energy prices to go down, but... standing charges remain

[Deleted User]

Krakkkers said:

If those companies profits are capped at 1.8% then why are they in business, i just opened a fixed rate account at 6.1%.

.......because 1.8% of a very, very, very big number is still a very big number.

silverwhistle

dunstonh said:

Is that fair?

yes, it is.  Difficult to understand why you wouldn't think it fair.   However, you linking the falling costs of energy to the standing charge suggest its more to do with a lack of understanding.

Good grief! Now before I go on let me say that with solar panels etc. I have no problems paying my energy bills. But let me be as patronising to you as you were to the OP. It's amazing, in a world where some food bank recipients request food that doesn't need to be cooked, that you have a complete lack of imagination as to how other people live.

Your investment advice elsewhere on these boards is helpful to some, thank you, but your lack of understanding of the impact of high standing charges does you no credit.

If you have little money and manage to get your daily consumption down to say 3kWh, then a 60p standing charge adds 20p to each unit.

If you are comfortable and use 20 units then the standing charge component to add is only 3p per unit.

Which of these two examples make the most demands on generation and transmission, whether CAPEX or running costs?

Do let me know if you find that difficult. The low user will still be contributing via their unit costs, but it seems you prefer regressive pricing regimes.

[Deleted User]

These recurring threads on standing charges are certainly entertaining. Something to keep us amused now most of the smart meter conspiracy theorists have moved on, and Brexit is a done deal and delivering the benefits us remainers expected....

Seriously though, wouldn't it be best if we all took a step back (myself included) rather than go round the same circles we've been round many times before?

CSI_Yorkshire

silverwhistle said:

dunstonh said:

Is that fair?

yes, it is.  Difficult to understand why you wouldn't think it fair.   However, you linking the falling costs of energy to the standing charge suggest its more to do with a lack of understanding.

Good grief! Now before I go on let me say that with solar panels etc. I have no problems paying my energy bills. But let me be as patronising to you as you were to the OP. It's amazing, in a world where some food bank recipients request food that doesn't need to be cooked, that you have a complete lack of imagination as to how other people live.

Your investment advice elsewhere on these boards is helpful to some, thank you, but your lack of understanding of the impact of high standing charges does you no credit.

If you have little money and manage to get your daily consumption down to say 3kWh, then a 60p standing charge adds 20p to each unit.

If you are comfortable and use 20 units then the standing charge component to add is only 3p per unit.

Which of these two examples make the most demands on generation and transmission, whether CAPEX or running costs?

Do let me know if you find that difficult. The low user will still be contributing via their unit costs, but it seems you prefer regressive pricing regimes.

Oh behave.

The question wasn't "is having standing charges fair?"  - that's been endlessly debated here and always ends up in the same stalemate.

The question was "is it fair that standing charges haven't fallen when unit prices have?".  That's a completely different question, that you haven't addressed at all.

Would you please like to explain why you think a standing charge for government policy costs and network maintenance should directly track wholesale power prices? 

debitcardmayhem

silverwhistle said:

dunstonh said:

Is that fair?

yes, it is.  Difficult to understand why you wouldn't think it fair.   However, you linking the falling costs of energy to the standing charge suggest its more to do with a lack of understanding.

Good grief! Now before I go on let me say that with solar panels etc. I have no problems paying my energy bills. But let me be as patronising to you as you were to the OP. It's amazing, in a world where some food bank recipients request food that doesn't need to be cooked, that you have a complete lack of imagination as to how other people live.

Your investment advice elsewhere on these boards is helpful to some, thank you, but your lack of understanding of the impact of high standing charges does you no credit.

If you have little money and manage to get your daily consumption down to say 3kWh, then a 60p standing charge adds 20p to each unit.

If you are comfortable and use 20 units then the standing charge component to add is only 3p per unit.

Which of these two examples make the most demands on generation and transmission, whether CAPEX or running costs?

Do let me know if you find that difficult. The low user will still be contributing via their unit costs, but it seems you prefer regressive pricing regimes.

Sadly you have missed the point, the SC is “meant” to contribute to the costs of providing 3kWh on demand, or gas mains so your boiler pilot light stays on when you need hot water( I realise that modern boilers don’t use pilot lights) The suppliers don’t get anything from the SC it is the distributor that should get the benefit from that. If you use 200kWh / day or 0 kWh /day the cables/pipes are still there, but I think a better system is to charge an extra say 2-5% on the unit rate and give that to the distributor.

EDIT or preferably whatever % that ofgem deems an average household, but of course if the cost of supply changes up or down that is unfair / outrageous depending upon which way it goes, catch 22

double_dutchy

[Deleted User] said:

Something to keep us amused now most of the smart meter conspiracy theorists have moved on

Have they really all gone? Phew! Still, I'm keeping my head down, what with all the 5G radiation.......

Scot_39

Krakkkers said:

If those companies profits are capped at 1.8% then why are they in business, i just opened a fixed rate account at 6.1%.

Shell - one of the few remaining - has already decided to quit uk reseller market.

And before anyone blames Brexit - they are quitting in Germany and one other - Spain ?.

Even when or is it still if the ebit allowance increases to 2.4% - and that's pre tax and pre interest on debts- the margins just aren't that attractive to many investors.

Edit:

In fact arguably we are quickly at risk of only those with a direct tie to producers - drilling / generation (whether fossil or renewables etc) plants will remain.  Basically as a sales front for parts of the global businesses - where they can still make a reasonable profit. 

Scot_39

[Deleted User] said:

Krakkkers said:

If those companies profits are capped at 1.8% then why are they in business, i just opened a fixed rate account at 6.1%.

.......because 1.8% of a very, very, very big number is still a very big number.

Not when it's divided amongst millions of shares / shareholders - many of whom can now access 5%+ in a deposit account in uk and abroad.

Ectophile

javixeneize said:

Energy companies say they will be reducing their unit price, but the standing charges, which where increased when unit prices went up, are not coming down at the same pace

Is that fair?

Yes.  Because the wholesale price of a unit of gas or electricity, and the cost of delivering that gas or electricity, are completely unrelated to each other.

javixeneize

This used to be a nice forum with polite people, but now it seems to be full of know it all arrogant consultants

thank you, thank you so much for enlightening me