The energy crisis

[Taf]

Setting the boiler temperature for the radiators at 47c and 53c meant none of the rooms got up to 18c within 4 hours after being off all night. And that was during a cool, but not cold period. With subzero nights forecast for the next week or so, I've upped it to 61c and the rooms reach 18c within a couple of hours and stay there.

I lowered mine to 65C last week.

Its certainly running more now the temperatures have dropped.

[SnoopZ]

Bulb suggested I reduce my DD to £83 a month so I did, next month they will want it back in the 90s again most likely.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Centrica owns gas fields and part of UK's nuclear energy. Crucially it also owns British Gas to whom the supply. Centrica thus controls the entire chain for the benefit of its shareholders.

That's not good.

But they DON'T set the prices gas and electricity are bought at.

Should any profits made in Ireland or with Dyno Rod count?

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

It seems daft to me that the country gets left with the bill (and ultimately the citizens) if energy companies go bust. Certainly the supply needs to be maintained but it should be treated similarly to any other company going broke. If you are owed money then you join the line of creditors and wait your turn. If you owe money then the administrators will work out payment.
I mean if you took the risk of low bills with some company you should accept the risk and not just the benefits. Those who chose to pay more to a "stable" supplier should now not have to cover the costs of those who didn't and maybe even benefit from smaller price rises.

What a silly suggestion. If it worked like this, none of the new start ups would succeed in gaining customers and would inevitably fail- thus reducing competition and allowing the big firms to have sole control the market.

Allowing new start ups to enter the market was one of the reasons why Thatchers Government believed that privatisation would reduce costs for consumers.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

What a silly suggestion. If it worked like this, none of the new start ups would succeed in gaining customers and would inevitably fail- thus reducing competition and allowing the big firms to have sole control the market. This was one of the reasons why Thatchers Government believed that privatisation would reduce costs for consumers.

I think Tweetiepooh has made the case for nationalisation. Tbh we all now pay about the same energy price cap, so no competition and no point to privatisation. We've been nationalised by the price cap/ofgem already, but dont say that or the Tories won't like it !

[Taf]

I had been unable to find any place that could do my MOT test before it expires next week.

The garage I normally use for servicing and MOT has had so many no-shows this week that they called those due in next week. Almost half said they are taking their cars off the road due to high fuel costs, so won't be needing MOT tests or servicing.

So the boss called me and offered me the first slot next Monday! The day the MOT expires!

Fingers crossed the car passes. They will do the MOT checks before the servicing, just in case.

[Jaymoss]

£25 cold weather payment triggered for a fair bit of the UK today

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

£25 cold weather payment triggered for a fair bit of the UK today

Here's the link to check for your area.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

What a silly suggestion. If it worked like this, none of the new start ups would succeed in gaining customers and would inevitably fail- thus reducing competition and allowing the big firms to have sole control the market.

Allowing new start ups to enter the market was one of the reasons why Thatchers Government believed that privatisation would reduce costs for consumers.

And it failed. Privatise the profits and nationalise the losses. Welcome to capitalism.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Taf

I had been unable to find any place that could do my MOT test before it expires next week.

The garage I normally use for servicing and MOT has had so many no-shows this week that they called those due in next week. Almost half said they are taking their cars off the road due to high fuel costs, so won't be needing MOT tests or servicing.

So the boss called me and offered me the first slot next Monday! The day the MOT expires!

Fingers crossed the car passes. They will do the MOT checks before the servicing, just in case.

The police are very unlikely to do anything if they stop you and your MOT has expired, as long as you have a set appointment to get one.

As long as visually the car doesn’t look like a death trap of course!

You are legally allowed to travel to an MOT appointment if yours has expired.

You cannot drive or park your vehicle on the road if the MOT has run out.

You can be prosecuted if caught.

The only exceptions are to drive it:

* to or from somewhere to be repaired
* to a pre-arranged MOT test

https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot

[tweetiepooh]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

What a silly suggestion. If it worked like this, none of the new start ups would succeed in gaining customers and would inevitably fail- thus reducing competition and allowing the big firms to have sole control the market.

Allowing new start ups to enter the market was one of the reasons why Thatchers Government believed that privatisation would reduce costs for consumers.

They may have got customers who are willing to take the risk and pay less for their fuel. The risk is that you could face much bigger increases if things don't work out.
Companies could have offered a higher rate but will some sort of guarantee to buffer future rises and protect against the company folding.
If you choose to take the risk you need to be willing to face the risks too. Same with any other purchase. You can buy top end stuff knowing you will get support and good goods, or take a risk with some cheap label sticker in China from a market stall in cash. You may be OK with the cheap version, it may all be fine but you don't know and if it fails you will be out of pocket.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Sometimes it's the suppliers, of the suppliers, of the suppliers. The producers of gas, sell it to the electricity generators, who sell the electricity to the domestic suppliers.

Originally Posted by Qtx

It wouldn't surprise me if ultimately many of the companies involved are owned by one or two companies or people ultimately if you follow the cookie trail back all the way.

Originally Posted by nomadking

So what? They are still separate companies, where one is not allowed to subsidise the other.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f...10970b50ba7ce3

Shell props up UK energy supply arm with £1.2bn as prices soar

Shell has been forced to support its UK supply arm, which has more than a million customers, with £1.2 billion worth of financing amid the “unprecedented” rise in energy prices.

The FTSE 100 energy giant has extended capital and loans to its subsidiary Shell Energy to help bolster its finances after losses widened last year.

Shell has contributed £237 million so far this year and will provide a further £288 million injection next year. It also continues to provide the retail arm with a working capital loan worth £680 million.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f...10970b50ba7ce3

Loans which will have to be repaid.
Shows that the suppliers are NOT making profits.