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

Brie

I don't want to twist the debate (too much anyways)

But if the SC is to pay for the infrastructure to deliver a variable rate product then shouldn't the SC be the same for everyone and with every supplier?  As far as I know it differs even for different tariffs from the same supplier.  Isn't that part of what makes trying to do comparisons almost impossible (without a spreadsheet and if not math savvy)

debitcardmayhem

£222 for electricity approx 60.8p per day jeez I thought my 40.1p was a tad high , but I can't complain since I use import and export(no additional SC on that)

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

debitcardmayhem said:

£222 for electricity approx 60.8p per day jeez I thought my 40.1p was a tad high , but I can't complain since I use import and export(no additional SC on that)

We're in North Wales and Merseyside, some of the highest rates going I think. 

Scot_39

Brie said:

I don't want to twist the debate (too much anyways)

But if the SC is to pay for the infrastructure to deliver a variable rate product then shouldn't the SC be the same for everyone and with every supplier?  As far as I know it differs even for different tariffs from the same supplier.  Isn't that part of what makes trying to do comparisons almost impossible (without a spreadsheet and if not math savvy)

London is the cheapest and also the densist / most concentrated population and less rugged terrain etc.

IIRC NW and Mersey is the most expensive - followed closely by Southern Scotland - supply regions.

About £85 pa difference iirc.

I can undesrtand some logic in terrain and population density impacting SC costs.

Payment method however - other than credit risk - which is lower for prepay arguably than even DD - is less clear.

And am quite disappointed to see that despite the fuss - and political posturing by all sides a couple of months ago - prepay SC are still more expenive than direct debit - the govt arguing that because prepay unit rates are lower - they dont need EPG compensation. In fact for this Q - the only EPG reduction - is gas unit rate.  But of course thats based on a presumed - TDCV usage - e.g. 8kWh for electric.

Having a quick scan of electricity SR rates for instance on EDF tables - electric users in many regions - would need to use 5kWh + daily to break even in some regions - but many low users will be trying desperately not to use that much in summer.

pochase

Brie said:

I don't want to twist the debate (too much anyways)

But if the SC is to pay for the infrastructure to deliver a variable rate product then shouldn't the SC be the same for everyone and with every supplier?  As far as I know it differs even for different tariffs from the same supplier.  Isn't that part of what makes trying to do comparisons almost impossible (without a spreadsheet and if not math savvy)

Apart from the different regional rates the SC that the suppliers have to pay over is the same, but for suppliers this is just the maximum they are allowed to charge customers.

The suppliers are free to charge lower rates, as for example Octopus does, and of course they can use different rates for different tariffs. If they charge less they just have to make up the difference out of their own pocket.

CSI_Yorkshire

Scot_39 said:

Brie said:

I don't want to twist the debate (too much anyways)

But if the SC is to pay for the infrastructure to deliver a variable rate product then shouldn't the SC be the same for everyone and with every supplier?  As far as I know it differs even for different tariffs from the same supplier.  Isn't that part of what makes trying to do comparisons almost impossible (without a spreadsheet and if not math savvy)

Payment method however - other than credit risk - which is lower for prepay arguably than even DD - is less clear.

It's mainly that from how I last read it - and whilst the volume of debt is lower, the chance of recovery is also lower (allegedly) - although the debts that cause people to go onto prepayment and the cost of changing over to prepayment meters both count against the PP SC (even though both costs were actually incurred by people who at the time were not PP customers).

CSI_Yorkshire

Scot_39 said:

And as per usual @CSI_Yorkshire seems to have far more specific detailed knowledge than most - including me.

            

Qyburn

CSI_Yorkshire said:

I didn't ask why they don't build their own, the question was why don't they foot the bill? Maybe they do contribute, I don't know, hence the question.  

They used to.  They paid the complete connection charge to the local substation and for the upgrades to the substation.  And it was discovered to be an idiotic idea.  Many complaints and lawsuits about clawing costs back from competitors who came along to use the subsequently improved capability, a massive jump in the effective cost of generation if you were the site who triggered the need for works, but no change at all to the cost for any generator before or after them in the queue, disputes about how much upgrade was actually necessary based on that specific project and how much was just 'necessary works', disputes about how 'deep' in the network was the generator's responsibility to fund...

That's interesting because we saw this with a project over 10 years ago. To connect an 800kW turbine rather than 600kW, they had to pay an additional £100K for "reinforcement" on top of the connection price. There was an argument (which I supported) that they should install with a 600kW limit applied, then wait for another renewable project to mean that reinforcement went ahead paid for by someone else.