Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not good news for the wind and solar farm operators, who will go bust without the subsidies." Excuse the ignorance - why does one necessarily have to affect the other? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not good news for the wind and solar farm operators, who will go bust without the subsidies." "Excuse the ignorance - why does one necessarily have to affect the other?" Electricity prices at the moment are set by the highest supply cost, which is almost always gas. If they change that, they'll be paying the solar and wind farm less money. Many of those operators won't be able to survive on the lower payments. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not good news for the wind and solar farm operators, who will go bust without the subsidies. Excuse the ignorance - why does one necessarily have to affect the other? Electricity prices at the moment are set by the highest supply cost, which is almost always gas. If they change that, they'll be paying the solar and wind farm less money. Many of those operators won't be able to survive on the lower payments." That's the price, but not what producers get. Newer suppliers actually get an agreed fixed "strike price", under the Contracts for Difference system, which isn't changing. Older ones (pre 2017) will lose their windfall profits that they've been earning and will revert to "normal" (pre energy crisis) profit levels... Which presumably would have been the forecast when they began generating and therefore would be unlikely to send them bust. Have any operators outright said that they would go bust? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Electricity prices at the moment are set by the highest supply cost, which is almost always gas. If they change that, they'll be paying the solar and wind farm less money. Many of those operators won't be able to survive on the lower payments." "That's the price, but not what producers get. Newer suppliers actually get an agreed fixed "strike price", under the Contracts for Difference system, which isn't changing. Older ones (pre 2017) will lose their windfall profits that they've been earning and will revert to "normal" (pre energy crisis) profit levels... Which presumably would have been the forecast when they began generating and therefore would be unlikely to send them bust." Ah, so you do know how it works. Yes, many operators will get the strike price, and that's pretty high. We won't get the cost of electricity down much if we're still paying strike prices. The older operators will be paid the new lower prices, and they simply won't be able to operate at much below what they currently get. Take a look at the balance sheets of any of these companies and you'll see that they just aren't making massive profits. If the price drops, it won't be long till some of them run into problems. "Have any operators outright said that they would go bust?" Well, no, because the government haven't said what they intend to do yet. I'm quite sure we'll see some of them saying that when the detail finally emerges. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Ah, so you do know how it works. " As of two hours ago.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The government are looking into decoupling gas and electric prices, good news. " if it happens then it will be very good news indeed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Standing Charges have increased faster than either Electricity/Gas, in the last 5 years, yet it’s all brushed under the carpet?" What do you mean "brushed under the carpet". I've read several media stories explaining that standing charges have gone up to cover the infrastructure work that needs doing to cater for renewable energy, to cover the costs involved in chasing defaulters, and to put emergency measures in place when energy companies go bust. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders." Nonsense. The standing charge is decreed by the regulator and the distribution operators. The electricity companies don't get any of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Even the CEO of octopus is calling this. But apparently the reform minded amongst us know better" What exactly is he 'calling'? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Even the CEO of octopus is calling this. But apparently the reform minded amongst us know better What exactly is he 'calling'?" For the decoupling of gas and renewables | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Even the CEO of octopus is calling this. But apparently the reform minded amongst us know better" "What exactly is he 'calling'?" "For the decoupling of gas and renewables" Of course he is. He's the boss of an electricity supply company, i.e. a company that buys in electricity from generating companies, and then sells it on to customers. Obviously he wants to pay less for the electricity so that he can drop his prices and satisfy his customers. Octopus don't generate the electricity, so the reduced price won't harm them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Even the CEO of octopus is calling this. But apparently the reform minded amongst us know better What exactly is he 'calling'? For the decoupling of gas and renewables Of course he is. He's the boss of an electricity supply company, i.e. a company that buys in electricity from generating companies, and then sells it on to customers. Obviously he wants to pay less for the electricity so that he can drop his prices and satisfy his customers. Octopus don't generate the electricity, so the reduced price won't harm them." Won't harm their customers either then!! Who do you work for? Why wouldn't you want cheaper bills? So we can at last admit that renewables are cheaper!? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Even the CEO of octopus is calling this. But apparently the reform minded amongst us know better" "Of course he is. He's the boss of an electricity supply company, i.e. a company that buys in electricity from generating companies, and then sells it on to customers. Obviously he wants to pay less for the electricity so that he can drop his prices and satisfy his customers. Octopus don't generate the electricity, so the reduced price won't harm them." "Won't harm their customers either then!!" No it won't. Nobody said it would. "Why wouldn't you want cheaper bills?" I do want cheaper bills. We all do. "So we can at last admit that renewables are cheaper!?" That's almost exactly the opposite of what I said above. Renewables look cheap if you ignore the cost of connecting them to the grid. If you include those costs, renewables aren't a lot cheaper than gas. That's why some of the companies (the ones that no longer have a guaranteed minimum price for their electricity) are going to go bust if the price they are paid gets decoupled from gas and they end up with less income. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders. Nonsense. The standing charge is decreed by the regulator and the distribution operators. The electricity companies don't get any of it." nonsense, it's just a scheme that robs peter to pay paul. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Even the CEO of octopus is calling this. But apparently the reform minded amongst us know better Of course he is. He's the boss of an electricity supply company, i.e. a company that buys in electricity from generating companies, and then sells it on to customers. Obviously he wants to pay less for the electricity so that he can drop his prices and satisfy his customers. Octopus don't generate the electricity, so the reduced price won't harm them. Won't harm their customers either then!! No it won't. Nobody said it would. Why wouldn't you want cheaper bills? I do want cheaper bills. We all do. So we can at last admit that renewables are cheaper!? That's almost exactly the opposite of what I said above. Renewables look cheap if you ignore the cost of connecting them to the grid. If you include those costs, renewables aren't a lot cheaper than gas. That's why some of the companies (the ones that no longer have a guaranteed minimum price for their electricity) are going to go bust if the price they are paid gets decoupled from gas and they end up with less income." What do you mean connecting to the grid? Speak to me like I'm 5. From what I've been able to understand wind and solar are connected to our grid we can run nearly self sufficiently. Do you mean heat pumps, and panels on homes? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders." "Nonsense. The standing charge is decreed by the regulator and the distribution operators. The electricity companies don't get any of it." "nonsense, it's just a scheme that robs peter to pay paul." If you mean that it takes money from customers which is then passed to the distribution operators to pay for infrastructure, then yes. If you think that money goes to shareholders, then you're wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Renewables look cheap if you ignore the cost of connecting them to the grid. If you include those costs, renewables aren't a lot cheaper than gas. That's why some of the companies (the ones that no longer have a guaranteed minimum price for their electricity) are going to go bust if the price they are paid gets decoupled from gas and they end up with less income." "What do you mean connecting to the grid? Speak to me like I'm 5. From what I've been able to understand wind and solar are connected to our grid we can run nearly self sufficiently." The pressure groups that talk about how cheap renewable energy is almost always talk about the cost of the turbines. "£5m for a 4MW turbine, and then you get free electricity". What they don't talk about is the land cost, and the electrical converters, and the cabling, and the maintenance. Those things quickly add up, especially if you want your turbine to be offshore. On top of that the national grid has the cost of handling intermittent power. It has to balance demand and supply by having emergency power generation methods, and ways to dump power when there's too much. And if Scotland is producing lots of power but England is short, we don't have the capacity to shift that power down to England because the grid wasn't set up that way. In short, wind power isn't a vastly profitable business. It makes money, but not a lot. If a new government policy decouples the price of gas from the price paid to other operators, that price will drop to about half of what is paid now, and lots of wind farms simply won't be profitable at that rate. I'm not even convinced that it will bring electricity bills down very much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders. Nonsense. The standing charge is decreed by the regulator and the distribution operators. The electricity companies don't get any of it. nonsense, it's just a scheme that robs peter to pay paul. If you mean that it takes money from customers which is then passed to the distribution operators to pay for infrastructure, then yes. If you think that money goes to shareholders, then you're wrong." nonsense, the whole point of privatisation in 1990 was that it was meant to be an effective means for the upgrade of infrastructure of the grid. that didn't happen. shareholders got paid huge dividends over the last 36 years and bill payers have been lumped with the bill for infrastructure modifications which are effectively 36 years behind. dress it up how you want with rhetoric but thems the facts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders." "Nonsense. The standing charge is decreed by the regulator and the distribution operators. The electricity companies don't get any of it." "nonsense, it's just a scheme that robs peter to pay paul." "If you mean that it takes money from customers which is then passed to the distribution operators to pay for infrastructure, then yes. If you think that money goes to shareholders, then you're wrong." "nonsense, the whole point of privatisation in 1990 was that it was meant to be an effective means for the upgrade of infrastructure of the grid. that didn't happen. shareholders got paid huge dividends over the last 36 years and bill payers have been lumped with the bill for infrastructure modifications which are effectively 36 years behind. dress it up how you want with rhetoric but thems the facts." Sigh. The companies collecting standing charges are electricity supply companies. They buy and sell electricity, but they don't generate it or have anything to do with the grid. The ones that maintain the grid are the energy network distribution companies, which are paid the standing charges to cover the cost of maintaining the grid. There are companies that generate electricity, distribute electricity, and sell electricity. Each company does just one of these things. Standing charges are collected by sellers, and given to distributors. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders. Nonsense. The standing charge is decreed by the regulator and the distribution operators. The electricity companies don't get any of it. nonsense, it's just a scheme that robs peter to pay paul. If you mean that it takes money from customers which is then passed to the distribution operators to pay for infrastructure, then yes. If you think that money goes to shareholders, then you're wrong. nonsense, the whole point of privatisation in 1990 was that it was meant to be an effective means for the upgrade of infrastructure of the grid. that didn't happen. shareholders got paid huge dividends over the last 36 years and bill payers have been lumped with the bill for infrastructure modifications which are effectively 36 years behind. dress it up how you want with rhetoric but thems the facts. Sigh. The companies collecting standing charges are electricity supply companies. They buy and sell electricity, but they don't generate it or have anything to do with the grid. The ones that maintain the grid are the energy network distribution companies, which are paid the standing charges to cover the cost of maintaining the grid. There are companies that generate electricity, distribute electricity, and sell electricity. Each company does just one of these things. Standing charges are collected by sellers, and given to distributors." it's clear you have no understanding of how the infrastructure operates as a whole and so it's pointless listening to your nonsense any further. until you fully grasp how network generation and distribution operates and how it is funded then you're probably best off saying nothing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it's clear you have no understanding of how the infrastructure operates as a whole and so it's pointless listening to your nonsense any further. until you fully grasp how network generation and distribution operates and how it is funded then you're probably best off saying nothing." Feel free to point out what I've got wrong, and educate all of us. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it's clear you have no understanding of how the infrastructure operates as a whole and so it's pointless listening to your nonsense any further. until you fully grasp how network generation and distribution operates and how it is funded then you're probably best off saying nothing. Feel free to point out what I've got wrong, and educate all of us." the part where you assert that standing charge is not used for upgrades to the network grid that distributes electricity for starters. i'll leave you to research a little in your own time so you begin to understand where you've got things wrong. in the meantime i'll finish off the ATEX inspection report that i'm doing today. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Feel free to point out what I've got wrong, and educate all of us." "the part where you assert that standing charge is not used for upgrades to the network grid that distributes electricity for starters." I said the exact opposite. All along I've been maintaining that standing charges are collected by the supply companies, and passed to the distribution companies, who use it to maintain and improve the network. It was you that said "standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders". I'm glad to see that you now agree with me that isn't true. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Feel free to point out what I've got wrong, and educate all of us. the part where you assert that standing charge is not used for upgrades to the network grid that distributes electricity for starters. I said the exact opposite. All along I've been maintaining that standing charges are collected by the supply companies, and passed to the distribution companies, who use it to maintain and improve the network. It was you that said "standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders". I'm glad to see that you now agree with me that isn't true." you haven't said the exact opposite at all. you've posted it there in black and white for all to see. shareholders of the network have capitalised on the inaction on network upgrades for 36 years. now the bill paying public are being forced to fund the work that should've been done via whopping standing charges while the shareholders at all sectors of the network, from EP's through DNO's to the NG are still receiving dividends. i disagree with your rhetorical garbage 100%. you're disingenuousnous borders wholesale trolling to be quite frank. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Feel free to point out what I've got wrong, and educate all of us." "the part where you assert that standing charge is not used for upgrades to the network grid that distributes electricity for starters." "I said the exact opposite. All along I've been maintaining that standing charges are collected by the supply companies, and passed to the distribution companies, who use it to maintain and improve the network. It was you that said "standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders". I'm glad to see that you now agree with me that isn't true." "you haven't said the exact opposite at all. you've posted it there in black and white for all to see." So quote the bit where I said that standing charges aren't used for upgrades. Then I might be able to understand what you're talking about. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Feel free to point out what I've got wrong, and educate all of us. the part where you assert that standing charge is not used for upgrades to the network grid that distributes electricity for starters. I said the exact opposite. All along I've been maintaining that standing charges are collected by the supply companies, and passed to the distribution companies, who use it to maintain and improve the network. It was you that said "standing charge is basically just taking money from customers and handing it straight over to shareholders". I'm glad to see that you now agree with me that isn't true. you haven't said the exact opposite at all. you've posted it there in black and white for all to see. So quote the bit where I said that standing charges aren't used for upgrades. Then I might be able to understand what you're talking about." so you're asserting that the network companies don't have shareholders then? you just going round in ever decreasing circles with this nonsense. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So quote the bit where I said that standing charges aren't used for upgrades. Then I might be able to understand what you're talking about." "so you're asserting that the network companies don't have shareholders then?" It's beginning to look like you're doing this on purpose. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt again. If you want to claim that I've said something that isn't correct, quote what I said and explain why it isn't correct. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So quote the bit where I said that standing charges aren't used for upgrades. Then I might be able to understand what you're talking about. so you're asserting that the network companies don't have shareholders then? It's beginning to look like you're doing this on purpose. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt again. If you want to claim that I've said something that isn't correct, quote what I said and explain why it isn't correct." i don't need to ... you've written it down for everyone to see. go back and read what nonsense you've posted for yourself chap. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's beginning to look like you're doing this on purpose. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt again. If you want to claim that I've said something that isn't correct, quote what I said and explain why it isn't correct." "i don't need to ... you've written it down for everyone to see. go back and read what nonsense you've posted for yourself chap." OK, so you can't find anything that's actually incorrect, and to cover for that you're just going to keep on throwing accusations. Got it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" OK, so you can't find anything that's actually incorrect, and to cover for that you're just going to keep on throwing accusations. Got it." wrong again .... ipoint to all your previous posts on this thread. so no you are utterly wrong Again... or you are a liar ... it's hard to tell. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, so you can't find anything that's actually incorrect, and to cover for that you're just going to keep on throwing accusations. Got it." "wrong again .... ipoint to all your previous posts on this thread. so no you are utterly wrong Again... or you are a liar ... it's hard to tell." You don't have to point to all of them, just quote a single one and tell me where I'm wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, so you can't find anything that's actually incorrect, and to cover for that you're just going to keep on throwing accusations. Got it. wrong again .... ipoint to all your previous posts on this thread. so no you are utterly wrong Again... or you are a liar ... it's hard to tell. You don't have to point to all of them, just quote a single one and tell me where I'm wrong." i already have ... so i won't be meeting your demands to spoon feed you any further. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, so you can't find anything that's actually incorrect, and to cover for that you're just going to keep on throwing accusations. Got it." "wrong again .... ipoint to all your previous posts on this thread. so no you are utterly wrong Again... or you are a liar ... it's hard to tell." "You don't have to point to all of them, just quote a single one and tell me where I'm wrong." "i already have ... so i won't be meeting your demands to spoon feed you any further." You've responded to some of my posts and disagreed. And you've made some posts attacking stuff that I didn't say. But you haven't made any where you quote my words and then tell me which bit you think is wrong. But if you don't want to engage, I can't make you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, so you can't find anything that's actually incorrect, and to cover for that you're just going to keep on throwing accusations. Got it. wrong again .... ipoint to all your previous posts on this thread. so no you are utterly wrong Again... or you are a liar ... it's hard to tell. You don't have to point to all of them, just quote a single one and tell me where I'm wrong. i already have ... so i won't be meeting your demands to spoon feed you any further. You've responded to some of my posts and disagreed. And you've made some posts attacking stuff that I didn't say. But you haven't made any where you quote my words and then tell me which bit you think is wrong. But if you don't want to engage, I can't make you."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
