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

[ubersonic]

Renewables are cheap energy, its their entire purpose.

You can't use windmills and solar panels to generate gas.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Not denying this but why do we have to pay this bill? We the consumers have paid what we owe as usual. We aren’t the ones at any part of the supply chain, that are either mismanaging or reaping huge profits.

The choice was frankly to either say to customers you lost your money or not.
The government rightly IMO say that customers should not lose money in those circumstances.

There were some other things that affected the SC, although I dont know how much.
The national grid for example had to spend a lot of money due to significant disruption, remember all those storms and people being cut off for days due to so much work needing to be undertaken to fix the infrastructure....

I also suspect that the SC was not maximised at its potential from many. Eg I had a tariff with silly low SC the other year, I suspect it was marketing and "worth it" to get my custom. I bet all the energy suppliers are putting every single thing they are allowed into SC now they are basically not allowed to charge market rate for the energy they provide.

 

[Doobedoo]

Yes, its partially that, although I thought that was the reason for the high standing charge?

In terms of unit rate, as someone has posted above, the wholesale price of gas is 17p/kwh for December. Is anyone here paying 17p/kwh for gas? I'm certainly not, so every kwh of gas I use results in my supplier losing 10p, multiply that by thousands of customers using thousands of kwh and tell me if you think its viable to maintain that over an extended period?

You’re not paying for today gas your paying for the gas brought 12 months ago. Don’t worry you will have to pay for the 17p/kWh at some point. You’re certainly not getting it cheap.

 

[Haggisman]

Not denying this but why do we have to pay this bill? We the consumers have paid what we owe as usual. We aren’t the ones at any part of the supply chain, that are either mismanaging or reaping huge profits.

You don't have to pay this bill, no one is forcing you to keep using energy

Seems apt to respond to a previous post of yours

They were private business's, if a shop goes out of business, it doesn't cost us anything, if a bus station went out of business, it wouldn't cost us anything. Why should these privately run energy business's cost us.

If a bus company was forced out of business because it cost more in fuel to run the buses than they were allowed to charge in ticket prices then you would have to walk everywhere. Is that preferable to having to pay a bit more for a bus ticket?

 

[danlightbulb]

Yeah I thought the poster was talking about the high standing charge:

although I thought that was the reason for the high standing charge?

Still no need to increase the SC and effectively use it as a stealth tax.

but the cap directly and significantly destroyed many of these businesses.

These businesses weren't very secure anyway though. I remember reading an MSE post about Avro and someone has gone into their posted accounts and seen all sorts of money movements to various directors and shell companies. Then the companies went bust but no-one can touch the shell companies or the individuals.

We should have better laws in place for this stuff.

 

[MadMossy]

You can't use windmills and solar panels to generate gas.

Correct, but you can use gas to generate electricity. So why then is the price of solar/wind/hydro tied to the price of gas.

 

[danlightbulb]

You don't have to pay this bill, no one is forcing you to keep using energy

Energy is an essential need. It should never have been treated as an international market.

 

[Haggisman]

You’re not paying for today gas your paying for the gas brought 12 months ago. Don’t worry you will have to pay for the 17p/kWh at some point. You’re certainly not getting it cheap.

I'm well aware of that, and I'm "happy"* to do so, because I have enough sense to realise that while far from ideal, unfortunately that is what it costs.

Energy is an essential need. It should never have been treated as an international market.

I couldn't agree more, but looking at it pragmatically, saying "this should have been done" or "this shouldn't have been allowed", isn't going to help anyone with anything. I'd like to think the current situation would be an eye opener to our politicians that maybe looking past the next election once in a while would be a sensible idea, but I have my doubts

* happy is definitely not the right word, more of a weary resignation

 

[MadMossy]

You don't have to pay this bill, no one is forcing you to keep using energy

Seems apt to respond to a previous post of yours



If a bus company was forced out of business because it cost more in fuel to run the buses than they were allowed to charge in ticket prices then you would have to walk everywhere. Is that preferable to having to pay a bit more for a bus ticket?

Other than our entire way of life relies on it completely. Switch off your supply see how well you fair with no fridge, hot water, clean clothing, bedding etc etc

There are alternative options in that scenario, like you say, walking, cycling, taxis, planes, trains etc

 

[Doobedoo]

You don't have to pay this bill, no one is forcing you to keep using energy

Seems apt to respond to a previous post of yours

Of course I’m not being forced to use energy but realistically you can’t avoid it. I have done my best to avoid waste and have also invested my own money to reduce my dependency on the grid.
I don’t have a gas supply but I do have to pay the standing charge regardless of how sensible I am.
I’m not responsible for any of this and I always pay what I owe.
What I don’t like doing is paying for failed private business enterprise. I never received the dividends and share prices that were no doubt dolled along the way.

 

[danlightbulb]

unfortunately that is what it costs.

Its not what it costs to produce though. Its what it costs on the open market, which is different.

Dont you think energy cost should be much closer linked to cost to produce and regulated so excess profits are not allowed?

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Yeah I thought the poster was talking about the high standing charge:









These businesses weren't very secure anyway though. I remember reading an MSE post about Avro and someone has gone into their posted accounts and seen all sorts of money movements to various directors and shell companies. Then the companies went bust but no-one can touch the shell companies or the individuals.

We should have better laws in place for this stuff.

But thats just business. Virtually no young business is secure and has massive reserves.
Then being forced to sell at a loss just to totally torpedo your chance to survive and grow.

Many of them probably would have transitioned to good businesses over time, and some would have failed.

This was out of their control. As peoples deals ended they should have been moved to market rate, so that the risk of failure of the businesses was reduced constantly. The opposite happened, as peoples deals finished they were forced to continue to sell at a loss.

Most of what we are paying for as consumers is that price of the fuel we have all used and under paid for in effect.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Energy is an essential need. It should never have been treated as an international market.

I think your not being realistic here
Just about everything we consume is part of an international market at some point in its supply chain

 

[danlightbulb]

I think your not being realistic here
Just about everything we consume is part of an international market at some point in its supply chain

It doesn't have to be. Ive used water as the example before so I'll do it again.

We extract our own water and we supply it to our own people at regulated prices.

Why cant we make our own energy and sell it to our own people at regulated prices?

 

[Haggisman]

Its not what it costs to produce though. Its what it costs on the open market, which is different.

Dont you think energy cost should be much closer linked to cost to produce and regulated so excess profits are not allowed?

Well, that's down to supply and demand. Who do you suggest should regulate it? How do we decide which country should get priority if there isn't enough supply to meet demand (as in the current situation)?

There are alternative options in that scenario, like you say, walking, cycling, taxis, planes, trains etc

There are alternatives now as well, go off grid, install solar and switch to purely electric, get a wood stove for heating.

Of course I’m not being forced to use energy but realistically you can’t avoid it. I have done my best to avoid waste and have also invested my own money to reduce my dependency on the grid.
I don’t have a gas supply but I do have to pay the standing charge regardless of how sensible I am.
I’m not responsible for any of this and I always pay what I owe.
What I don’t like doing is paying for failed private business enterprise. I never received the dividends and share prices that were no doubt dolled along the way.

That doesn't really have anything to do with the unit price though. Yes, you are quite right to complain about the standing charge, but ultimately that is just a very small fraction of most people's bills

Why cant we make our own energy and sell it to our own people at regulated prices?

We can and we should. That's not going to solve the issue today, tomorrow, or for several years.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

It doesn't have to be. Ive used water as the example before so I'll do it again.

We extract our own water and we supply it to our own people at regulated prices.

Why cant we make our own energy and sell it to our own people at regulated prices?

We could, as has been said its possible within some degree.
You just need to convince the rest of the population to vote for a party that proposes some kind of semi nationalisation of energy.

If we want to retain any kind of international reputation however its going to cost us a bucket load of money.

 

[danlightbulb]

You just need to convince the rest of the population to vote for a party that proposes some kind of semi nationalisation of energy.

And when it is proposed, the big corporations and political parties go into fear campaigning to convince people it won't work.

Honestly, we don't deserve to be in any better position than we are because everyone is chasing the quick buck.

 

[the shadow]

Got a message for Sid ?

 

[200sols]

And when it is proposed, the big corporations and political parties go into fear campaigning to convince people it won't work.

Honestly, we don't deserve to be in any better position than we are because everyone is chasing the quick buck.

We should have had govt owned wind farms and sold the energy cheaply back to us. Instead we pay gas prices for wind power.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

And when it is proposed, the big corporations and political parties go into fear campaigning to convince people it won't work.

Honestly, we don't deserve to be in any better position than we are because everyone is chasing the quick buck.

Yep somewhat true

Plus many will remember when key infrastructure was under government control, it was often the most political tinderbox for strikes.
My parents have told me more than once I was a powercut baby. Goes back to when they were only allowed 3 nights a week of electric since there was not enough generation available due to strikes.
They played board games by candle light, and other ahem entertainment

There are fixes that could be applied to at least make things better but it requires political will and we as a nation are not recently inclined to vote in that direction.
Maybe that will change if we see a coherent and decent strategy laid out.