Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)

HungryHippos said:
You'd need smart meters to enforce it though, or people will just lie about units.

Some houses can't get smart meters, I read some people in flats struggle to get them as not always allowed.

It's a good solution if it's properly scoped, and I'd support the idea of it, but in practice it has a lot of challenges.
Click to expand...

It needs a load of variables to be "fair".
I bet most of the people who think a fixed amount at x price (cheap) and the rest are more are relatively low usage and highly correlated to single people ;)
I also suspect most are probably young/middle age, and healthy males.

IE the group who historically have low usage, don't feel the cold as much, and wont have kids or partners nagging at being cold, or expensive bills from medical equipment etc

Tbh I haven't come across a single person lately not complaining about bills (I suspect there is a group still oblivious and hence quiet) who isn't saying they are reviewing and cutting back.
So I don't see the need to try to get the higher users to be harder hit, they are already harder hit in £ terms.
The very rich aren't going to care in general, but in reality they are probably a tiny fraction of the overall consumption.
 
Devilman said:
The claim of the price hasn't risen anything like the cost of gas is extremely short sighted and pinned very clearly in the "now". (not specifically a bad thing, it just paints a false picture wording it the way you did, as if gas was always rising at a higher rate than oil)
Looking at the history price of natural gas in the UK compared to oil, they have pretty much risen at the same rate over the last 30 years, except for the most recent spike due to the current energy crisis.
So while yes, it's true the price of oil hasn't risen anything like what was going to happen to gas with the new caps, we now know (but are still awaiting final details) that a package is coming to offset those rises.

I see no such package being offered towards those on domestic oil unless I missed it?
So with winter coming, we're expected to still have to "eat" a 200% rise, while gas users get help? Seems a little.... unfair no?
Especially when you consider that a lot of people who are typically living out in "some nice small village or the middle of nowhere" will often be older, retired individuals / couples who simply have no access to natural gas.

Also, the notion of "they can lock in for as much as they can store on site" is both laughable and ludicrous. Firstly there is the space required to store it - many people with oil-fired heating are not living in 5 acre mansions with enough room to store 50,000L of oil.
Then there is the costs associated with the tanks required to store that much fuel. Then there is the fire risk. Then there is the theft risk.
What if you had to tank and store all that gas you "lock in" at a cheap rate for 3 years onsite? Would you like to do that? That is what you're proposing here.

Most oil users get more than 1 delivery a year. The vast majority of oil installations are a 1000 or 1200L tank. Even with a super efficient boiler, you will still get through more than that in a year. Hell a lot of places will get through that in the 3-4 months of winter (depending on severity).
Click to expand...
I still do not except your notion that oil has risen by 200%, it just hasn’t. You can’t pick historically low prices during covid as your comparison. It’s risen by 100% over the last 4 years or so. Gas has risen significantly more.

The point is why does oil need a cap when it’s not risen as much as gas even after the rumoured package being announced tomorrow has taken effect.

Everyone is getting screwed but those on oil are not getting screwed as much even after the support package. They know that hence no support.

HungryHippos said:
OK but how do you verify the basic meter readings?

In reality people check them occasionally, but this could in theory have years between checks, as there are so many to do.

Smart meters would take out any shenanigans.
Click to expand...

I can’t see how it’s any different to the status quo.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
It needs a load of variables to be "fair".
I bet most of the people who think a fixed amount at x price (cheap) and the rest are more are relatively low usage and highly correlated to single people ;)
I also suspect most are probably young/middle age, and healthy males.

IE the group who historically have low usage, don't feel the cold as much, and wont have kids or partners nagging at being cold, or expensive bills from medical equipment etc

Tbh I haven't come across a single person lately not complaining about bills (I suspect there is a group still oblivious and hence quiet) who isn't saying they are reviewing and cutting back.
So I don't see the need to try to get the higher users to be harder hit, they are already harder hit in £ terms.
The very rich aren't going to care in general, but in reality they are probably a tiny fraction of the overall consumption.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I see the issue with making it easier on single people? The cost of living for a single person trying to rent is so astronomical that frankly, they deserve a little bit of a break (and no, the 25% council tax discount doesn't cut it).

Also.. I fail to see the reasoning behind your argument not to hit the high users harder, they are causing greater demand than others, consuming more gas (via electricity generation and heating / cooking) and as such should be the ones to bare the greater burden.
And if as you say, they are not going to care because they are rich, why would you actively choose the other option, to hit those less well off, the working families, the singletons trying to rent a place single-paychecked etc?
 
Devilman said:
I'm not sure I see the issue with making it easier on single people? The cost of living for a single person trying to rent is so astronomical that frankly, they deserve a little bit of a break (and no, the 25% council tax discount doesn't cut it).

Also.. I fail to see the reasoning behind your argument not to hit the high users harder, they are causing greater demand than others, consuming more gas (via electricity generation and heating / cooking) and as such should be the ones to bare the greater burden.
And if as you say, they are not going to care because they are rich, why would you actively choose the other option, to hit those less well off, the working families, the singletons trying to rent a place single-paychecked etc?
Click to expand...

It could be made easier for single people, the simple fact is as always happens in these sorts of situation people argue for what they feel is better for them.
People choose to live alone, why should they get special benefits compared to others.

I just find it all frankly dishonest.
Again, people with higher usage ARE paying more, in simple £s. They aren't necessarily better off, there are many factors that affect energy needs which is why just a simple flat x per house isnt a good fix at all.
Its A fix, but certainly not a good one.
There are a lot of factors that affect peoples need for energy, and some of them are far less easy to address than being single. (ill, old, young child etc)
 
A tiered usage charge approach would be good IMO. Gives incentive to lower usage.

Not sure what figures you'd use to tier them but as an example of a 3 tier system:

Low monthly usage = Standard rate -25%
Average monthly usage = Standard rate
High monthly usage = Standard rate + 25%
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
It could be made easier for single people, the simple fact is as always happens in these sorts of situation people argue for what they feel is better for them.
People choose to live alone, why should they get special benefits compared to others.

I just find it all frankly dishonest.
Again, people with higher usage ARE paying more, in simple £s. They aren't necessarily better off, there are many factors that affect energy needs which is why just a simple flat x per house isnt a good fix at all.
Its A fix, but certainly not a good one.
There are a lot of factors that affect peoples need for energy, and some of them are far less easy to address than being single. (ill, old, young child etc)
Click to expand...

Im sorry but what?!
People *choose* to live alone? seriously? You haven't even considered the multitudes of reasons why a person could be in the position of being single and trying to keep a property over their head. Your answer to this is "well they should just get a roommate" ?
That has to be right up there with "The poor just can't cook" and "They just need to get a second job"
You talk about how there are a lot of factors that affect peoples need for energy, yet completely ignore the HUGE swath of possible reasons why a person may be living alone.
It's both insensitive to those who may have just been recently widowed / divorced / bereaved and are now living alone and totally ignores the not insignificant number of people who are suffering with mental health problems these days who quite frankly cannot cope with living with another person.
Do you consider such a life to be "special benefit?"
 

Octopus to visit customers' homes to give energy bills advice​

With an energy crisis looming this winter, one supplier is taking drastic action.
Octopus Energy said it will go to customers' doorsteps to give personalised advice on reducing bills as it hears from "many" reporting that they will struggle to pay.
The company said it hoped to visit at least 500,000 homes this winter following a summer trial to give customers "actionable, bespoke advice".


Bet they'll also be checking for those EV's parked on the drive (or not) lol..
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
I still do not except your notion that oil has risen by 200%, it just hasn’t. You can’t pick historically low prices during covid as your comparison. It’s risen by 100% over the last 4 years or so. Gas has risen significantly more.

The point is why does oil need a cap when it’s not risen as much as gas even after the rumoured package being announced tomorrow has taken effect.

Everyone is getting screwed but those on oil are not getting screwed as much even after the support package. They know that hence no support.



I can’t see how it’s any different to the status quo.
Click to expand...
With regard to the 200%, I was speaking from memory remembering back to previous oil bills in years past (not specifically the covid low point, long before that), however as I said later (or possibly in a follow up post) Having looked over a long period (15-20yrs) both oil and gas have for the most part run a fairly matched trend across the graph, with the obvious recent issues being the key difference in the two, where gas has obviously jumped significantly more than oil.

I guess the point really is... as we are kind of seeing with so much of this profiteering "end-game" capitalism, it seems to be clear to me that restrictions / legislation / caps *are* needed in all sectors to prevent the kind of extortion we are currently seeing from the energy producers.

Electricity / Heating / Cooking are basic needs at this point, it stands to reason that all of their variants should have appropriate caps set to protect the public from price gouging / monopolization of the means of generation and that should also include oil.

If everyone is getting screwed, it does *not* make it ok to say "well, those guys gets screwed less, so **** them, they can just suck it up" - which I would like to remind people is a common theme of complaint from those "more well off" (not on basic minimum wage) regarding any kind of Cost of Living help etc...
Comments along the lines of - "those on Universal Credit get all the help again - but they themselves just have to "suck it up" (while on their £40-£50k salary)"
 
Devilman said:
I'm not sure I see the issue with making it easier on single people? The cost of living for a single person trying to rent is so astronomical that frankly, they deserve a little bit of a break (and no, the 25% council tax discount doesn't cut it).

Also.. I fail to see the reasoning behind your argument not to hit the high users harder, they are causing greater demand than others, consuming more gas (via electricity generation and heating / cooking) and as such should be the ones to bare the greater burden.
And if as you say, they are not going to care because they are rich, why would you actively choose the other option, to hit those less well off, the working families, the singletons trying to rent a place single-paychecked etc?
Click to expand...
There is no question single people have it the hardest in this country. But its not politically fashionable to correct it. Hence it never been rectified.

But regardless of that I think its very clear we need to encourage lower use. A tiered pricing structure I feel is inevitable, we just kicking the can down the road if we dont implement one now.

I also think everyone on fixed DD charging should be getting a monthly report if their usage is higher or lower than the estimate used to calculate their DD amount and warned of the consequences of not reducing their usage, as so many people treat fixed DD as unmetered.
 
HungryHippos said:
OK but how do you verify the basic meter readings?

In reality people check them occasionally, but this could in theory have years between checks, as there are so many to do.

Smart meters would take out any shenanigans.
Click to expand...
It is no different to what happens now for people without smart meters.

I mean the companies could require you to submit photo proof to get the credit, but it's literally no different to what already happens.
I seem to remember before we got our smart meter, there used to be a guy that would come round every few months, I think they still exist.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
It could be made easier for single people, the simple fact is as always happens in these sorts of situation people argue for what they feel is better for them.
People choose to live alone, why should they get special benefits compared to others.

I just find it all frankly dishonest.
Again, people with higher usage ARE paying more, in simple £s. They aren't necessarily better off, there are many factors that affect energy needs which is why just a simple flat x per house isnt a good fix at all.
Its A fix, but certainly not a good one.
There are a lot of factors that affect peoples need for energy, and some of them are far less easy to address than being single. (ill, old, young child etc)
Click to expand...
I take issue with that.

A all you can eat subsidy has big obvious flaws, people heating swimming pools and the like will be using the subsidy which is not what this is intended for.

The simple fact is people who use less effectively pay more per unit due to the SC part of bills, which is completely backwards, SC in addition takes no account of number of adults at property, other countries have adopted use more pay more, we are stuck on legacy types of billing and why? because people get confused? or maybe people who have packed out their houses want to maintain their better affordability advantage?

You coming across a bit selfish now, this should be about helping those who are most struggling, and the facts are living alone is harder than living with other adults. This isnt an opinion, its confirmed by the energy companies their most vulnerable customers are single adults (its in the first WHD consultation, I can link it if you want just ask), and also in various case studies. For reference the new WHD will favour packed out houses, 88% of low income people in fully detached will get WHD, but only 7% of low income in flats will get it.
 
Werewolf said:
It is no different to what happens now for people without smart meters.

I mean the companies could require you to submit photo proof to get the credit, but it's literally no different to what already happens.
I seem to remember before we got our smart meter, there used to be a guy that would come round every few months, I think they still exist.
Click to expand...

I reckon you're talking years between visits now though, if they could commit to every few months then perhaps.
 
Devilman said:
With regard to the 200%, I was speaking from memory remembering back to previous oil bills in years past (not specifically the covid low point, long before that), however as I said later (or possibly in a follow up post) Having looked over a long period (15-20yrs) both oil and gas have for the most part run a fairly matched trend across the graph, with the obvious recent issues being the key difference in the two, where gas has obviously jumped significantly more than oil.

I guess the point really is... as we are kind of seeing with so much of this profiteering "end-game" capitalism, it seems to be clear to me that restrictions / legislation / caps *are* needed in all sectors to prevent the kind of extortion we are currently seeing from the energy producers.

Electricity / Heating / Cooking are basic needs at this point, it stands to reason that all of their variants should have appropriate caps set to protect the public from price gouging / monopolization of the means of generation and that should also include oil.

If everyone is getting screwed, it does *not* make it ok to say "well, those guys gets screwed less, so **** them, they can just suck it up" - which I would like to remind people is a common theme of complaint from those "more well off" (not on basic minimum wage) regarding any kind of Cost of Living help etc...
Comments along the lines of - "those on Universal Credit get all the help again - but they themselves just have to "suck it up" (while on their £40-£50k salary)"
Click to expand...
I get the point you are making but the short version of my point is not screw them they’ll be fine.

It’s that applying the same relative cap (E.g. matching the same price rise on gas) to heating oil will be well above the current market price so an intervention isn’t needed as oil already below that level.

Oil has always been more significantly expensive than gas and I don’t think they government should be intervening in that market while the prices have not yet reached ludicrous levels like they have in the gas market.
 
Werewolf said:
It is no different to what happens now for people without smart meters.

I mean the companies could require you to submit photo proof to get the credit, but it's literally no different to what already happens.
I seem to remember before we got our smart meter, there used to be a guy that would come round every few months, I think they still exist.
Click to expand...

We have a lady that comes around to read the meter, she likes to come in for a cup of tea sometimes, she's a most charming person, witty and bright. Does it beacuse she likes getting out and about and meeting people. Seems averse to a backhander though, sadly ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom