OFGEM - Winter 2025/2026 Standing Charge Plans

Chrysalis

I can only see one of two charging methods here.
Either
1 - First unit or two used is expensive enough that it recovers any lost SC, meaning to benefit you pretty much have to be zero use rather than low use.  so an empty property tariff.

2 - Not extreme unit rates for first 1-2 units, but still a noticeably higher unit rate, maybe extra 30% or so.

Ofgem was put under pressure to get SC under control as there is too much stuff in there that shouldnt be in there, and they lost the plot going really radical with this scheme presumably as they didnt want or were unable (due to government).to make adjustments to SC in a downwards direction.

I expect this scheme to fail, and the long term resolution instead to be the proposed social scheme that was recently brought up.

Ildhund

Chrysalis said:

Ofgem was put under pressure to get SC under control as there is too much stuff in there that shouldnt be in there, 

What is in the SC that shouldn't be, in your opinion? There's often a suggestion, for example, that some policy elements of the SC should be covered by 'general taxation'. Why would this be better, or more equitable, do you think? 

Chrysalis

Ildhund said:

Chrysalis said:

Ofgem was put under pressure to get SC under control as there is too much stuff in there that shouldnt be in there, 

What is in the SC that shouldn't be, in your opinion? There's often a suggestion, for example, that some policy elements of the SC should be covered by 'general taxation'. Why would this be better, or more equitable, do you think? 

I have answered this so many times on here at this point, I will just ignore the question from now on, the information is easy to find.

But I will say what I think should be there, fixed infrastructure costs.  So pretty much everything else that isnt that, is your answer.  Ofgem/gov at this point basically have employed the suppliers as stealth per property based tax collectors for government policies, and fiddled with other figures for political reasons.

Scot_39

Zero SC tariffs were backed as a way of helping the poor afford their bills.

WHD has been extended - well for currently it's last year - yes it was a time limited stop gap measure itself  - so do we still need them ?

And their are far more sane ways of lowering our bills, without any adverse impact on suppliers or generators willingness to support UKs ambitions 

- scrap any and all policy costs - thats £198 + allowances / overheads gone

- scrap the 5% VAT itself

and the one thats really gonna upset some greens out there

- scrap net zero 95% by 2030

Slow down and bring in far far more linked planning - its really simple in some cases - like say stop licensing and building wind farms and paying them £100s millions soon to be billions in curtailment - until the grid capacity exists - would be a big start.

If Germany can meet its obligations under Paris accords and subsequent COP agreements by not abandoning coal fired power generation until 2038 - I am sure there is time to pause - and replan - and finally get a grip on this unseemly badly executed rush in the UK.

To stop the inexorable net zero "orthodoxy" marching us all towards the £3bn grid curtailment peak (and remember if EGL2 late - the way EGL1 did by 18m vs initial planning - it might not be the peak) and NESO's £8bn total balancing costs.

We already have GW of wind with no realistic transmission path to markets on windy days. 

Seagreen's 1.075GW  largest single farm in Scotland -  a classic recent example - or our rush to meet meaningless targets - 71% in curtailment - getting 40% of cash for 8% of capacity in one report.

Generation capacity we simply cannot use - but pay for regardless.

And we currently have another iirc c18-19GW outstanding renewables capacity already sold outstanding from AR4 to AR6 (or their was until Orsted shelved plans for c2.4GW of Hornsea 4 OS Wind sold in AR6).

AR7 is in progress - and no doubt when reports if successful we will have even more licensed capacity without the transmission capacity to deliver it - possibly if forecast - already built into the £3bn / £8bn projections - possibly not.  

And just like after after AR6 a bunch of ministers and greens standing around congratulating themselves - for in reality given recent trends - driving our energy costs - domestic and commercial - higher - often far higher than far too many of our international counterparts.

Ildhund

Chrysalis said:

Ildhund said:
... There's often a suggestion, for example, that some policy elements of the SC should be covered by 'general taxation'. Why would this be better, or more equitable, do you think? 

I have answered this so many times on here at this point, I will just ignore the question from now on, the information is easy to find.

I'm sorry, but I wouldn't have asked if the answer were easy to find. I assume you think that the policy elements of the SC - currently almost £200 p.a., perhaps £5Bn in total - should be covered by 'general taxation' instead. I just don't see why that is better.  

---

[Full disclosure: I'd be delighted if this burden were shifted from domestic electricity consumers like me to those who pay income tax, a cohort which I'm in the happy position of not belonging to.] 

Scot_39

See a link to the table in the SC report and a summary of the figures from it I did in another post here

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81569872/#Comment_81569872

See stacked bar chart or table under 2.1 - but summarising that table

Item                                   Electricity SC                Gas SC
Operating                          £62                                  £84
Network                             £121                                £0
Policy                                 £11                                  £11
Others                                £26                                 £20

That has 2 x £11 of the at time - £22 of the £188 iirc total for traditional policy costs - £11 on both gas and electric standing charges (ex vat and overheads of course) breakdown.

Obviously implying of course the remaining c£164 if the £188 correct - was recovered on unit rates at TDCV consumption levels.

So higher users - regardless of their own financial position or health needs - over contributed - and low users - under contributed.

 

Of  course you could argue that the electricity network costs themselves are in fact largely due to policy, and certainly any recent increases - and Ofgem's predicted significant future increases - are in fact a direct result of govt policy - govt net zero policy - in terms of connecting new and remote renewables and in terms of adding total power capacity to feed net zero driven EV replacing ICE and likes of ASHP replacing GCH.

But if we are going to keep paying allowances like grid curtailment to suppliers putting wind farms in remote locations - often years before the network connections to handle that power are in place - then we have little choice to spend money to offset those currently expanding costs.

My solution would be to stop doing so - to stop curtailment payments full stop in fact. On past and future licensed renewables.

The £3bn should be a massive wake up call to us all - but the rush to 95% by 2030 - has the DESNZ and NESO - which has it as part of it's very remit - under for want of a better term - under it's thrall.  

So unless that goes - the current trajectory is sadly set.

scotsman123

Just got an email from Utilita, they're discontinuing their Smart Energy tariff, the one with no standing charge. I'm being put on to Smart Energy with Standing Charge (57p per day for electric, 34p for gas) I'm trying to find out what other tariffs they might offer. I'll update if I find anything useful.

born_again

scotsman123 said:

Just got an email from Utilita, they're discontinuing their Smart Energy tariff, the one with no standing charge. I'm being put on to Smart Energy with Standing Charge (57p per day for electric, 34p for gas) I'm trying to find out what other tariffs they might offer. I'll update if I find anything useful.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6628306/utilita-no-standing-charge-ending#latest

So if Utilita have pulled the plug. Does that mean the no S/C is dead in the water already, as the rest of the suppliers have said no to the idea.
Or simply said if they have to, then it will be priced in such a way that it will not be cost effective for anyone?
So something like £15 for the 1st unit & £1 after that 🤣

Scot_39

scotsman123 said:

Just got an email from Utilita, they're discontinuing their Smart Energy tariff, the one with no standing charge. I'm being put on to Smart Energy with Standing Charge (57p per day for electric, 34p for gas) I'm trying to find out what other tariffs they might offer. I'll update if I find anything useful.

There is another poster here saying they still offer it prepay, just not credit meters.  True ?

Brit2020

Scot_39 said:

scotsman123 said:

Just got an email from Utilita, they're discontinuing their Smart Energy tariff, the one with no standing charge. I'm being put on to Smart Energy with Standing Charge (57p per day for electric, 34p for gas) I'm trying to find out what other tariffs they might offer. I'll update if I find anything useful.

There is another poster here saying they still offer it prepay, just not credit meters.  True ?

It says this at the bottom of the email I got:

If you’d like to move to a Utilita tariff without a standing charge, you can switch to Pay As You Go energy. Please call 0345 207 2000 or reach out on Live Chat, anytime.

So this tariff I assume is only available with a smart meter?