Liz's energy subsidy.

[Oldgreybeard]

and this

"Ditch the standing charge
The regressive standing charge could be replaced so that fixed costs (for example, to pay for networks) are instead recovered proportionately through unit rates."

Funny how people have these good ideas after they have left their positions of power

Desp

Folk may remember me arguing for this for about 10yrs. In fact I've argued it so long, that I've just realised I can't use the term I've used before, the 'petrol forecourt' price, as we are moving to BEV's. So will have to change it to the supermarket checkout price (SCP), which includes all costs of doing business.

The benefits of the SCP for energy is that it rewards low users more, and penalises high users more. An average user would see no change in the total bill. This in turn encourages energy efficiency and increases the savings on a more efficient TV, or loft insulation. It also improves the economics of demand side generation, as higher unit cost imports are being displaced.

There is a counter argument that the energy provider has the costs of maintaining your connection. But the counter counter argument is that all the supermarkets near me have capital and operational costs, in the hope of getting some of my business too.

I appreciate it's a more complicated discussion, but when half of my water bill is the standing charge, for example, then further reductions benefit me less and less, so encouragement and momentum for greater effort is (to some degree) lost.

[Side issue / rant - but it annoys me how much the standing charges vary. The cost per connection must be standard*, yet different companies, and different deals have different standing charges, it's almost like 'they' are trying to confuse you.

*I mean standard for any given location, whilst geographic regions do have differing costs.

The standing charge is not only grossly unfair, but it is also the mechanism for funding the fly by night suppliers that have gone bust. Almost all of the massive standing charge increase in April was implemented by Ofgem to recover the costs of funding the dozen or more suppliers that failed in 2021. It seems wholly wrong to me that the incompetent chancers that set up these poorly run companies still get their pensions courtesy of everyone else bailing them out.

[spread-tee]

and this

"Ditch the standing charge
The regressive standing charge could be replaced so that fixed costs (for example, to pay for networks) are instead recovered proportionately through unit rates."

Funny how people have these good ideas after they have left their positions of power

Desp

Folk may remember me arguing for this for about 10yrs. In fact I've argued it so long, that I've just realised I can't use the term I've used before, the 'petrol forecourt' price, as we are moving to BEV's. So will have to change it to the supermarket checkout price (SCP), which includes all costs of doing business.

The benefits of the SCP for energy is that it rewards low users more, and penalises high users more. An average user would see no change in the total bill. This in turn encourages energy efficiency and increases the savings on a more efficient TV, or loft insulation. It also improves the economics of demand side generation, as higher unit cost imports are being displaced.

There is a counter argument that the energy provider has the costs of maintaining your connection. But the counter counter argument is that all the supermarkets near me have capital and operational costs, in the hope of getting some of my business too.

I appreciate it's a more complicated discussion, but when half of my water bill is the standing charge, for example, then further reductions benefit me less and less, so encouragement and momentum for greater effort is (to some degree) lost.

[Side issue / rant - but it annoys me how much the standing charges vary. The cost per connection must be standard*, yet different companies, and different deals have different standing charges, it's almost like 'they' are trying to confuse you.

*I mean standard for any given location, whilst geographic regions do have differing costs.

The standing charge is not only grossly unfair, but it is also the mechanism for funding the fly by night suppliers that have gone bust. Almost all of the massive standing charge increase in April was implemented by Ofgem to recover the costs of funding the dozen or more suppliers that failed in 2021. It seems wholly wrong to me that the incompetent chancers that set up these poorly run companies still get their pensions courtesy of everyone else bailing them out.

That's how Neoliberalism works, socialise the risk, privatise the profit0

Desp

[Swwils]

Although we don't know the full details, I believe this will ONLY apply if an existing fixed tariff is above the capped rate.

I would think they will let suppliers decide this, otherwise how is it implimentable. I'm on a 9.65p gas, 33p elec fix from march 2022 and I would be gutted to "lose out" on my prudence, especially if it's raked back over the next 20 years.

You make a fair point there, especially if you have been paying over the odds for the past 6 months. I think it's going to be a tough call with some winners and losers as there are always unintended consequences with these emergency measures.

The way I saw it was, I got the solar installed and my elec use would drop almost to nothing. I make use of the agile export and lower standing charge.

My gas use initially was nothing as I solar diverted, and for the same reasons electricity export prices determined my summer gas use.

My monthly latest bill was -£146, so working great for me but probably representative of the mess elsewhere.

I have also done a massive amount preparing for winter gas reduction making the most of my boiler. It was designed for 80/60C flow in a 2020 new build... Now have it weather compensation and should be able to go low flow temp, I can't do anything about the gross oversizing of the boiler though; as ultimately using less is the trump card, I don't know why that isn't being pushed more.

[Oliver90owner]

Is the burner adjustable? My boiler (an older one) is adjustable up by 50% (or down by 33%). It is set for the minimum, which may, or may not, alter its efficiency. My system also has a three speed circulation pump, which can make a difference to the leccy required to run the system.

Hence, my central heating system is used minimally - preferring to use localised heat, where required, rather than heating the whole abode.