Electricity and gas prices going up - what will you do?

[KidKruger]

Why gamble ?

Just switch off what we?re not using.

womanofdulwich Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well as you are all so informed.Does leaving

> things like the and laptops on standby really use

> a lot of energy?

> A lot of energy wasted in my household arguing

> this

O

[womanofdulwich]

I can assure you I switch EVERYTHING off.Its others that don't. Then I have a heated debate. What about phone and bike light chargers everywhere?

[KidKruger]

Sorry wasn?t questioning or accusing, it was more just taking it down to a basic level to delete the unknowns.

[Seabag]

I find a heated debate warms things up nicely

Then I sit in a tin bath set over two tea light candles and turn everything else in the house off

[womanofdulwich]

I prefer whisky

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> when you don't have enough

> baseload generation...it leaves you vulnerable to things

> like spikes in gas prices and failure of

> interconnectors.

>

> So it has everything to do with reckless

> acceleration of changes in the generation mix.

You're mixing capacity and fuel mix issues here. The price rises are not to do with capacity - we have plenty of capacity.

Neither would retaining dirty coal have been the answer - you know that the price of thermal coal has gone up 300% since September 2020 (from USD 48 per tonne to USD 177 per tonne)? Coal prices are 50% higher today than they have been at any time in the last decade.

[TheCat]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > when you don't have enough

> > baseload generation...it leaves you vulnerable

> to things

> > like spikes in gas prices and failure of

> > interconnectors.

> >

> > So it has everything to do with reckless

> > acceleration of changes in the generation mix.

>

> You're (delibwrately?) confusing capacity and fuel

> mix issues here.

Ummm....no...I dont meant to be rude, but i think you're the one who's confused.

Go look up baseload (typically coal and nuclear, sometimes nat gas - could be hydro too) and peak load (often nat gas and intermittent sources, like most renewables) generation - and see why the type of generation is critical to this whole discussion. Not all 'capacity' is created equal.

You cant just replace X Gw of baseload capacity with XGw of intermittent capacity and expect to have a secure/stable energy system, which isn't vulnerable to the things we've mentioned. Until such time as efficient and cost effective battery storage becomes a reality at least.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

The consumer price rises have nothing to do with capacity (baseload or aggregate) and nothing to do with increasing renewable capacity.

They are a result of high global energy prices. Gas prices were rising months before the not-windy month, which has had only an incremental impact. Coal prices have also risen sharply for reasons that are obvious. We could have double the present baseload capacity but it wouldn't make gas or coal any cheaper for power generating companies.

More nuclear power plants would insulate us from gas and coal price rises but the failure to maintain and expand atomic energy is not a result of the introduction of renewables - it's a total failure of government to articulate a sensible policy to the market. More renewable capacity would also dampen the impact of global fuel prices - but of course their output varies in this country.

[TheCat]

No. The rising gas prices don't indeed have anything to do with capacity or generation mix.

But the UK's reliance on Nat gas peak load style generation (as a result of closure of base load and replacement with intermittent renewable capacity) means that the whole system is vulnerable to Nat gas price rises. The cost of Nat gas electricity generation is also far more sensitive to the price of gas, than coal fired generation is to the cost of coal, or nuclear to the cost of U308. So the increases in the cost of coal and uranium we've seen recently would not flow through to the cost of generation in the same way as they have for Nat gas.

So, you are quite correct that the generation mix hasn't created a gas price spike. And that is in no way what I've said. But the mix of generation that we have has created a system VULNERABLE to that gas price rise..becuase we have low proportion of coal or nuclear baseload, which would not have seen the same rise in cost of generation as we have seen with Nat gas, despite the increase in cost of those generation fuels.

[teddyboy23]

Connect to my neighbours

[jazzer]

It has been announced that the energy supplier AVRO have gone bust.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But the UK's reliance on Nat gas peak load style

> generation (as a result of closure of base load

> and replacement with intermittent renewable

> capacity) means that the whole system is

> vulnerable to Nat gas price rises. The cost of Nat

> gas electricity generation is also far more

> sensitive to the price of gas, than coal fired

> generation is to the cost of coal, or nuclear to

> the cost of U308. So the increases in the cost of

> coal and uranium we've seen recently would not

> flow through to the cost of generation in the same

> way as they have for Nat gas...we have low

> proportion of coal or nuclear baseload, which

> would not have seen the same rise in cost of

> generation as we have seen with Nat gas, despite

> the increase in cost of those generation fuels.

What you're ignoring is the cross-elasticity of global demand between coal and gas (even when it's dampened in the UK because there are so few coal fired power plants). Having a whole bunch of coal fired power plants lying around wouldn't have meant the UK could switch from gas to coal in response to gas getting more expensive - because everyone else in the world will have had the same idea, driving up the cost of coal. And that is exactly what has happened in reality, with the price of coal going up 300% in the past year.

Your argument doesn't work in theory and doesn't work in practice.

https://www.ft.com/content/b696720f-fed4-4f4b-acbd-302f8935c73e

https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/coal

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

teddyboy23 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Connect to my neighbours

This winter, I shall mostly be burning wet sticks foraged from Dulwich Wood and spare tyres stolen off the tailgates of luxury SUVs.

[TheCat]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > But the UK's reliance on Nat gas peak load

> style

> > generation (as a result of closure of base load

> > and replacement with intermittent renewable

> > capacity) means that the whole system is

> > vulnerable to Nat gas price rises. The cost of

> Nat

> > gas electricity generation is also far more

> > sensitive to the price of gas, than coal fired

> > generation is to the cost of coal, or nuclear

> to

> > the cost of U308. So the increases in the cost

> of

> > coal and uranium we've seen recently would not

> > flow through to the cost of generation in the

> same

> > way as they have for Nat gas...we have low

> > proportion of coal or nuclear baseload, which

> > would not have seen the same rise in cost of

> > generation as we have seen with Nat gas,

> despite

> > the increase in cost of those generation fuels.

>

> What you're ignoring is the cross-elasticity of

> global demand between coal and gas (even when it's

> dampened in the UK because there are so few coal

> fired power plants). Having a whole bunch of coal

> fired power plants lying around wouldn't have

> meant the UK could switch from gas to coal in

> response to gas getting more expensive - because

> everyone else in the world will have had the same

> idea, driving up the cost of coal. And that is

> exactly what has happened in reality, with the

> price of coal going up 300% in the past year.

>

> Your argument doesn't work in theory and doesn't

> work in practice.

>

> https://www.ft.com/content/b696720f-fed4-4f4b-acbd

> -302f8935c73e

> https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/coal

Haha. Brilliant. Okay, I have to stop my side of this discussion.

You have a little bit of info, and think you know a lot.

Look...im going to sound like a dick now, but hey ho....while you post links to articles from the Bbc, the ft etc....Im the guy that those media outlets call for an expert comment to write those articles. I don't want to betray my identity, but I've been quoted for years by those outlets on anything related to mining or energy commodities. Doesn't mean I'm right in what I say..but means I know a bit about what I'm talking about...

So to have someone googling articles and telling me argument doesn't stack up is more than a little amusing.

I can tell you objectively that what you are saying makes zero sense.

[Sephiroth]

BBC and co spend a lot of time interviewing and quoting Patrick Minford too.

He also thinks he knows a lot. It just happens to be the opposite of what majority of his peers think

[TheCat]

How 'shocking' that you take an opportunity to have a dig even though this hasn't been a discussion you've been a part of....

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

TheCat Wrote:

> > > Im the guy that those media

> outlets call for an expert comment to write those

> articles...Doesn't mean I'm right in what I say..

Well, quite.

[Sephiroth]

I think I have been part of the conversation. Back on previous page.

But yeah I have kind of left people too it as they seem happy to ignore the elephant in the room and operate on a parochial level.

But you can?t big yourself up like you did and not expect some blowback, surely?

[ianr]

> cost of U308.

This is the odd case where, when people say and hear O in a digit string, it really is letter O meant, as in triuranium octoxide, rather than digit 0. Conventional scientific form U3O8.

Do many who know still get it wrong in writing? My first thought was that it was a typo for an isotope number.

[malumbu]

Still felt happier when the energy sector was run by the state. So strange that the state operator in France (EDF) is providing much of our energy both as a generator and retailer. Such a bad decision by Thatch to turn her back on nuclear (big supporter of nuclear in 87, in 89 announced we were a country of clean energy, we were a country of gas - so little of this in our history books but I was there as the time.

And after 35 years of telling us that we must have competition, shop around for the best deal as this would lead to more efficient supply of utilities, now many of us have the issue that our supplier has or will go bust (any views on Zebra energy?).

[womanofdulwich]

Yes, my supplier went under today, I swapped in April, to a smaller supplier with less overheads....

[Alan Medic]

I recently changed from Shell to Igloo and they were mentioned in dispatches yesterday. Something about restructuring consultants, whatever that means. I looked at their last filed accounts in 2020 and they made a loss of ?6M I think.

I decided to check the accounts of another one which is getting a lot of airtime recently, Octopus. In the same period it made a loss of ?55M.

What to make of that, I do not know.

[Spartacus]

I wonder what would be happening if privatisation of the energy sector didn't occur and we were all on British gas and London Electricity as there was no option or competition by other companies.

Would the government be forced to bail them both out ?

[jazzer]

Probably we'd be on a set tariff and with no choice. That isn't to say that the current situation of providers going bust is right either.

For anyone's energy provider who has gone bust and has/is being moved to another (likely much larger provider) on a much increased rate, I feel for you. I can only suggest let Energy UK do the switch which they are required to do and once complete take a look at that energy companies tariffs and see if their is a more suitable tariff or look at the market and see where you can switch to.

[redpost]

My view:

This is just another failure by this governement. The job of government is to think strategically and prepare for black swan events pandemics, shortages, wars etc

This could have all been avoided if OFGEM wasn't asleep at the wheel and stress tested energy providers just like they do banks e.g. if wholesale gas prices double, who will still be in business?

The energy providers going bust now have made a nice tidy profit over the last few years when the wholesale prices were nice and stable, yet with inadequate hedging they've come a cropper and the only outcone is socialising the costs of their foolhardiness. No moral hazard for the directors, free to start up again when the market is back to normal.

With increased hedging, the rough gas storage facility and others could have possibly have paid for themselves instead of needing government subsidy (which of course they refused).