Jump to content

Town wide energy switch?


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Kendal Council has started a scheme, whereby they act on behalf of signed up town's folk to negotiate with the energy companies for the cheapest tariff. Similar schemes exist in Holland, where bills were reduced from around £150 to £50; which begs the question, are these companies ripping us off, if they can achieve such reductions? Would you want the Council to explore such an initiative and would you want to register? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep so a win win then on both sides then (maybe).

 

I doubt they'd increase council tax Cleo as people would just move to all these 'more affordable' homes with lower rates and the likes that they are allowing to be built or maybe people would move out of the area all together if they did go down your suggested route :wink:

 

More money to be had by continually ripping off (oops sorry I mean hammering) the local businesses etc in the area who can't as easily up sticks and move elsewhere. :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One tariff would never be suitable for all customers in the borough. Some want fixed rates for as long as possible, some want dual fuel, some want "green" electricity, some want paper bills, some simply won't deal with certain suppliers as a result of previous bad service, consumption amounts and patterns vary.

 

One size is never going to fit all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true Inky and I'm sure that Kendal Council aren't expecting all their residents to sign up... just some.

 

It would be a simple exercise to say to people 'right we are going to negotiate for the cheapest price we can get on say a dual fuel tarrif. Are you interested ? We need to be able to show we have at least 500 people who would be willing to switch IF the price is considerably lower than you can get elsewhere'

 

Personally as a council I would negotiate and then send it to the press and the energy watchdog bloke showing that the energy companies were willing to offer a much reduced price (whilst clearly still making a profit) so they should be able to offer the very same discounted price to all their customers :wink:

 

You mention 'different consumption' amounts and 'patterns'. Why should the amount we use or when we use it make any difference to the unit price we pay ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different consumption amounts change the balance of whether a "standing charge plus low unit cost" is cheaper than a "no standing charge plus higher unit cost" tariff is cheapest.

 

Different consumption patterns (a night shift worker, for example, or someone who works from home during the day) can change whether or not a tariff which includes an Economy 7 night rate will work out cheapest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, unless it were a fixed rate for a defined period (which in times of rising prices will always be more expensive per unit at the outset than a standard variable tariff) there would be nothing to stop a supplier quoting a low price to start with and then creeping the rates up over a period of time - relying on peoples inertia to keep many of them on what they think is "the cheapest tariff on the market".

 

And if people did then start leaving the group negotiated tariff, so that the group size fell to below the 500 customers mark, the supplier would no longer be bound any price promises made.

 

The ridiculous thing is that 20% of everyone's gas and electricity bill is made up of tax and so-called green levies imposed by the government. If the government really were so concerned about energy costs then they could cut everyone's bill by that 20% with a stroke of the Chancellors pen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used to have ecomony 7 heating when we first moved in our house. It was cheaper (apparently) as it would use elec during the night to charge and emit the heat during the day... by 7pm it had run out and we used to sit with coats on cos we were freezing.

 

WHY should it cost more to use elec during the day than it does at night as it's still coming from the same place and the same supplier.

 

It doesn't cost me any more to drive or put petrol in my car in the day than it does at night, it doesn't cost me any more to shop during the day than it would at night, so why should it cost me any more to use my elec lights or gas appliances.

 

Are the energy companies the ones behind the ridiculous long standing idea of the clocks going back tomorrow too so that we have to put our lights and heating on an hour earlier :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Inky says about the "green" taxes imposed by the government to pay wealthy people to own bird killers.

 

Dizzy, I don't understand why changing the clocks back to GMT means having to put your heat and light on earlier. There are only so many hours of daylight in any day (depending on the time of year obviously) so what the clock says shouldn't make an iota of difference. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe these schemes work on an annual basis, so any increase by the supplier would mean a re-negotiation with the rest. The bottom line is, like most private sector charges, they are based on maximising profit and are a case of smoke and mirrors, designed to confuse customers into being ripped off. As for storing electricity Pierre, yes it can be stored, via hydraulic pumps sited inside mountains, but I don't think we have that many, if any; but it would cater for peak demands. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we are in a truly "European Free Market" as Kije keeps telling us, why is gas and electric so much cheaper on the continent and cheaper even in Northern Ireland?

 

Why can't the public just buy their gas and electric from there like you can buy cars and the like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subsidising doesn't actually make it cheaper, it just transfers some of the cost to the taxpayer, who is also a consumer. Plus the added bureaucracy which has its own cost. Nationalisation didn't work the last time either.

 

For information on fuel prices Europe wide:

 

Fuel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "rich" already pay more than the poor. Many of the "poor" pay little or nothing at all in tax.

 

That's the inevitable effect of a taxation system based on escalating rates of tax as earnings increase.

 

Besides, since the "rich" tend to use more energy than the "poor" any price subsidy would benefit them more. I doubt that's what you were hoping to achieve Obs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think you exagerate their current financial commitment to the tax system Ink; top earners exercise complex tax avoidance schemes to the extent, they pay less than 10% income tax. So good in fact, that even the taxmen are at it! :D

 

My link

 

Quotes "The highest-earning 1 per cent of Britons pay almost 30 per cent of all income taxes, according to research."

 

"The lower-earning 50 per cent pay £17bn – less than the housing benefit bill."

 

Official figures, as opposed to your ignorant preconceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...