Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)

[bigmike20vt]

That's not how it works in the UK

The owners of the wind farm and the land owner benefit, no one else. The electricity generated just gets priced the same as the rest.

Just like oil here, oil extraction in the UK is all carried out by international corporations, so it's priced up and sold on the global market. We don't get any benefit. In Russia, SA etc it's state owned and cheap locally.

i know... it sucks.

 

[jpaul]

regional standing charges from google +5% https://octoenergy-production-media.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/svt_jan24_rates_-_RATES_FOR_BLOG.pdf
standing charge is higher in nicer areas of the country !



more clearly : can see what tracker and agile rates have been historically V last 28 days - not aware of anything better

Grafana

dashboards.energy-stats.uk

Average Unit Price (Electric Tracker)
16.9 p
Average Unit Price (Gas Tracker)

3.9 p

Average all-day Unit Price (Agile Import)
13.8 p
Average all-day excluding 4pm to 7pm (Agile Import)
12.2 p
Average between 4pm and 7pm (Agile Import)

30.0 p

and then decide which might be better based on energy time of use

 

[chrcoluk]

The point you raise about some people paying more than the cap. Yes, that’s correct, as long as the typical use middle person doesn’t then that’s fine per the rules and they working as intended.

Ok yeah, thats news to me, I am still somewhat confused though because even if we take that there is only a cap for typical usage and no cap otherwise, if you was to tinker with the published rates, then people on typical usage would only stay below the cap, if you lowered unit rate and increased SC, or lowered both, I think to keep them below whilst raising unit rates would need quite a significant downward adjustment on the SC which no supplier has done.

 

[Uther]

i was stunned to see a mate of mine on intelligent octopus has an SC of over 60p per day. (I cant remember exactly and i have deleted the image from my phone, i think it was 63p but dont hold me to it). Mine has gone up to just under 48p per day.

The thing which is insane is, you can literally see a massive wind farm from my mates bedroom window, its on his doorstep. I am a big supporter of relatively low yield onshore wind dotted about the country to reduce the problems of having to transport huge excesses across the country, but surely those savings have to be passed onto the locals who are using it, and that clearly isnt happening there.

There are several fields being turned in to a huge solar farm just outside our village, apparently the locals won’t be benefitting from that either.

 

[Sinbad2000]

The cap is a regional cap on standing charge and a regional cap on unit rate.

However there is some jiggery pokery going on, eg:
Ofgem reserves the right to grant temporary or permanent exemptions from the price cap for tariffs and suppliers which make significant efforts to generate and supply green energy to customers. This means that they are allowed to charge rates that exceed the price cap unit rate on SVTs - in other words, the price cap does not apply to them.

Ecotricity, Good Energy and 100Green are the three suppliers who have been granted permanent exemption from the price cap.

They also only apply to standard variable tariffs - which is why the Intelligent go peak rate is above the cap.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Ok yeah, thats news to me, I am still somewhat confused though because even if we take that there is only a cap for typical usage and no cap otherwise, if you was to tinker with the published rates, then people on typical usage would only stay below the cap, if you lowered unit rate and increased SC, or lowered both, I think to keep them below whilst raising unit rates would need quite a significant downward adjustment on the SC which no supplier has done.

There is only so much tinkering you can do to ensure the typical person stays within the capped rate. If you dropped the SC by 10p/day, you can only increase the unit rate by like 0.9p. It’s neither here nor there in reality.

The supplier also needs to make a profit so if they go too low on the rates, their high usage users will pummel their bottom line. If they go too high on the SC, low usage customers will jump ship and vice versa.

Don’t forget, people can just leave to another ‘supplier’ (aka billing agent).

 

[alexakasloth]

Amazing to see that the cost for electric and gas was so low, my usage cost just £1.20 on Saturday!

 

[200sols]

Saturday was great, they paid me 28p to use 20kwh

 

[200sols]

Yeah, but if you were to e.g. drop the SC a little bit and then bump the unit rate, you would get some people paying more than the cap, as it will be very finally balanced to achieve the target figure and that balance would be broken, and yep am already aware of regional variances, and the published cap is based on what they consider to be typical usage. Thanks.

200sols is stating the suppliers dont have to adhere to these rates on their SVR tariffs, (the regional rates for specific regions).

Ofgem state it on their website, not me. Presumably to give suppliers flexibility to offer extra tariffs like high SC low unit rate, or other way round for specific cases, not that anyone really uses that right now.

 

[Sinbad2000]

Yeah, but if you were to e.g. drop the SC a little bit and then bump the unit rate, you would get some people paying more than the cap, as it will be very finally balanced to achieve the target figure and that balance would be broken, and yep am already aware of regional variances, and the published cap is based on what they consider to be typical usage. Thanks.

200sols is stating the suppliers dont have to adhere to these rates on their SVR tariffs, (the regional rates for specific regions).

There's no unified "cap". There are separate caps on standing charge and unit rate applied to SVTs.

 

[chrcoluk]

There is only so much tinkering you can do to ensure the typical person stays within the capped rate. If you dropped the SC by 10p/day, you can only increase the unit rate by like 0.9p. It’s neither here nor there in reality.

The supplier also needs to make a profit so if they go too low on the rates, their high usage users will pummel their bottom line. If they go too high on the SC, low usage customers will jump ship and vice versa.

Don’t forget, people can just leave to another ‘supplier’ (aka billing agent).

So essentially all this has been a lot of talk about very little, the tinkering is just really small amounts and the rates listed are effectively going to be close just might not be an exact match.

 

[Richie]

If energy generation prices were also localised, Scotland’s electricity rates would be halved even though they have the highest distribution costs.

The east of England wouldn’t be far behind either.

Places like London and Birmingham would have the most expensive energy.

The difference between London and Scotland is circa 50% MORE in Scotland than London.

I aint even arguing for it to go the other way (following your example above) - I just think SC should be the same throughout the UK. At the moment, the "energy powerhouse" areas of the UK are subsidising the other areas and the argument for this difference - "distribution costs are more due to lower density/more difficult areas to run infrastructure to". no one is even looking at the fact that these very same areas are disproportionately producing the energy compared to the lower SC areas.

 

[200sols]

The difference between London and Scotland is circa 50% MORE in Scotland than London.

I aint even arguing for it to go the other way (following your example above) - I just think SC should be the same throughout the UK. At the moment, the "energy powerhouse" areas of the UK are subsidising the other areas and the argument for this difference - "distribution costs are more due to lower density/more difficult areas to run infrastructure to". no one is even looking at the fact that these very same areas are disproportionately producing the energy compared to the lower SC areas.

You have a source for this 'subsidising' part? Or just assuming your higher SC is doing that?

 

[Richie]

You have a source for this 'subsidising' part? Or just assuming your higher SC is doing that?

Yeah I knew someone would come back with that, and you were on a very short list

I should have said something like "effectively subsidising or, at the very least proportionately overpaying...". I did quote a post to indicate the general argument I was replying to. Any thoughts on that? (posted below for ease):

If energy generation prices were also localised, Scotland’s electricity rates would be halved even though they have the highest distribution costs.

The east of England wouldn’t be far behind either.

Places like London and Birmingham would have the most expensive energy.

 

[200sols]

Yeah I knew someone would come back with that, and you were on a very short list

I should have said something like "effectively subsidising or, at the very least proportionately overpaying...". I did quote a post to indicate the general argument I was replying to. Any thoughts on that? (posted below for ease):

Until somebody finds out how these projects are funded its all just a guess. But as a rule I see no good reason why wind power in one region should mean that region gets cheaper energy. After all as someone said it is a national grid.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

You have a source for this 'subsidising' part? Or just assuming your higher SC is doing that?

Scotland produces the cheapest energy in the U.K. They are also a net exporter to rUK.

It’s all the gas powered stuff that happens elsewhere that adds the cost for everyone.

They do genuinely have higher local distribution costs at the DNO level and no doubt pay their share of the national grid level distribution so us southerners benefit from their cheap renewable electricity.

They also benefit from the dirty gas stations we have south of the boarder when the wind isn’t blowing but as mentioned they are a net exporter and by a decent margin too.

If they just paid for what they consumed in Scotland and what they imported from England, their bills would halved. I’m pretty sure that came from the Octopus CEO but I may be mistaken.

Until somebody finds out how these projects are funded its all just a guess. But as a rule I see no good reason why wind power in one region should mean that region gets cheaper energy. After all as someone said it is a national grid.

Thats not really how it works and they are mostly funded by private capital and the energy is sold to us.

Don’t forget, onshore wind is allowed in Scotland, it’s cheaper than anything else and as such they deploy it en mass. It’s basically banned in England for spineless political reasons.

Power generated in Scotland is consumed in Scotland, it’s only the surplus that’s exported to England. You can’t beat physics with a national grid. Power flows down the path of least resistance.

PS, I don’t live in Scotland but I do think they get screwed on power prices and subsidise rUK because of the way our system is set up.

 

[200sols]

Scotland produces the cheapest energy in the U.K. They are also a net exporter to rUK.

It’s all the gas powered stuff that happens elsewhere that adds the cost for everyone.

They do genuinely have higher local distribution costs at the DNO level and no doubt pay their share of the national grid level distribution so us southerners benefit from their cheap renewable electricity.

They also benefit from the dirty gas stations we have south of the boarder when the wind isn’t blowing but as mentioned they are a net exporter and by a decent margin too.

If they just paid for what they consumed in Scotland and what they imported from England, their bills would halved. I’m pretty sure that came from the Octopus CEO but I may be mistaken.


Thats not really how it works and they are mostly funded by private capital and the energy is sold to us.

Don’t forget, onshore wind is allowed in Scotland, it’s cheaper than anything else and as such they deploy it en mass. It’s basically banned in England for spineless political reasons.

Power generated in Scotland is consumed in Scotland, it’s only the surplus that’s exported to England. You can’t beat physics with a national grid. Power flows down the path of least resistance.

PS, I don’t live in Scotland but I do think they get screwed on power prices and subsidise rUK because of the way our system is set up.

It's two different issues there, the price of electricity being pegged to the most expensive generator is an issue for all not just Scotland. We can move away from that with smart meters and time of use and variable pricing because energy is not the same price all the time. But people are very slow to adopt.

Ofgem also said it was linked earlier the funding for the large projects linking Scotland and England will be recouped from bills, think the issue was on grid infrastructure rather than who pays for actual wind farms.

 

[Richie]

Until somebody finds out how these projects are funded its all just a guess. But as a rule I see no good reason why wind power in one region should mean that region gets cheaper energy. After all as someone said it is a national grid.

My point is that, IMHO, SC should be the same throughout the UK.

People will use the argument that it costs more to supply electric to someone in Sutherland than Birmingham yet they don't even look at the other side of the argument - these higher SC areas are generally where most of the energy is created. So, yes, the areas creating the energy are shipping it out to the areas with the lowest SC costs whilst the production areas are lumped with higher SC costs.

As you say - It's a National Grid.

Is it fair that areas should have different SC costs or even Unit Costs? If yes, why?

 

[bigmike20vt]

Until somebody finds out how these projects are funded its all just a guess. But as a rule I see no good reason why wind power in one region should mean that region gets cheaper energy. After all as someone said it is a national grid.

because it may stop nimby tosspots from constantly whining about turbines being built within 10 miles of their house. Right now places like Scotland and the example i gave in my mates village are getting shafted from both sides.

he is getting some of the most expensive standing charges in the uk, and at the same time not getting any discount on the generation despite it being generated on his doorstep.

besides if your argument is it isnt fair for a village with a turbine to take any of the profits of the generation via reduced kwh charges.... because "national" grid........ then how could you justify different standing charge prices? londons is almost half that of areas around the north west of England.

 

[200sols]

because it may stop nimby tosspots from constantly whining about turbines being built within 10 miles of their house. Right now places like Scotland and the example i gave in my mates village are getting shafted from both sides.

he is getting some of the most expensive standing charges in the uk, and at the same time not getting any discount on the generation despite it being generated on his doorstep.

besides if your argument is it isnt fair for a village with a turbine to take any of the profits of the generation via reduced kwh charges.... because "national" grid........ then how could you justify different standing charge prices? londons is almost half that of areas around the north west of England.

Because his standing charge has nothing to do with having a turbine nearby?

Said before, just because people have generation nearby it doesn't mean the cost of supplying them is not higher.

Also unless the village in your example owns a share in the turbine they won't be taking any profits, and if they do own a share the point made was non existent. Perhaps encouraging more community funding of their own turbines would be good..