energy prices

[ri Alban]

Just now, Smithee said:

 

Then take it out of their hands. Take over the energy companies, absorb the losses, invest in infrastructure, and when things are looking up, use the profits to bring prices down.

 

Apprenticeships and jobs for life, for the community brought back again. 👍

[Don Dan]

2 hours ago, Victorian said:

 

It's not a personal loan.  You wont have debt.  The providers borrow from a central fund and,  at some point,  they repay it and claw it back from customers with a levy on all bills.  

 

Customers are not being attributed personal debt.

Thanks Vic my ability to pick up conversations is not good at the moment. So thanks for clarifying 👍

[Captain Sausage]

6 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Then take it out of their hands. Take over the energy companies, absorb the losses, invest in infrastructure, and when things are looking up, use the profits to bring prices down.

 

And who is footing the trillion (or more) pound bill to buy all the energy production and supply companies?

[Don Dan]

1 minute ago, Captain Sausage said:

And who is footing the trillion (or more) pound bill to buy all the energy production and supply companies?

And guarantee pensions ect 

[Don Dan]

Energy bills and generators' profits could be elevated for decades under Truss cost shield | Business News | Sky News > more on the govt’s energy bill plans here via ⁦

@pkelso

⁩

 

 

news.sky.com

Energy bills and generators' profits could be elevated for decades under Truss cost shield

 

25

 

32

 

30

 

 

 

 

[Victorian]

Just now, Imaman said:

Thanks Vic my ability to pick up conversations is not good at the moment. So thanks for clarifying 👍

 

No probs.  It's really just a sort of community scheme.  

 

This is the new settlement which will last for quite some time.  Not ideal by any means.  Elevated bills for many years.  But crucially it should ensure bills don't go out of all control.

 

By an interesting sub-plot,  these elevated bills will encourage people and businesses to be much more aware and careful with their own energy consumption.  Which is actually a little side benefit in terms of net zero.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

2 hours ago, Victorian said:

 

It's not a personal loan.  You wont have debt.  The providers borrow from a central fund and,  at some point,  they repay it and claw it back from customers with a levy on all bills.  

 

Customers are not being attributed personal debt.

 

Yes and a figure of up to £100bn is being banded about for this 'fund' that the providers can borrow from, great if that's the case and it would be the highest or near the top level of support in the whole of Europe (Germany £65bn so far, so I heard on the news), however as always the devil is in the detail, so I'll wait until I see the actual details of what Truss et al is going to offer before I get excited.

[Smoked-Glass]

Is it possible to just ask your supplier to turn the gas off but keep the electricity?

 

I ll just make do and have cold showers and not use my heating or hob

[Unknown user]

34 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

And who is footing the trillion (or more) pound bill to buy all the energy production and supply companies?

I didn't say anything about the production companies mate

Edited September 6, 2022 by Smithee

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Just on Sky News the now, that sky news understands that the price cap will be around about £2500 with the current rebate/s (£400 etc) still in place, meaning that most people's bills will only rise by a small amount from the current £1971 and that would be in place for the duration of this parliament, in other words no more energy price increases every 3 months for the next 2 years. 

 

No word about businesses yet.

 

Edited September 6, 2022 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Jambo-Jimbo]

5 minutes ago, Smoked-Glass said:

Is it possible to just ask your supplier to turn the gas off but keep the electricity?

 

I ll just make do and have cold showers and not use my heating or hob

 

Hold fire with everything until we see what help Truss & co come up with.

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yes and a figure of up to £100bn is being banded about for this 'fund' that the providers can borrow from, great if that's the case and it would be the highest or near the top level of support in the whole of Europe (Germany £65bn so far, so I heard on the news), however as always the devil is in the detail, so I'll wait until I see the actual details of what Truss et al is going to offer before I get excited.

 

£130bn for domestic + business is the figure being briefed out.  In truth it will be higher.

 

As an accounting technicality / point of debate,  the UK gvt will attempt to argue that this borrowing is not on their ledgers.  That the energy providers carry the debt and it's merely underwritten by government guarantee.  The counter argument is that it can always notionally default,  therefore notionally it is on the government's books.

[Captain Sausage]

3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

I didn't say anything about the production companies mate

The supply companies are capped at 1.9% profit. They’re not the ones making money here anyway…

[joondalupjambo]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

Just on Sky News the now, that sky news understands that the price cap will be around about £2500 with the current rebate/s (£400 etc) still in place, meaning that most people's bills will only rise by a small amount from the current £1971 and that would be in place for the duration of this parliament, in other words no more energy price increases every 3 months for the next 2 years. 

 

No word about businesses yet.

 

I wonder how it will work if all the suppliers have different standard tariffs for gas and electric?  Would part of this not be to have standard unit rates across all energy providers?  Might be showing my ignorance here but if we have the cap held is it just your luck as to which supplier you are with when this new capping model starts?

[Jambo-Jimbo]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

£130bn for domestic + business is the figure being briefed out.  In truth it will be higher.

 

As an accounting technicality / point of debate,  the UK gvt will attempt to argue that this borrowing is not on their ledgers.  That the energy providers carry the debt and it's merely underwritten by government guarantee.  The counter argument is that it can always notionally default,  therefore notionally it is on the government's books.

 

Oh yeh some clever accounting will be going on here, so as none of it appears on the national debt books.

 

I'll say it again, there is a perfect opportunity for the government to nationalize Bulb now, and have at least one national energy provider and would act as the provider of last resort if any of the other providers went bust, and then when things calm down, Bulb would be able to compete on the energy market as a state owned company.................but I won't hold my breath.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 minute ago, joondalupjambo said:

I wonder how it will work if all the suppliers have different standard tariffs for gas and electric?  Would part of this not be to have standard unit rates across all energy providers?  Might be showing my ignorance here but if we have the cap held is it just your luck as to which supplier you are with when this new capping model starts?

 

I'd think it will just work exactly the same as it does now, can't see anything changing.

[Unknown user]

9 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

The supply companies are capped at 1.9% profit. They’re not the ones making money here anyway…

That's why I said absorb the losses

[Victorian]

2 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Oh yeh some clever accounting will be going on here, so as none of it appears on the national debt books.

 

I'll say it again, there is a perfect opportunity for the government to nationalize Bulb now, and have at least one national energy provider and would act as the provider of last resort if any of the other providers went bust, and then when things calm down, Bulb would be able to compete on the energy market as a state owned company.................but I won't hold my breath.

 

There is the issue of debate for the next election,  which happens just after the end of this scheme (it will go on further in truth).  It's now up to other parties to campaign for some degree of nationalised production and/or supply (wholesale and retail).  

[Dazo]

15 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

Just on Sky News the now, that sky news understands that the price cap will be around about £2500 with the current rebate/s (£400 etc) still in place, meaning that most people's bills will only rise by a small amount from the current £1971 and that would be in place for the duration of this parliament, in other words no more energy price increases every 3 months for the next 2 years. 

 

No word about businesses yet.

 

I’d be disappointed with that price cap if it’s true. Prices clearly will be going up unless there is a rebate next year also. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

8 minutes ago, Dazo said:

I’d be disappointed with that price cap if it’s true. Prices clearly will be going up unless there is a rebate next year also. 

 

It'll be dressed up as a good thing though, in as much as, 'look it was going to be £3500 but the government has helped people by lowering it to £2500'.  But you are right if there is no further 'rebate' comes along in the spring, the average household will be paying £600 more than they are right now., so yes there will still be a rise.

[Unknown user]

80% of gas use is between October and March, even the current level's too high.

[Footballfirst]

If there is no cap, the energy companies will go bust because of too many defaulting customers.

 

If there is a cap imposed then the energy companies will go bust without government support.

 

The debate is about the nature of the support provided.  It has to either be a subsidy or a loan. If it is a subsidy without strings, then the government is putting good money after bad.  The only sensible way of implementing a subsidy or a loan is for the government to take a stake in those companies in return for the cash provided.

 

Those shares could be bought back from future profits (not a levy on bills).

[Victorian]

Simon Jack (BBC economy) says one option being discussed is that the repayment part of the scheme wouldn't be immediate.  Think his jist was that the government would absorb the borrowing on to the books and deal with it longer term.  

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

If there is no cap, the energy companies will go bust because of too many defaulting customers.

 

If there is a cap imposed then the energy companies will go bust without government support.

 

The debate is about the nature of the support provided.  It has to either be a subsidy or a loan. If it is a subsidy without strings, then the government is putting good money after bad.  The only sensible way of implementing a subsidy or a loan is for the government to take a stake in those companies in return for the cash provided.

 

Those shares could be bought back from future profits (not a levy on bills).

 

Taking a stake at the point of the loan being drawn down is nationalisation.  They wont want the optics of that.  Maybe some sort of mechanism of the state taking a stake in firms in the event of default?  Notional nationalisation.

[The Mighty Thor]

12 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

If there is no cap, the energy companies will go bust because of too many defaulting customers.

 

If there is a cap imposed then the energy companies will go bust without government support.

 

The debate is about the nature of the support provided.  It has to either be a subsidy or a loan. If it is a subsidy without strings, then the government is putting good money after bad.  The only sensible way of implementing a subsidy or a loan is for the government to take a stake in those companies in return for the cash provided.

 

Those shares could be bought back from future profits (not a levy on bills).

This is what i've said from the get go.

 

Offer them money for shares. No handing money to distributors. Hammer the arse out the generators while they're at it as they are printing money right now.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

23 minutes ago, Smithee said:

80% of gas use is between October and March, even the current level's too high.

 

Yes, even if it's capped at £2500, that's still double to what the average household was paying a year ago.

As I said it'll get dressed up as Liz has saved us from £3500 or even £5000 bills. 

£2500 or there abouts will become the new normal and folks will just accept it and move on.

[Taffin]

8 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yes, even if it's capped at £2500, that's still double to what the average household was paying a year ago.

As I said it'll get dressed up as Liz has saved us from £3500 or even £5000 bills. 

£2500 or there abouts will become the new normal and folks will just accept it and move on.

 

Hopefully it triggers people to use a bit less power, or prods us down a path of increasing the amount we produce via renewables and then incentivising that with lower prices. I feel being forced into taking a proper deep dive into energy provision due to spiralling costs can only be a good thing...it just can't go too high to be disastrous for people whilst we (hopefully, but I won't hold my breath) come up with a greener long term strategy.

[Gizmo]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Hopefully it triggers people to use a bit less power, or prods us down a path of increasing the amount we produce via renewables and then incentivising that with lower prices. I feel being forced into taking a proper deep dive into energy provision due to spiralling costs can only be a good thing...it just can't go too high to be disastrous for people whilst we (hopefully, but I won't hold my breath) come up with a greener long term strategy.

With that current price being pegged to the predicted price per gas unit, we are essentially subsiding renewables/profit as the generators can charge that price even if much cheaper to produce.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Hopefully it triggers people to use a bit less power, or prods us down a path of increasing the amount we produce via renewables and then incentivising that with lower prices. I feel being forced into taking a proper deep dive into energy provision due to spiralling costs can only be a good thing...it just can't go too high to be disastrous for people whilst we (hopefully, but I won't hold my breath) come up with a greener long term strategy.

Good post 

[JudyJudyJudy]

“ you could argue that the Queen doesn’t face the same cost of living crisis as most people. “ 

 

a reporter on ITV just now . Unbelievable 

[gjcc]

4 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

“ you could argue that the Queen doesn’t face the same cost of living crisis as most people. “ 

 

a reporter on ITV just now . Unbelievable 

She probably got a heids up and got on a 10 year fix.
She’ll be getting the 25% reduction of council tax too. 

[WorldChampions1902]

2 hours ago, Taffin said:

Hopefully it triggers people to use a bit less power, or prods us down a path of increasing the amount we produce via renewables and then incentivising that with lower prices. I feel being forced into taking a proper deep dive into energy provision due to spiralling costs can only be a good thing...it just can't go too high to be disastrous for people whilst we (hopefully, but I won't hold my breath) come up with a greener long term strategy.

With all due respect, I am sick to death of the guff coming from politicians and energy commentators about increasing U.K.-based energy production (whether by renewables or nuclear or whatever source). Such comments are usually aligned to a suggestion that this will somehow lower the price we consumers pay.

 

Given that we are being continually told that the reason we are paying the current exorbitant levels is because we have to pay the current price levels on international energy markets, is the government seriously now suggesting that it somehow has the power/inclination to intervene on energy prices related to future U.K.-based energy generation that eventually comes on steam? And if they can do that in future, why not now?

 

Not having a go at yourself BTW. Rant over.

[ri Alban]

https://news.sky.com/story/scotland-to-freeze-rent-and-rail-fares-as-cost-of-living-worsens-12691305 

 

👍

[Victorian]

An economic analyst on BBC was saying that her institute has modelled the solvency of small businesses (substantial turnover with 10+ employees) and the findings were that,  without energy cost support/price cap,  that 50,000 will become insolvent in 2023.  Not included were 'micro businesses'.  The modelled cost to prevent being £100bn.

 

So that's another £100bn then.  £100bn+ for household energy cost freeze.  

 

The rhetoric is about economic growth,  etc.  Forget it.  The real story is preventing economic collapse.  To grow the economy you first need to have an economy to grow.

[Don Dan]

[Japan Jambo]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

An economic analyst on BBC was saying that her institute has modelled the solvency of small businesses (substantial turnover with 10+ employees) and the findings were that,  without energy cost support/price cap,  that 50,000 will become insolvent in 2023.  Not included were 'micro businesses'.  The modelled cost to prevent being £100bn.

 

So that's another £100bn then.  £100bn+ for household energy cost freeze.  

 

The rhetoric is about economic growth,  etc.  Forget it.  The real story is preventing economic collapse.  To grow the economy you first need to have an economy to grow.

 

She was from a company called Red Flag Alert. Hadn't heard of them, but a quick look at their website/Companies House leaves me surprised at the prominence the BBC were giving them on the today program this morning. This rent a quote shroud waving helps no-one.

 

Wish they focussed deeper into the issue - perhaps they could do a proper analysis of the companies making a killing out of the price cap and looking at how the wholesale energy markets work with a view to making some constructive suggestions instead?

[Japan Jambo]

2 mentions of Scotland doing it's part by building Nuclear Power stations from the PM in PMQ's. Clearly going to be a point of difference with the SNP.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

12 minutes ago, Japan Jambo said:

2 mentions of Scotland doing it's part by building Nuclear Power stations from the PM in PMQ's. Clearly going to be a point of difference with the SNP.

 

Yeh, it'll be interesting what the SNP say about that.

[Don Dan]

Ukraine war latest updates: Putin threatens to cut gas supply to Europe for good

Ukraine latest as President Vladimir Putin says Russia has not lost anything as a result of its actions in Ukraine; Russia requests "additional explanations" from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on parts of its report on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

 

will this ever end well? 

[ri Alban]

2 hours ago, Japan Jambo said:

2 mentions of Scotland doing it's part by building Nuclear Power stations from the PM in PMQ's. Clearly going to be a point of difference with the SNP.

I'll torch it personally. We don't need it or want it. England can use them for themselves, we've plenty of renewables, oil, and gas on tap.

[XB52]

1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yeh, it'll be interesting what the SNP say about that.

No it won't as the SG don't have to say a thing. There will be no new nuclear power stations in Scotland 

[Malinga the Swinga]

11 minutes ago, XB52 said:

No it won't as the SG don't have to say a thing. There will be no new nuclear power stations in Scotland 

Of course there won't. That's because the SNP, as a minority government who failed to win a majority at last election, can't pick their noses without getting approval of the lunatics from the green party. The very same green party who want us all, at a time everyone facing rising prices, to spend more money on solutions that aren't viable and don't do the job.

 

[manaliveits105]

2 hours ago, Japan Jambo said:

2 mentions of Scotland doing it's part by building Nuclear Power stations from the PM in PMQ's. Clearly going to be a point of difference with the SNP.

Good - energy source and jobs win win 

[The Mighty Thor]

24 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

 The very same green party who want us all, at a time everyone facing rising prices, to spend more money on solutions that aren't viable and don't do the job.

 

Speaking of solutions that aren't viable and don't do the job.......... the new PM's solution of putting the current energy crisis on the public tab with us all paying the debt off over 20 years, which of course makes a raging assumption that prices will go down after this winter, which given the energy companies stand to make £170 billion in EXTRA profit in the next 12 months means they'll be on that teat forever more amen.

 

Never mind the greens mate, think about where the real problem and of course solution lies. 

 

[XB52]

36 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Of course there won't. That's because the SNP, as a minority government who failed to win a majority at last election, can't pick their noses without getting approval of the lunatics from the green party. The very same green party who want us all, at a time everyone facing rising prices, to spend more money on solutions that aren't viable and don't do the job.

 

Since 2007 the snp has been against nuclear power stations, nothing to do with the greens. And if you want value for money you don't spend 15 years and billions of pounds building a nuclear power station 

[Jeffros Furios]

42 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Speaking of solutions that aren't viable and don't do the job.......... the new PM's solution of putting the current energy crisis on the public tab with us all paying the debt off over 20 years, which of course makes a raging assumption that prices will go down after this winter, which given the energy companies stand to make £170 billion in EXTRA profit in the next 12 months means they'll be on that teat forever more amen.

 

Never mind the greens mate, think about where the real problem and of course solution lies. 

 

First day and she puts the business interests of multinational companies and its shareholders over the people

she is meant to serve . 

And no surprise the likes of Andrew Brigeton agree with her .

Will the decade of paying this debt back only be residential or do we all pony up for the massive increases 

for business .

What a bunch of ****in ***** !! 

 

 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

2 minutes ago, Jeffros Furios said:

First day and she puts the business interests of multinational companies and its shareholders over the people

she is meant to serve . 

And no surprise the likes of Andrew Brigeton agree with her .

Will the decade of paying this debt back only be residential or do we all pony up for the massive increases 

for business .

What a bunch of ****in ***** !! 

 

 

 

aye but the F****NG Greens !!!111!1!!1111

[ri Alban]

1 hour ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Of course there won't. That's because the SNP, as a minority government who failed to win a majority at last election, can't pick their noses without getting approval of the lunatics from the green party. The very same green party who want us all, at a time everyone facing rising prices, to spend more money on solutions that aren't viable and don't do the job.

 

First past the post (WM rules)they wiped the floor with the lot of you. So, please stop with the minority pish. 

[Mikey1874]

 

[Victorian]

She's said a lot about the supply side of energy.  Increasing domestic supply and has referenced North Sea oil & gas,  as well as nuclear and the suggestion of fracking.  Nuclear definitely has to form part of future energy strategy and it's questionable how important that North Sea oil & gas has to be to fulfill energy supply.

 

1.  No details and no thoughts have yet been shared as to how any expanded domestic supply will affect the market price of energy.  As things stand the UK could become a clear exporter of energy but still be under the tyranny of the wholesale market price.  Until she gives details about how and when domestic supply breaks free of the market,  anything she says about increased supply should be treated as lies.

 

2.  There's obviously very little money to make and no party donations to rake in from the renewables sector of supply.  They appear disinterested.  By far and away it is the quickest form of energy generation that becomes energy from the point of planning.  Nuclear reactors? 10 years?  New North Sea licences?  3 or 4 years?  You can bring forward onshore wind and solar and be supplying the grid in a faster lead time.  And in addition,  at some point over the next 20 years,  renewables will need to form 75% of our energy production.

 

For a bunch of con artists who seemed hell bent on taking back control,  especially a lot of stuff that really didn't need control taken back of,  they seem somewhat less demented about taking back control of how much we pay for our own resources.  And very little urgency to promote the quickest,  cheapest,  greenest form of potential new supply.