have exactly the same effect - if the unit cost is relatively low then the barrier to additional consumption is also relatively low, and the 'I'm paying for it anyway' mentality kicks in.

Mstty

@charliewhatsit the MSE forum staffed have produced this I formation for you

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6435580/why-are-my-standing-charges-going-up-again-from-1-april#latest

sevenhills

matt_drummer said:

The costs to supply every user are the same, my wires and cables are the same as my neighbours.

Another untrue piece of inflation. Rishi Sunak has paid himself to upgrade the cable/sub station because his swimming pool uses more electricity.