Standing Charges Ofgem review

Chris_b2z

The concept of standing charge at current levels seems completely unfair to me. It would be the same as petrol stations charging a fixed £5 fee to cover delivery costs, etc before you start filling.

GingerTim

Chris_b2z said:

The concept of standing charge at current levels seems completely unfair to me. It would be the same as petrol stations charging a fixed £5 fee to cover delivery costs, etc before you start filling.

That's not really an equivalent comparison, though, unless the petrol station delivers and maintains pipes and other infrastruture to your home.

TheElectricCow

wild666 said:

believe the standing charges were introduced in the 70's as a short term measure but they have never being scrapped. Energy suppliers must be rubbing their hands with glee that most people are paying £300 for using no electric or gas, or £180 for those that just use electric. 
I would rather see a her higher kWh charge on both electric and gas worked out on average daily usage, that would be about 6p on the electric and 1p on the gas. Low users would benefit and high users would lose out. This could make users find ways of using less electric and gas.

Based on January’s price cap figures for electric that works out to an average unit rate increase of 7.2p, meaning anyone using over 4kWh per day would be worse off. Practically speaking this means anyone with electric heating/hot water would pay much more, and those with solar and battery installations could pay nothing at all for their use of the grid.

Chris_b2z

Let's not forget that there's a £38 million annual marketing budget to promote smart meters with the main message being that they will save you money. Is there really any point in a low energy user switching off their standby devices at night to save 50p a year when they will be stung by a huge standing charge anyway?
There is no incentive for the low energy user to reduce usage.

MattMattMattUK

Chris_b2z said:

Let's not forget that there's a £38 million annual marketing budget to promote smart meters with the main message being that they will save you money. Is there really any point in a low energy user switching off their standby devices at night to save 50p a year when they will be stung by a huge standing charge anyway?
There is no incentive for the low energy user to reduce usage.

The incentive to low users is the same as everyone else, saving money, different people have to decide if they are interested in making those savings versus the effort involved, it does not matter if someone is a high, average or low user, the standing charge has no impact on usage reductions because they are different elements. It is entirely irrational to say that the standing charge discourages energy saving or makes them not worthwhile. 

MultiFuelBurner

Chris_b2z said:

Let's not forget that there's a £38 million annual marketing budget to promote smart meters with the main message being that they will save you money. Is there really any point in a low energy user switching off their standby devices at night to save 50p a year when they will be stung by a huge standing charge anyway?
There is no incentive for the low energy user to reduce usage.

With my smart meter I have so far saved over £500 this year with a smart meter only tariff.

It's not pence it's big pounds and to be honest I don't much care if those that oppose smart meters dig their heels in anymore. It really is their big financial loss.

Qyburn

In effect the anti smart meter brigade are subsidising us by paying more than they need for their energy, and saving the country money to the tune of the smart meter they've refused. 

Netexporter

Chris_b2z said:

Let's not forget that there's a £38 million annual marketing budget to promote smart meters with the main message being that they will save you money. Is there really any point in a low energy user switching off their standby devices at night to save 50p a year when they will be stung by a huge standing charge anyway?
There is no incentive for the low energy user to reduce usage.

You entirely miss the point of smart meters. It is the time of use that yields the biggest savings.

Gerry1

wild666 said:

believe the standing charges were introduced in the 70's as a short term measure but they have never being scrapped.

@wild666 Nope, standing charges have been around since the 1930s.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2000/jan/13/utilities.personalfinancenews

(Note the date of the article.)

Following privatisation, some companies introduced 'No Standing Charge' tariffs but these were largely sleight of hand: there was usually a surcharge on the first few kWh per day to claw back the shortfall, so there was little if any benefit for most users.

However, it made sense for owners of lock-up garages and holiday homes because zero usage meant zero bills.  Suppliers found that they often ended up with a significant proportion of unprofitable canny customers so these tariffs fell out of favour.

Chris_b2z

Netexporter said:

Chris_b2z said:

Let's not forget that there's a £38 million annual marketing budget to promote smart meters with the main message being that they will save you money. Is there really any point in a low energy user switching off their standby devices at night to save 50p a year when they will be stung by a huge standing charge anyway?
There is no incentive for the low energy user to reduce usage.

You entirely miss the point of smart meters. It is the time of use that yields the biggest savings.

Sorry, but I think you entirely miss the point that high standing charge is having on low energy users trying to economise.

Sure, we've learnt that a spreadsheet guru can save a fortune with TOU tariffs. How about the average consumer that goes to work, supports a family or just someone that cannot change their life routine? How about granny next door without an internet connection? The high standing charge is having a major impact in many of those cases.

And at the same time the marketing department is spending £38 million each year on an Einstein 'Consumer Engagement Campaign'. Really?