Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)

[Philtor]

“You trigger me so hard”

Umm. We still talking about electric bro?

 

[Brutal biff]

Those saying government will do something I just can't see it to be honest

 

[Curlyriff]

Better protest, analogous to blocking petrol stations/DOS, might be for everyone to put their kettle on at the same time.



keep telling yourself that .. ofgen have already enumerated the inequalities of the standing charge, and need for a cap

49. The burden of the standing charge falls disproportionately on those who consume the least energy because it forms a large part of their total bills and means they pay the highest price overall for each unit of energy (see paragraph 34 above). These are generally low income households, who are also most likely to be on the SVTs and the poorest value tariffs generally and to be fuel poor and most in need of help with energy bills.

The CMA went further. In setting the PPM price cap for nil consumption at the average standing charge of the Big Six energy firms’ PPM tariffs it broke the standing charge down into its components. It stated that “the value of the price cap at nil consumption does not include, nor need to include, network costs since these are volume driven”63. It said that the network charging statements of the network companies defined ‘use of system’ charges to be nil at nil consumption64 . Thus it has been acknowledged that almost all (if not all) network costs should be recovered through the unit rate.

...
The benefits of a cap on the standing charge would also be further enhanced if the
Government withdrew value added tax (VAT), currently levied at 5% on all elements of
energy bills, from the standing charge. This would be on the basis that the standing
charge confers the ability to access a supply of energy, which is a necessity83

Yeah cause lets listen to Ofgem again whom have shown their inept way of doing anything. Just because you are utilising less gas or electric doesn't absolve you of the maintenance of the total grid for when you do use it, the install of smart meters and such forth. Could they have a tier system where you standard charge is reduced by 10% if you are lighter user, sure. But people will never agree on what that artificial tier is.

 

[bigmike20vt]

having a tiered system for energy costs where 1st X KW/ a month costs an amount and then going up in tiers could work like has already been suggested...... but I am not so sure.

the premise is that all high users are rich people I presume with their 6 bed houses , hot tub and pool.
but I. not so sure. absolutely you would get more money of these people but OTOH who are more likely to have inefficiently insulated homes,. with ancient TVs using a lot of power and who are unable to afford the likes of solar and home batteries and A rated white goods etc?

it could end up that the people who would benefit most would be middle earners. I know I would definitely benefit from scrapping SC and having tiered energy costs. I have all of the above and am now a very low user (esp for 8 months of the year)....... but as much as I would love to save money, I am definitely not in the category which needs help.

I dunno, not saying I am right just putting another thought out there.

 

[danlightbulb]

No then

Yes I have, but I'll only do it if sufficient volume is reached.

Get out on the streets of London in an organised protest but as usual people aren't prepared to do that, instead they will take the armchair protest of not paying and "sticking it to the man" when targetting the wrong organizations and then announce to the world they did their bit. Its the pussy way to protest

That's a worse way to protest. First it costs money, 2nd it disrupts the public.

If you can afford to pay and dont pay because "stick it to the man" (which is sticking it to entirely the WRONG party) achieves nothing and will do more harm and damage to YOU than it will to the company.

I already acknowledged that it's targeting the wrong party but as there is no way to directly target the government or wholesale producers then the retailers are all there is.

You trigger me so hard because i honestly cant believe someone can read this poorly/ is this dumb

If you're referring to the standing charge then perhaps you can elaborate on exactly how it's calculated then? I'm fairly sure there isn't a direct link between fixed network costs and the SC. Up until everyone was on the Ofgem calculated default tariff caps then retailers were free to set their own SC. There may be some costs that are added on after wholesale purchase such as taxes and levies that could be added directly to SC.

 

[doesitmatter]

having a tiered system for energy costs where 1st X KW/ a month costs an amount and then going up in tiers could work like has already been suggested...... but I am not so sure.

the premise is that all high users are rich people I presume with their 6 bed houses , hot tub and pool.
but I. not so sure. absolutely you would get more money of these people but OTOH who are more likely to have inefficiently insulated homes,. with ancient TVs using a lot of power and who are unable to afford the likes of solar and home batteries and A rated white goods etc?

it could end up that the people who would benefit most would be middle earners. I know I would definitely benefit from scrapping SC and having tiered energy costs. I have all of the above and am now a very low user (esp for 8 months of the year)....... but as much as I would love to save money, I am definitely not in the category which needs help.

I dunno, not saying I am right just putting another thought out there.

This is what I think should be done, it's not a perfect solution but it does incentivise people to use less energy, those that are wealthy will invest in solar, further reducing demand.

The issue I foresee is that it would require smart meters to work, presumably heavy users not on a smart meter will resist. I'm not sure how you get round that issue? Perhaps parliament would have to make it a law.

 

[Curlyriff]

having a tiered system for energy costs where 1st X KW/ a month costs an amount and then going up in tiers could work like has already been suggested...... but I am not so sure.

the premise is that all high users are rich people I presume with their 6 bed houses , hot tub and pool.
but I. not so sure. absolutely you would get more money of these people but OTOH who are more likely to have inefficiently insulated homes,. with ancient TVs using a lot of power and who are unable to afford the likes of solar and home batteries and A rated white goods etc?

it could end up that the people who would benefit most would be middle earners. I know I would definitely benefit from scrapping SC and having tiered energy costs. I have all of the above and am now a very low user (esp for 8 months of the year)....... but as much as I would love to save money, I am definitely not in the category which needs help.

I dunno, not saying I am right just putting another thought out there.

My only reason for anyone suggesting a tier is that if you use more electric the maintenance is based on cycles so that increases. Not to do with the how much use based on how expected income. Unfortunately you use more then you do create more maintenance due to wear and tear.

Not saying directly fair but that why we get a flat rate in end because that is generally the more fair side to it. A three tier system possibly could be done with light, medium and high use and that SC as you drop a tier reduces by 10% as the offset to you not being the reason for the required maintenance cycle but hard where all companies would have to agree in my view on the same tier level for it not to further escalate things with issues later on.

Hard call, not the easiest but technically possible.

 

[Curlyriff]

This is what I think should be done, it's not a perfect solution but it does incentivise people to use less energy, those that are wealthy will invest in solar, further reducing demand.

The issue I foresee is that it would require smart meters to work, presumably heavy users not on a smart meter will resist. I'm not sure how you get round that issue? Perhaps parliament would have to make it a law.

The first answer is that if you don't provide a reading to the company monthly as you not on smart is that it is assumed you are a heavy user and thus paying the maximum SC rate instead. If you make the effort to show readings then they can bill accordingly.

 

[Uther]

having a tiered system for energy costs where 1st X KW/ a month costs an amount and then going up in tiers could work like has already been suggested...... but I am not so sure.

the premise is that all high users are rich people I presume with their 6 bed houses , hot tub and pool.
but I. not so sure. absolutely you would get more money of these people but OTOH who are more likely to have inefficiently insulated homes,. with ancient TVs using a lot of power and who are unable to afford the likes of solar and home batteries and A rated white goods etc?

it could end up that the people who would benefit most would be middle earners. I know I would definitely benefit from scrapping SC and having tiered energy costs. I have all of the above and am now a very low user (esp for 8 months of the year)....... but as much as I would love to save money, I am definitely not in the category which needs help.

I dunno, not saying I am right just putting another thought out there.

Not everyone with high usage is rich though. A family member has a wife who is now seriously disabled and their electricity bill is horrendous with various medical equipment, hoists etc.

 

[413x]

Not everyone with high usage is rich though. A family member has a wife who is now seriously disabled and their electricity bill is horrendous with various medical equipment, hoists etc.

Unfortunately some of the highest users are the most unfortunate.

That's why energy is so hard to 'tier'

 

[Doobedoo]

It’s not hard to tier you just need to allow provisions for those that maybe are using more because they are disabled ect.

It’s prudent and financially incentivises people to use less which is better for the planet.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

That makes billing far more complex.

Most people can’t seem to cope with Xp per kWh and Yp per day, let alone tiered pricing.

That is why the cap is always given as a flat ‘typical use’ figure which helps no one who can actually do basic maths.

 

[Doobedoo]

I think we’re talking about the standing charge predominately.

 

[413x]

It’s not hard to tier you just need to allow provisions for those that maybe are using more because they are disabled ect.

It’s prudent and financially incentivises people to use less which is better for the planet.

It would be a nightmare.
How would you know? It would be near impossible to set up. It's not really something you can validate if someone is a high user due to medical reasons.

 

[bigmike20vt]

Not everyone with high usage is rich though. A family member has a wife who is now seriously disabled and their electricity bill is horrendous with various medical equipment, hoists etc.

that is exactly my point. sorry if I didn't make it clear

 

[413x]

Noticed the message at the bottom.
This is new on my bill I'm sure. Wonder if it's due to the cancelling of the DDs?

 

[Doobedoo]

It would be a nightmare.
How would you know? It would be near impossible to set up. It's not really something you can validate if someone is a high user due to medical reasons.

It’s easy. They already use deemed averages based on No of rooms. Use that. If you have a 3 bedroom house yet use the same as a 2 bed you get charged the lower tier.

 

[jpaul]

medical exemption is easy - like for disabled parking ticket ?

having a tiered system for energy costs where 1st X KW/ a month costs an amount and then going up in tiers could work

as said, for those on monthly(smart) readings that could work, but pre-payment/poorest it would be more tricky, ...
a cheaper rate card that could be renewed strictly once a month, and a higher rate card for any overflow use ? Google doesn't show any european countries have innovated with tiering.

short term you can just view the £400 ...£1200 govt contribution as reducing the price of those first units every month

 

[danlightbulb]

Anyone reliant on energy for medical needs should be registered to the energy priority services register (PSR) and should therefore be able to be identified to claim additional support with energy bills on a means tested basis.

Companies and governments have got lazy with means testing and support of those genuinely in need I think.

 

[Doobedoo]

Anyone reliant on energy for medical needs should be registered to the energy priority services register (PSR) and should therefore be able to be identified to claim additional support with energy bills on a means tested basis.

Companies and governments have got lazy with means testing and support of those genuinely in need I think.

Rishi isn’t lazy he’s been working hard on reversing the flow of money to poorer communities