MSE News: More energy deals with NO standing charges finally on the cards

QrizB

Ildhund said:

His electricity consumption last year was just over 1000 kWh. A penny on the unit rate would cost him £10 a year.

Nobody's seriously seriously suggesting it'll be a penny on a unit, though. More like 10p, with the breakeven around 2000kWh/yr (the Ofgem benchmark "low" - bottom quartile - dual-fuel electricity consumption being 1800kWh/yr at present).
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/average-gas-and-electricity-usage

wrf12345

On a very small scale, Ebico is 20p s/c and 35p per unit, and there was an Octopus business offering with zero s/c and 35p per unit. You do need scale to make zero s/c charge work properly, which seems unlikely under the current proposals, which is why I suggested the abolition of the s/c. Perhaps the combination of a prepaid smart meter and TOU tariff would be the best route for zero s/c reintroduction as it would solve the debt problem and skewed towards low users the wear and tear on the Grid would be minimal (with prohibitive peak time rates thrown in). It's a pity Octopus is slowly turning into a socialist company intent in redistributing wealth with multiple layers of unnecessary cash generation, they could otherwise lead the way with zero tariff offerings.

matelodave

They could go back to the good old days when you paid extra (quite a bit extra) for the first two or three kwh a day  to cover the standing charge and then a lower rate for everything after that.

It worked really well for my mum who was all electric  (heating as well)but with a gas hob that only got used a couple of times a month. Her gas bills were only a couple of quid a quarter but her leccy was just as expensive as anyone else's.

As @QrizB says, anyone who thinks they'll get away with 1p on a kwh is dreaming. It will be predicated on recovering the s/c for the average or given half a chance, those who are below average.

It will be the usual smoke and mirrors and although some may come out on top it will penalise the majority who will end up paying again

Anyway, when Milliped gets his wishes we'll all only have one standing charge or super expensive leccy so its not likely to make a lot of difference

TheElectricCow

wrf12345 said:

On a very small scale, Ebico is 20p s/c and 35p per unit, and there was an Octopus business offering with zero s/c and 35p per unit. You do need scale to make zero s/c charge work properly, which seems unlikely under the current proposals, which is why I suggested the abolition of the s/c. Perhaps the combination of a prepaid smart meter and TOU tariff would be the best route for zero s/c reintroduction as it would solve the debt problem and skewed towards low users the wear and tear on the Grid would be minimal (with prohibitive peak time rates thrown in). It's a pity Octopus is slowly turning into a socialist company intent in redistributing wealth with multiple layers of unnecessary cash generation, they could otherwise lead the way with zero tariff offerings.

The zero SC Octopus business tariffs are a perfect example of how zero SC tariffs can be a false economy - Last time I did the sums, they’re only available to users above a certain minimum consumption threshold, and if you went more than ~230kWh above that threshold it’s cheaper to just have a regular tariff. It was a very small subset of people in a quite specific consumption range who would see any benefit in taking those tariffs, and even then the maximum total saving was under £15 per year for the tariff I looked at.

It’s exactly as you say, you need scale to make a zero SC tariff work properly, so why would any supplier want to offer a tariff they’re going to make a loss on?

badmemory

If I remember back when that was how it was done for all, it was more than 1p/kwh even then, so it has got to be significantly more now..

MattMattMattUK

jeffuk said:

MattMattMattUK said:

jeffuk said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Increase fuel duty by 10p a litre this year and 10p a litre every year after and add 10% duty to all ICE vehicles, 

Wouldn't that be a tax on the poor who can't afford an EV/don't have access to home charging?

It would be a tax on polluters, which is who we should tax. 

As I said, a tax on the poor who have no alternative. These could be people who need their cars for essential jobs such as care home workers etc. Until we have public charging stations that are the same price to use as home chargers it will be a tax on the poor. 

Not everything is "a tax on the poor" because the cost that needs to be paid reflects the cost to society. The reality that carbon emitting transport is too cheap, well below it's true cost to society and far below it's cost to the environment. Trying to claim that things are "a tax on the poor" is an appeal to emotion, it is not a valid argument.

The reason that current public charging is generally more expensive is because it requires infrastructure investment and that cost is currently carried by private enterprise who requires a return on that investment. However if this was funded from taxation (the tax on ICE vehicles) then the infrastructure cost could be written off at point of installation and the energy cost could be charged at whatever the rate is plus a small markup to account for network upkeep. 

Scot_39

matelodave said:

They could go back to the good old days when you paid extra (quite a bit extra) for the first two or three kwh a day  to cover the standing charge and then a lower rate for everything after that.

Utilita already do that - first 2 units per day. 

bristolleedsfan

Someone has posted example of Utilita Prepayment No Standing Charge Tariff rates elsewhere.

E - Unit Rate 1 - 58.450p   Unit Rate 2 - 24.560p

G  Unit Rate 1 - 21.831p    Unit Rate 2 -  5.943p

Qyburn

Scot_39 said:

Qyburn said:

When Ofgem published their options paper they stated that suppliers weren't allowed to offer a zero or reduced standing charge tariff which exceeded the price cap at any usage. So as illustrated in their graphics the increased unit rate could only be levied up to a certain point.

And anyone below the point at which the two meet creates a funding shortfall for the supplier.

Which will need higher prices to compensate for the fixed external costs at least.

Simple example - a consumer with usage at half the rate breakpoint would essentially pay only half their share of the c£330 SC - the fixed costs.

So who is going to pay their other £165 ?

Cap compliant doesn't mean fair.

When Ofgem published that doc there was no suggestion that suppliers would be forced to offer such a tariff, only that they were allowed to.

Patr100

bristolleedsfan said:

Someone has posted example of Utilita Prepayment No Standing Charge Tariff rates elsewhere.

E - Unit Rate 1 - 58.450p   Unit Rate 2 - 24.560p

G  Unit Rate 1 - 21.831p    Unit Rate 2 -  5.943p

Just to be clear, rate 1 is non SC, rate 2 is with?