Energy future

[SteamyTea]

Just seen this from a week ago.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/energy-future-paying-up-front-should-lead-to-tangible-savings-ahead-13390939

 

So are standing charges to go up?

[BotusBuild]

Probably

[MikeSharp01]

Pay now save later, makes sense but only if they tell us how they are going to adjust the system so gas is not the producer of last resort. 

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, MikeSharp01 said:

adjust the system so gas is not the producer of last resort

I don't think that gas is the long term problem, nuclear and storage are the expensive ones.

 

Edited Saturday at 16:20 by SteamyTea

[ProDave]

Buttering us up for the U turn on "more renewables will bring bills down"

 

Why am I not surprised  disappointed ?

[Alan Ambrose]

That graph is for the US?

[Ferdinand]

  

12 hours ago, Alan Ambrose said:

That graph is for the US?

Yes - it's from here on Wiki, and that is noted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity#:~:text=The levelized cost of electricity,levelized cost of thermal energy.

 

But @SteamyTea's point that the generation cost drivers may be nuclear and gas may be valid.

However two points:

1 - The UK will be having a chunk of our standby / baseload power as SMR Reactors (small modular reactors) where Rolls Royce is a leader, and where we do not know the cost equation yet.

 

2 - The Sky piece is making a big balloon out of a small story. The actual change is so small (~1% of an annual bill  - £22), that they had to leave it out of the subheadline to make the story less small. And that is all they are getting in a FIVE YEAR period:

A major component within household energy bills is set to rise sharply from next year to help pay for efforts to maintain energy security during the transition to green power.

The industry regulator Ofgem's draft determination on how much it will allow network operators to charge energy suppliers from 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2031 would push up network costs within household bills by £24 a year.

These charges currently account for 22% of the total bill.

I'd call this a non-story on a media puff wagon to try and scare people.

On renewables, the report from the Climate Change Committee 2 weeks ago confirmed that UK emissions are now down more than half since 1990 in consumption based numbers.

Politically, I'd say the Govt is preparing to decouple the gas-linked striking price to go regional, which will encourage investment. They also promised energy bills down by £300 by the next Election, and they need to meet that.

Nor am I convinced by the "political opponents" of Net Zero RefUK and Conservatives.

RefUK are a wind sock not a sign post, and went into quite recent elections with a commitment to non-Zero (eg Welsh Elections 2021), and they have already lost about 28 wheels from their organisational clown car; they just lost their 2nd MP *. Farage will turn his coat like the Vicar of Bray when the wind changes direction. The Cons are still up a creak with no paddle, and no map of an escape route, and their leader is a performing seal trying to make populist noises to out-Reform, Reform - that won't work.

I think Starmer can hold this line.

Ferdinand

* - There's an amusing but very enthusiastic Youtube channel called Political Custard which covers this subject.

[ProDave]

13 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

The industry regulator Ofgem's draft determination on how much it will allow network operators to charge energy suppliers from 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2031 would push up network costs within household bills by £24 a year.

These charges currently account for 22% of the total bill.

I'd call this a non-story on a media puff wagon to try and scare people.

On renewables, the report from the Climate Change Committee 2 weeks ago confirmed that UK emissions are now down more than half since 1990 in consumption based numbers.

Politically, I'd say the Govt is preparing to decouple the gas-linked striking price to go regional, which will encourage investment. They also promised energy bills down by £300 by the next Election, and they need to meet that.

The point is we keep being told by Starmer that more renewables will lower our bills.  Now we are going to face a further (yes small) rise to our electricity bills to help pay for propping up the creaking grid.  However small, that is bills going in the WRONG direction.

 

And do you really think the master of U turns is really going to deliver £300 savings per customer in 4 years?

 

Yes the electricity price determined by gas price link needs to end, but ALSO and much quicker and easier is to put the green levies onto GAS prices not electricity.  Whoever came up with a scheme that basically says "we want consumers to switch to cleaner electricity rather than gas, how shall we encourage them?  By taxing the cleaner fuel we want them to switch to insteady of the dirty one we want them to stop using"

[SteamyTea]

12 hours ago, Alan Ambrose said:

That graph is for the US?

Read this.

https://www.aquaswitch.co.uk/blog/lcoe/

It gives a good insight to the problems.

[Ferdinand]

12 hours ago, Alan Ambrose said:

That graph is for the US?

Yes. It's from wiki here:

 

 

11 minutes ago, ProDave said:

The point is we keep being told by Starmer that more renewables will lower our bills.  Now we are going to face a further (yes small) rise to our electricity bills to help pay for propping up the creaking grid.  However small, that is bills going in the WRONG direction.

 

And do you really think the master of U turns is really going to deliver £300 savings per customer in 4 years?

 

Yes the electricity price determined by gas price link needs to end, but ALSO and much quicker and easier is to put the green levies onto GAS prices not electricity.  Whoever came up with a scheme that basically says "we want consumers to switch to cleaner electricity rather than gas, how shall we encourage them?  By taxing the cleaner fuel we want them to switch to insteady of the dirty one we want them to stop using"

I agree with all of that.

My point on the Govt would be that we have a very unstable environment, where there are a lot of potential black swans, so they need to be seen to deliver on those high profile commitments that they have made. Which include for two, reductions in NHS waiting lists, and £300 off energy bills (though I'm not clear whether that was in cash or real terms).

I'd say that delivering on maybe 4 out of their main 5 targets is the starting point for getting a second term.

But also, the antidote to the current grumpiness and tendency towards extrems especially on the right (cf eg the rhetoric of RObert Jenrick and Chris Philp), is the restoration of a society that works and benefits its members after 15+ years of eg Local Government being gutted financially.

Regional pricing would play into that - for example for investment by energy intensive industries in northern regions, Scotland and Wales.

On driving renewables, we also have the argument of self-sufficieny - that has changed my own view on onshore wind, for example.

[SteamyTea]

6 minutes ago, ProDave said:

we keep being told by Starmer that more renewables will lower our bills

Because they will, and are already doing so in some parts of the world.

7 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Whoever came up with a scheme that basically says "we want consumers to switch to cleaner electricity rather than gas, how shall we encourage them?  By taxing the cleaner fuel we want them to switch

That came about from the old (late 1990's) subsidiaries.

What was not foreseen, and reacted to fast enough, was the rapid drop in price if offshore wind and large scale solar.  Because of this rapid drip, planning rules and grid connections are hampering the up take.

Rather than piss about with subsidies/incentives, the government just needs to take planning restraints out of local authority decision makers (which they want to do).

Money can be raised by increasing taxation on combustion technologies easily enough. I really don't understand why this is not happening. 

[ProDave]

Most "ordinary people" don't analyse it and work out why, they just look at "results"

 

We are being told more renewables will reduce prices.  We have been set a target of how much they will reduce by the next election, instead consumers are seeing them rise.

 

They better damned well fall by £300 by the next election otherwise it will be "yet another failed election promise, this lot are no better than the last lot, we need something radically different. Welcome PM Mr Farage."

 

I don't support Reform, but I perfectly understand the frustration and despair people have with the 2 parties that have alternated in power all my working life and fully understand people like me no longer believing a word that they say.  I really would have thought one of them would learn by now you can't just go giving the electorate a load of hopes and wishes portrayed as promises, and not expect the people to be a little bit annoyed at you when you fail to do what you promised.

[ProDave]

26 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

41 minutes ago, ProDave said:

 

Because they will, and are already doing so in some parts of the world.

Again, if they are in other parts of the world, WHY NOT HERE.  What is our government doing wrong that other countries do right?  We NEED to change how we do it.

[SteamyTea]

11 minutes ago, ProDave said:

WHY NOT HERE

Because we have a mature democracy, that hates to make a decision.