Energy Prices

[dockers_strike]

26 minutes ago, stringvest said:

That's only because you're too sort-sighted to see further than the nose on your face.   Here's a couple of questions for you:  What huge costs do you think might be avoided if the spikes for demand can be flattened out?  And who would pay if those costs could not be avoided?  What low-level intelligence might be incorporated into home systems or white goods over the next 10 years?   

The whole SMETS project has been a huge oversight, pretty much like HS2 is, huge cost for very little gain. SMETS has been designed from the ground up and it's 'meter costs' as someone claimed is nothing like the costing of the existing meter infrastructure.

 

Fuck me, whoever drew up the system requirements failed to include SMETS1 meters could still communicate with different suppliers when customers migrated accounts, a process consumers have been encouraged to do regularly to save money.

 

You ask the questions

Quote

What huge costs do you think might be avoided if the spikes for demand can be flattened out?  And who would pay if those costs could not be avoided?  What low-level intelligence might be incorporated into home systems or white goods over the next 10 years? 

 

Smart Meters were initially 'sold' to consumers as saving money on their bills. When that approach failed, they were 'sold' as what 'green' consumers should ruch to have installed to save the planet. Now, you're talking about smoothing demand.

 

In reality, that equates to 'time shifting' people's use of electricity and gas. Good luck telling your kids they cannot have their evening meal at 6pm because the price of gas and leccie is high and they'll have to wait until nearer 8pm before ma can start cooking their meal.

 

Oh, and you cant use your washing machine tumble dryer during the day because the elctric is too high, best wait until 2am in the morning when everyone in the house is asleep never mind being on hand if the thing floods or worse still, bursts into flames.

 

Who pays? The utility companies pay huge dividends to share holders. Cutting the divie would be a start. But to be honest, this wouldnt put much of a dent in a project costed at over £11bn and growing especially once 3g networks are switched off and more cost updating many Smart Meters are added. Costing of that level needs to come from efficiencies within the utility companies and support from Government.

 

Im not a white goods experts so have no idea what 'low level intelligence' could be installed in them. You?

 

Short sighted? Nah, Ive been to the University of Life. Nothing short sighted about that. Maybe try enrolling yourself sometime?

[Rico1304]

42 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Object to the article?! How the holy fuck do you come to that blinkered opinion?

 

I posted the info so people who may be interested in the article behind a paywall (that I dont pay for by the way, there's a simple hack to beat the torygraph's paywall that works for me!) could read it.

 

My opinion on SMETS is unchanged: it's a huge costly project that is costing consumers over £11bn on their bills that delivers fuck all to them in the form of material savings.

Oh this is going to be geeky!  
 

Which version of SMETS are you objecting to?

You say no material savings after posting an article referencing £4bn in savings. Which is it?

How would TOU tariffs be delivered without Smart Meters? 
How would faster switching and demand balancing be delivered without smart meters? 
 

 

[dockers_strike]

Oh lord, the call centre manager cannot handle it, can he?!

 

Yes, the article says 'But energy company bosses and Ofgem on Tuesday insisted the plans will ultimately benefit most customers, saving them between £1.6bn and £4.5bn overall. '

 

Where does any of my post say I believe the half hour data will result in £4.5bn savings? I'll save you the trouble rico, nowhere!

 

I think it is an absurd claim by OFGEM and suppliers. But hey, if it floats yer boat because you're taking the energy suppliers shilling, knock yourself out!

[Rico1304]

5 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Oh lord, the call centre manager cannot handle it, can he?!

 

Yes, the article says 'But energy company bosses and Ofgem on Tuesday insisted the plans will ultimately benefit most customers, saving them between £1.6bn and £4.5bn overall. '

 

Where does any of my post say I believe the half hour data will result in £4.5bn savings? I'll save you the trouble rico, nowhere!

 

I think it is an absurd claim by OFGEM and suppliers. But hey, if it floats yer boat because you're taking the energy suppliers shilling, knock yourself out!

So why are you posting it?  Are you against it or for it?  What are you basing your objections on? 
 

Any news on the other questions?  
 

University of Life - Jesus Christ. 

[Rico1304]

9 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Oh lord, the call centre manager cannot handle it, can he?!

 

Yes, the article says 'But energy company bosses and Ofgem on Tuesday insisted the plans will ultimately benefit most customers, saving them between £1.6bn and £4.5bn overall. '

 

Where does any of my post say I believe the half hour data will result in £4.5bn savings? I'll save you the trouble rico, nowhere!

 

I think it is an absurd claim by OFGEM and suppliers. But hey, if it floats yer boat because you're taking the energy suppliers shilling, knock yourself out!

So where did you say it wasn’t accurate.  I think you are simultaneously saying to me it’s rubbish but to Stringers it’s not.  
 

It’s clear you really don’t know an awful lot about this other than articles in the Mail and Telegraph. Throwing the odd word like ‘SMETS’ around doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about.  Is it possible that someone working in the programme for the DCC would know more than you?  I mean someone who’s doing this every single day. 
 

Remember the Harry Enfield character, old retired bloke ‘you don’t want to do it like that’? Ring any bells? 
 

(on the insult about being a call centre manager, have you seen how much those fuckers earn?  Nearly worth getting out of bed for).  

[dockers_strike]

Some people need to stop trying to introduce straw man arguments all the time as a diversion just because they think they are losing the argument or dont like the alternative point of view.

 

He just keeps digging a bigger and deeper hole for himself.

 

Ive seen some comments by one poster about me 'pontificating' about stuff. You'd think that person would look in the mirror. But hey ho. Is that a phone I hear ringing?!

 

 

[Rico1304]

Ha ha I’m asking you specific questions about the program and you NEVER answer them. I think that’s the opposite of a straw man.  
 

 

 

[stringvest]

1 hour ago, dockers_strike said:

The whole SMETS project has been a huge oversight, pretty much like HS2 is, huge cost for very little gain. SMETS has been designed from the ground up and it's 'meter costs' as someone claimed is nothing like the costing of the existing meter infrastructure.

 

Fuck me, whoever drew up the system requirements failed to include SMETS1 meters could still communicate with different suppliers when customers migrated accounts, a process consumers have been encouraged to do regularly to save money.

 

You ask the questions

 

Smart Meters were initially 'sold' to consumers as saving money on their bills. When that approach failed, they were 'sold' as what 'green' consumers should ruch to have installed to save the planet. Now, you're talking about smoothing demand.

 

In reality, that equates to 'time shifting' people's use of electricity and gas. Good luck telling your kids they cannot have their evening meal at 6pm because the price of gas and leccie is high and they'll have to wait until nearer 8pm before ma can start cooking their meal.

 

Oh, and you cant use your washing machine tumble dryer during the day because the elctric is too high, best wait until 2am in the morning when everyone in the house is asleep never mind being on hand if the thing floods or worse still, bursts into flames.

 

Who pays? The utility companies pay huge dividends to share holders. Cutting the divie would be a start. But to be honest, this wouldnt put much of a dent in a project costed at over £11bn and growing especially once 3g networks are switched off and more cost updating many Smart Meters are added. Costing of that level needs to come from efficiencies within the utility companies and support from Government.

 

Im not a white goods experts so have no idea what 'low level intelligence' could be installed in them. You?

 

Short sighted? Nah, Ive been to the University of Life. Nothing short sighted about that. Maybe try enrolling yourself sometime?

yep, short sighted.  I know precisely how much this programme is costing.  I know the roadmap on the evolution away from 3G.  I understand precisely how new dual band CHs and meters are being procured, I know all about migrating SMETS1 meters onto the solution, and I know what BEIS think about all of these things.  What you don't seem to be able to grasp is how benefits might be realised, benefits which ultimately be realised by the end consumer rather than the energy companies.  I won't tell you, as I'm sure the university of life will give you all you need to answer the question, but I'll give you a clue, it doesn't involve you staying up until midnight to warm up your pot noodle on cheap power.

[dockers_strike]

5 minutes ago, stringvest said:

yep, short sighted.  I know precisely how much this programme is costing.  I know the roadmap on the evolution away from 3G.  I understand precisely how new dual band CHs and meters are being procured, I know all about migrating SMETS1 meters onto the solution, and I know what BEIS think about all of these things.  What you don't seem to be able to grasp is how benefits might be realised, benefits which ultimately be realised by the end consumer rather than the energy companies.  I won't tell you, as I'm sure the university of life will give you all you need to answer the question, but I'll give you a clue, it doesn't involve you staying up until midnight to warm up your pot noodle on cheap power.

Oh please, disagree all you want but Im not shortsighted. Stop being so condescending. I just dont believe the consumer should be sacrificed on the high altar of the rush to net zero and be made to pay through the nose for something that gives miniscule benefit if any.

 

How much is the SMETS programme costing then, mate? Do you deny it's costing over £11bn and that the energy companies have admitted consumers will pay this cost via their bills? Do you deny the cost of the SMETS programme is over and above the 'normal' infrastructure costs of the current metering system?

 

Do you agree it is criminal 'we' have to pay wind turbine operators to switch off their turbines when there's too much supply? I've nothing against wind turbines, I think they're very relaxing to watch out in the bay on a nice sunny day.

 

Do you serious think that no one is allowed to challenge the efficacy of these billion pound projects and they should be nodded through because the industry wants them or as rico seems to think if you havent got intricate working knowledge of the DCC, you shouldnt comment? That sounds like Stazi thinking to me.

 

Do you agree when the 2g and 3g networks are switched off, some smart meters will need upgrading via an engineers visit and the cost of these upgrades will be again bourne by the consumer?

 

You say  dont seem to grasp the benefits? Im all in favour of benefits for the consumer but this doesnt offer benefits to the consumer. Im not in favour of the term 'surge pricing' but this is a move towards charging consumers more to use gas and leccie at different times of the day, to be determined by energy companies.

 

And if we dont have gas \ electric shortages, whoever may be responsible for that ie politicians \ OFGEM etc, why do we need to manage peaks and troughs more than we do know?

 

In my experience, these things dont lead to consumer savings and certainly not in the order of £4bn as claimed in that article. Rico doesnt seem to grasp the plain fact sharing an article doesnt de facto mean you agree with said article.

 

If Smart Meters would save me over 200 quid on my annual bills, Id have one fitted tomorrow. But they wont, they dont and so Im not having one. Neither do I agree with the bollocks that Smart Meters give you cancer, will be used to share your data or other crackpot theories.

 

Im sorry you and your mate dont like the 'university of life' quip. Maybe try not being so serious and the pair of you lighten up.

[Rico1304]

So your main objection to SMETS seems to be that meters fitted from 2010 to 2019 (in numbers) will need an upgrade in 2033? 

[dockers_strike]

[Rico1304]

46 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

So your main objection to SMETS seems to be that meters fitted from 2010 to 2019 (in numbers) will need an upgrade in 2033? 

 

23 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

SMETS does not equal Smart Meters, the communication system in smart metering systems can vary. SMETS 1 is not the same as SMETS 2 (indeed there are 2 methods  in SMETS 2). 
 

So, I wasn’t talking about your objection to smart meters, or major infrastructure projects. I was asking you a very specific question about SMETS.  So your silly picture shows you didn’t understand the question.  Nice try though.  Are you going to ignore this one too?   

[Moo]

Does anyone really think that energy companies or a Tory government will ensure that benefits/savings will be passed on to the consumer?  If so, why would they?

[stringvest]

45 minutes ago, Moo said:

Does anyone really think that energy companies or a Tory government will ensure that benefits/savings will be passed on to the consumer?  If so, why would they?

It’s as much about future cost avoidance as anything else.  

[littletedwest]

Here is a weird one. My fixed tariff expired a few months ago, it was a good price. So good my supplier went bust before this all kicked off.

My new supplier has still not put my prices up yet, question is why?

I get they may be waiting until April but why since it's not like if they did it now there's much i could do

[Rico1304]

4 minutes ago, littletedwest said:

Here is a weird one. My fixed tariff expired a few months ago, it was a good price. So good my supplier went bust before this all kicked off.

My new supplier has still not put my prices up yet, question is why?

I get they may be waiting until April but why since it's not like if they did it now there's much i could do

The whole migration takes time. It’s pretty complex and there’s quite a bit of stuff that goes on in the background.  It’ll catch up eventually.  

[littletedwest]

I've been with them 12 months mate though. Hopefully they've forgot about me.

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, littletedwest said:

I've been with them 12 months mate though. Hopefully they've forgot about me.

It’s possible, but unlikely. They won’t be out of pocket because the Supplier of Last Resort process compensates the new supplier for any difference in the tariffs.  That’s why energy suppliers going bump is so bad for the industry as some of the costs are socialised amongst the remaining suppliers and therefore customers. 

[Gooch]

https://mobile.twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1490754808436998146

This seems pretty good on the current situation

[Rico1304]

Telegraph article incoming - in which the very first sentence is incorrect.   

[Captain Turdseye]

Props to Dockers here. He’s making this thread worth reading. 
 

Rico and his tart, Stringvest, are being pompous twats.
 

Finish them. 

[Trumo]

9 hours ago, littletedwest said:

Here is a weird one. My fixed tariff expired a few months ago, it was a good price. So good my supplier went bust before this all kicked off.

My new supplier has still not put my prices up yet, question is why?

I get they may be waiting until April but why since it's not like if they did it now there's much i could do

 

When a customer is switched to a Supplier of Last Resort, the tariff they are put on is guaranteed for 6 months. As the majority of this shit kicked off about 6 months ago, the SoLRs are generally only now having to decide between extending that until April or biting the bullet now. It didn't matter a great deal when it was a few thousand customers but when you are talking hundreds of thousands of customers (possibly even just over a million), all coming to this stage at pretty much the same time, it really needs some careful deliberation. After all, the SoLRs don't want to head the same way as the suppliers whose customers they've had to take on.

[Rico1304]

52 minutes ago, Trumo said:

 

When a customer is switched to a Supplier of Last Resort, the tariff they are put on is guaranteed for 6 months. As the majority of this shit kicked off about 6 months ago, the SoLRs are generally only now having to decide between extending that until April or biting the bullet now. It didn't matter a great deal when it was a few thousand customers but when you are talking hundreds of thousands of customers (possibly even just over a million), all coming to this stage at pretty much the same time, it really needs some careful deliberation. After all, the SoLRs don't want to head the same way as the suppliers whose customers they've had to take on.

I’m not sure that but about the tariff for 6 months is correct.  
 

Edit: I’ve reread this and think you are confusing the changes to the Cap.  Most people going through SoLR will be moved to the standard tariff which will be the Cap (introduce a cap and everyone raises prices to it). That’s changed (as has just happened and been in the press) by Ofgem based on an algorithm taking into account loads of factors but primarily wholesale prices.  

[RJ Fan club]

Can you still take the leccy off the hook? 
 

asking for a ‘mate’

[Rico1304]

14 hours ago, RJ Fan club said:

Can you still take the leccy off the hook? 
 

asking for a ‘mate’

If you’re going to fiddle with the meters make sure you know what you’re doing. 
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-60344251