Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)

Isn’t this the exact purpose of prepayment meters?

I get there are other issues with them in that people have higher rates if they use them but that is easily solved by just regulating it out of the market.

Yes indeed

I find it interesting people dont realise that social tariffs are in effect paid for by the other consumers
 
So, my dad's fix just expired and with the potential for more energy chaos he wanted to fix.

He's currently with Scottish Power and wants to stay with them as he's attached to the in home display (SMETS 1).
The only option they have is a 'Flexi Rate' which is based on 75% fixed cost and 25% variable.

The variable element of this seems to be all of extra taxes / charges loaded onto energy which was a bit of a surprise to me as I didn't realise on the charges accounted for so much.
They are all listed in the T+C's by region (scroll down for yours and expand) and split into elements covered in standing charge and rate. Scottish Power T+C

Seems like they are covering themselves against the government increasing these mandatory charges which isn't something I've seen before and not sure that's a good thing.
What do they know that means they don't consider these parts fixed for 12m?

Is this now common? I fixed with a different supplier a few months back and it was a straight fix.

Examples

Northwest Electricity
Pj5q5sO.png

Northwest Gas
eIVYPLA.png
 
wind onshore and effectively offshore by offering so low a price for generation that no producers could be persuaded to buy a single contract
they put the contracts out for tender before incorporating the impact of inflation on build costs and interest rates for borrowing money - yes perhaps they should have abandonned the round.
the offshore wind companies had previously flagged up these increasing costs so lack of offers was no real surprise;
on the other hand have those companies found other countries to deploy their resources..
If we now construct more onshore wind - a quarter of the cost isn't it ? not such a bad thing.
Haven't heard Keir pontificate on on-shore wind and tell the electorate he's trying to buy with his housing promises they will have a turbine next to their house.

new oil fields - the government in theory is using the windfall profits to pay the winter fuel credits for those less well off - the £400 we all had last year plus the over 80's credit parents receive - levelling up.
 
Breathing cold air is bad for you and you pay for it long term health wise. Money is nothing.
From what I’ve read on a five minute google the ‘health risks’ unless you already have a significant respiratory condition don’t really exist and it’s not like the inside of modern houses actually get properly cold 16/17 degrees isn’t cold!
 
Oil and gas produced is sold on the world market and suppliers have to buy on the world market, consequently we pay high prices because suppliers are paying market price and the producers make huge profits from selling the same. Sunak gave the go ahead for lots of new oil fields consequently huge profits for oil companies and lots of taxes on it to fill govt coffers, meanwhile we get raped because market prices. Meanwhile the govt scrapped the agency that was promoting home insulation and blocked the cheapest form of energy, wind onshore and effectively offshore by offering so low a price for generation that no producers could be persuaded to buy a single contract. Yes, your government is screwing you over. What a life, eh.

Oh forgot to mention - govt have recently blocked new solar farms from being built on farmland so no cheap solar energy, all to avoid spoiling the view from Tory shire MP's constituency windows, probably.
I know all this, profits are up regardless of what you just typed.
 
Mainly it was the BBC.
The BBC was shaming Ofgem on the possibility of introducing a social tariff?

If you have a link would appreciate it, as cant find it.

Only found this.


Typically the BBC dont usually offer an opinion on their articles, so I am very curious at this point.
 
Last edited:
Yes indeed

I find it interesting people dont realise that social tariffs are in effect paid for by the other consumers
Although I scorn at the fact private companies should really provide funding, as an ethical initiative under licencing, for social tariffs from their own coffers / profits, I accept, begrudgingly, that this is being subsidised by other customers; a "social" tariff after all.

I utterly reject as unreasonable and unfair at the current situation, where seemingly, every customer of every other private energy company is subsidising each others debt, under the guise of whole sector security.
 
The whole thing is basically a buggers muddle.
There are multiple parties at fault, across differing timescales.

The first party to blame was the government who privatised it without decent enough safeguards in place to ensure a secure and competitive marketplace.

In recent times the government and Ofgem were the main villains. The majority of the energy firms that have gone bust were as a direct result of the government and Ofgem, not those companies.
Those companies in a normal functioning market place would simply up prices, they couldn't, and hadn't got the reserves and/or scale of the old players.

We see the same issues across the whole of the environment of monopoly supplies being attempted to be run with "competition"
They all either get screwed (like Royal mail being forced to provide service to the competitors at the point of loss making (delivery)) or end up in a position of too much power, utilities etc.

IMO the French model is far better with private/government involvement.
 
Last edited:
Hilarious isn't it. Instead of letting poorly run companies fail and the debt written off and soaked up by the investors / share-holders (in some instances, foreign entities); let the wider UK public household energy customers prop it up. Privatisation really has done a number within the utilities sector of the UK (especially England). Utter scam.

And working entitely as intended, and as envisaged when everyone's birthrights were sold off for peanuts, a process which began 40 years ago. Nationalk assets stolen by the tories and sold to their mates in the city as basically free chips at the casino.
 
And working entitely as intended, and as envisaged when everyone's birthrights were sold off for peanuts, a process which began 40 years ago. Nationalk assets stolen by the tories and sold to their mates in the city as basically free chips at the casino.

Not strictly true.
A lot of public bought shares in the privatised companies, but most then just flogged them straight on for a profit.
The sales were split to differing markets.
 
Not strictly true.
A lot of public bought shares in the privatised companies, but most then just flogged them straight on for a profit.
The sales were split to differing markets.

I wonder where the vast majory of shares are now? I doubt there are that many "Sids" left. Either way that's pretty much what happened.
 
Last edited:
The whole thing is basically a buggers muddle.
There are multiple parties at fault, across differing timescales.

The first party to blame was the government who privatised it without decent enough safeguards in place to ensure a secure and competitive marketplace.

In recent times the government and Ofgem were the main villains. The majority of the energy firms that have gone bust were as a direct result of the government and Ofgem, not those companies.
Those companies in a normal functioning market place would simply up prices, they couldn't, and hadn't got the reserves and/or scale of the old players.

We see the same issues across the whole of the environment of monopoly supplies being attempted to be run with "competition"
They all either get screwed (like Royal mail being forced to provide service to the competitors at the point of loss making (delivery)) or end up in a position of too much power, utilities etc.

IMO the French model is far better with private/government involvement.

Most things are better in France.
Obviously I don't know the ins and outs but I haven't seen anything better here than in France.
 
Most things are better in France.
Obviously I don't know the ins and outs but I haven't seen anything better here than in France.

Funny how having better public services, social provision, and infrastructure go hand in hand with having a quite heavily unionised working and middle class and a population with some b***s isn't it?
 
Back
Top Bottom