This is getting ridiculous (energy prices - Strictly NO referrals!)

[200sols]

So from what I can tell on the grid and as ever its tricky to find much detail.
The costs of the grid are shared (unknown) split to the generators and the consumers.
Again unclear if the users are charged via SC or units. Suspect its SC but its not certain.

I guess its another conversation in that areas with adequate generation and no real need to send energy out are having to share (socialise) the costs to get energy to low producing and high consumption areas (London/SE).
Without the high demand down there some of the national grid work would not be needed.

It does seem a little out that the national part of the grid needs to be socalised even with areas with vast excess of generation not needing any grid in effect, but the rest is localised and hence your pretty much always going to socialise the big stuff and yet the generation is typically going to be in the areas where the population is lowest and hence the areas where the generation is likely to be built.

It would make sense to be in the unit price, unit prices are higher in London than for example Scotland but its rarely mentioned. But as usual Ofgem are not forthcoming with details.

Of course those regions with generation also benefit from the demand for skilled workforces in those areas. E.g the new Scotland - England links are expected to generate many jobs.

Research undertaken by National Grid has found there will be an estimated 400,000 jobs created by 2050 due to the work needed to rewire Britain’s grid, including about 150,000 jobs anticipated in Scotland and the north of England.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

It would make sense to be in the unit price, unit prices are higher in London than for example Scotland but its rarely mentioned. But as usual Ofgem are not forthcoming with details.

Of course those regions with generation also benefit from the demand for skilled workforces in those areas. E.g the new Scotland - England links are expected to generate many jobs.

Nah details are difficult to find.
150/400 isn't that great a ratio

Its far from transparent

So we just need to find a way to balance the local environmental impacts, including asthetics now we have concluded the financial side is probably reasonably fair

 

[200sols]

150/400 isn't that great a ratio

Population adjusted its decent.

 

[Richie]

It would make sense to be in the unit price, unit prices are higher in London than for example Scotland but its rarely mentioned. But as usual Ofgem are not forthcoming with details.

All I can find is the following from Ofgem although I remember the conversation between a couple of members earlier about the figures here - https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/informatio...ce-cap-standing-charges-and-unit-rates-region

Going by that Ofgem info - its likely the differences in unit rates between London and Scotland are rarely mentioned as its a difference of between 1.06p/kWh and 0.96p/kWh depending on Southern or Northern Scotland. With an average household Elec consumption (according to Ofgem) of 2,400kWh, its a difference of circa £24.50/year in units

The difference in SC between London and Scotland is circa £78/year or 3 times as much as the equivalent unit charges mentioned above. That's potentially a reason it doesn't get mentioned.

 

[200sols]

All I can find is the following from Ofgem although I remember the conversation between a couple of members earlier about the figures here - https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/informatio...ce-cap-standing-charges-and-unit-rates-region

Going by that Ofgem info - its likely the differences in unit rates between London and Scotland are rarely mentioned as its a difference of between 1.06p/kWh and 0.96p/kWh depending on Southern or Northern Scotland. With an average household Elec consumption (according to Ofgem) of 2,400kWh, its a difference of circa £24.50/year in units

The difference in SC between London and Scotland is circa £78/year or 3 times as much as the equivalent unit charges mentioned above. That's potentially a reason it doesn't get mentioned.

I found out there actually is a subsidy of users in Northern Scotland called the Hydro Benefit Replacement Scheme. I think the issue for Scotland is the cost of supplying people in the north of the country is very high.

Transmission charges are a smaller part of the bill than local distribution and it looks like London is paying more to cover those transmission networks.

Electricity transmission charges2.10. These account for approximately 7% of a typical electricity bill (ex VAT). For‘typical’ households on the single rate the electricity transmission component of their bills range from £21 per year in North Scotland to £37 in London and Southern England.

You can see more here which confirms what I suspected, the cost of supplying remote rural regions is very high. https://assets.publishing.service.g...ariff-obligation-review-2022-consultation.pdf

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

I found out there actually is a subsidy of users in Northern Scotland called the Hydro Benefit Replacement Scheme. I think the issue for Scotland is the cost of supplying people in the north of the country is very high.

Transmission charges are a smaller part of the bill than local distribution and it looks like London is paying more to cover those transmission networks.



You can see more here which confirms what I suspected, the cost of supplying remote rural regions is very high. https://assets.publishing.service.g...ariff-obligation-review-2022-consultation.pdf

Makes sense when its looking at the distribution side, ignoring the generation side, which is kind of the point some of us are making.
Look at the north of Scotland and see the size of the wind farms generation close by, but which is not treated as local supply.

IE its cheap to connect (relatively per head) in London. But what are they in effect generating?

Even worse when you look at the proposed wind farms around Scotland.

List of offshore wind farms in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Richie]

Even worse when you look at the proposed wind farms around Scotland.

List of offshore wind farms in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That's just the offshore ones I see on that list?

Currently Scotland has a little under 16GW of renewable generation with projects in the pipeline taking it to an estimated 26GW or a 62.5% increase over current capacity (https://www.gov.scot/publications/e...q4-2023/pages/renewable-electricity-capacity/). The National Grid cant cope with the Scottish generation as it is so they best get their finger out to be able to cope with the extra else we are just ******* it away

Full Renewable Map of Scotland shows the extent of renewables in the country... Its everywhere (interactive so cant really post an image) - https://spice-spotlight.scot/2024/03/11/renewable-energy-map-of-scotland/

Currently, Scotland has 8.8GW of onshore wind capacity and 2.1GW of offshore wind. In 2021, the UK had 14.5GW of onshore and 11.3GW of offshore in total.

SOURCE

Works out at about 43% of wind renewables for the UK is generated in Scotland... I appreciate the data is 2-3 years old but the rest of the UK should get their finger out

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

That's just the offshore ones I see on that list?

Currently Scotland has a little under 16GW of renewable generation with projects in the pipeline taking it to an estimated 26GW or a 62.5% increase over current capacity (https://www.gov.scot/publications/e...q4-2023/pages/renewable-electricity-capacity/). The National Grid cant cope with the Scottish generation as it is so they best get their finger out to be able to cope with the extra else we are just ******* it away

Full Renewable Map of Scotland shows the extent of renewables in the country... Its everywhere (interactive so cant really post an image) - https://spice-spotlight.scot/2024/03/11/renewable-energy-map-of-scotland/


SOURCE

Works out at about 43% of wind renewables for the UK is generated in Scotland... I appreciate the data is 2-3 years old but the rest of the UK should get their finger out

yeah was aiming to show how much worse its going to get with offshore

 

[200sols]

Its still not about where its generated though, its about the cost of supplying rural and remote regions. Scotland already has lots of wind power to cover its usage, the issue is getting it to the properties.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Its still not about where its generated though, its about the cost of supplying rural and remote regions. Scotland already has lots of wind power to cover its usage, the issue is getting it to the properties.

Its 100% where is generated when everyone is paying for massive infrastructure projects to get it out of the regions its generated in to the regions that are using a massive amount compared to what they are generating.

Its really not hard to comprehend, the massive grid wide infra is being socialised nationwide when the local is being socialised in regions. For example we don't need the big projects in east anglia to support east anglia (scotland is the same), we need them to support the south.
We could simply avoid the massive grid upgrade costs, which again we are all paying for, if we didn't need to export so much to London.

It doesn't magically get from where its produced to London, but the Londoners aren't paying the full cost, we all are. I'm not sure whats so hard to grasp that one part is socialised nationally and the other is socialised in regions.
The fact there is a different apportionment basis means it triggers a different cost, and as it happens that most beneficially suits those in the higher population but low generation areas.
The apportionment basis could be changed. If the costs of network instead of being shared nationally equally were shared based on a net usage (actual usage - production) you would see a far different share of the costs of the high power large infrastructure projects going to those living in the densely populated areas.
Simply, the grid backbone is larger and needs more investment because the generation is not equally spread. If all regions more equally produced it could well be far smaller than it is now.

You cant get it to the properties in the south without us all paying for the backbone grid

 

[200sols]

I presume you have a source that backs up your claim r.e you are equally funding the upgrades because the data posted before disputes that.

The massive new grid upgrades are not yet in bills either, it's private funding with it to be recouped later.

 

[200sols]

See here, its a little old but no reason to believe the principle has changed.

1.18 Electricity transmission charges contain a locational element. This recognises that customers in different locations use different amounts of the transmission network, and therefore impose different costs on it. For example, customers located in areas where there is more demand than there is generation, such as in South East England, pay higher transmission charges for the energy they consume than those in areas where there is excess generation capacity, such as Scotland. This is because the electricity has to be transported over longer distances, using more of the transmission system, to reach them. Similarly, generators who only have to transport the electricity they generate over a short distance to reach customers will pay lower charges than those generators who are located a long way from them.This cost reflective approach is designed to promote efficient use of the network by larger users, for example, by providing a signal to generators that locating close to their customers requires less transmission network to be built

Seems clear to me you are not subsidising anything.