Energy Prices

[Todd_is_God]

20 minutes ago, strichener said:

I didn't say that it had nothing to do with it but it is not the cause.

Anyway, I don't think I'll be taking my technical analysis from someone who doesn't know the difference between oil and gas - Norstream is a gas pipeline.

Fine, a typo, it reduced the amount of gas available. The point remains the same.

What is the cause then? What has caused the wholesale price of gas to skyrocket if not the shortage it coincides with?

[Todd_is_God]

24 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I'd also add that for those who don't want or don't have a smart meter, there are electricity monitors you can buy reasonably cheaply online which might help people work out what devices are costing them to use.

True, though I suspect it will be gas usage that will be catching people out more than anything else. Running a 28kW boiler when you are used to gas being around 3-4p per kWh would cost 84p-£1.12 per hour. Now, with the unit price at 15.13p that same hour will cost £4.24 from Oct-Dec and £5.43 from Jan-Mar

With electricity, the average user will see 8kWh per day go from £1.52 to £4.30 and then £5.87.

The electricity increase is annoying, but the gas could easily get out of hand when the heating goes on.

[Gaz]

1 hour ago, superbigal said:

Prioritise for some. 

Seriously I couldn't believe the amount of folk I heard moaning about energy price rises, while sunning in a 5 Star AI resort in Lara during the school holidays.

These people (I include myself) should not be subsidised with £400 handouts, while loads of people slip into real fuel poverty.

Obviously yours is an extreme example, but I really dislike the "priorities" narrative.

A lot of narrative is about getting rid of luxuries completely. There seems to be folk who genuinely believe people should just go to work, run one basic car, eat basic food, and have no treats whatsoever.

What's the point of living like that?

If two folk working full time can't afford to have an odd luxury here and there that is fundamentally wrong and no amount of folk wailing about "BUT BUT NETFLIX" will change my mind on that.

[Left Back]

7 minutes ago, Gaz said:

Obviously yours is an extreme example, but I really dislike the "priorities" narrative.

A lot of narrative is about getting rid of luxuries completely. There seems to be folk who genuinely believe people should just go to work, run one basic car, eat basic food, and have no treats whatsoever.

What's the point of living like that?

If two folk working full time can't afford to have an odd luxury here and there that is fundamentally wrong and no amount of folk wailing about "BUT BUT NETFLIX" will change my mind on that.

He didn't say priorities.  He said prioritise, as in get help to the people that most need it.

[Bairnardo]

Obviously yours is an extreme example, but I really dislike the "priorities" narrative.
A lot of narrative is about getting rid of luxuries completely. There seems to be folk who genuinely believe people should just go to work, run one basic car, eat basic food, and have no treats whatsoever.
What's the point of living like that?
If two folk working full time can't afford to have an odd luxury here and there that is fundamentally wrong and no amount of folk wailing about "BUT BUT NETFLIX" will change my mind on that.

Its really the same as if you complain a bit and get angrily hit with SOME FOLK ARE REALLY STRUGGLING!!!!!

You can be both totally aware that others have it worse than you, and still have a grumble about having to cut your own cloth so that you can fund relentlessly obscene profits for energy companies....

[Todd_is_God]

4 minutes ago, Left Back said:

He didn't say priorities.  He said prioritise, as in get help to the people that most need it.

I don't think that's what he meant, actually. Given what he was responding to it's fair to assume he meant individuals prioritising their expenditure.

 

1 minute ago, Bairnardo said:

Its really the same as if you complain a bit and get angrily hit with SOME FOLK ARE REALLY STRUGGLING!!!!!

You can be both totally aware that others have it worse than you, and still have a grumble about having to cut your own cloth so that you can fund relentlessly obscene profits for energy companies....

This. The bigger picture is not who can or cannot afford their energy bills, it's what those who can afford them have left after doing so to spend in order to stimulate the economy. I suspect that those most in need will get additional support, but it makes little economic sense to allow everyone who can find the means to pay the market rate do so.

No business-centric support will make any difference if few people can afford to use them. And on top of that the additional support needs to be paid for somehow, so that requires money being spent to generate taxes.

"You can't complain about energy prices in 2023 because you could afford a holiday in 2022 (that could have been booked and paid for as far back as 2019)" is an utterly nonsense argument.

[Bairnardo]

This. The bigger picture is not who can or cannot afford their energy bills, it's what those who can afford them have left after doing so to spend in order to stimulate the economy. I suspect that those most in need will get additional support, but it makes little economic sense to allow everyone who can find the means to pay the market rate do so.
No business-centric support will make any difference if few people can afford to use them. And on top of that the additional support needs to be paid for somehow, so that requires money being spent to generate taxes.
"You can't complain about energy prices in 2023 because you could afford a holiday in 2022 (that could have been booked and paid for as far back as 2019)" is an utterly nonsense argument.

Precisely. No disposable income anywhere in society is going to make things worse for the people at the bottom.

You work part time in a pub, you are struggling to make ends meet, the govt should be helping you, but if that pub goes put of business because the govt only helped you then what fucking use is that.

Thats our economy in microcosm. Consumer led. No consumers left is a far worse potential death spiral than people asking for a wage lift.

[Gaz]

39 minutes ago, Left Back said:

He didn't say priorities.  He said prioritise, as in get help to the people that most need it.

He's literally talking about people going to a five-star resort complaining about heating bills. I specifically said that was an extreme example but the narrative that everyone with a Netflix subscription is utterly feckless when it comes to money and deserves to be destitute because of PRiORitIEs isn't a massive leap to make.

[Gaz]

I mean, woe betide folk who spunk out £12 a month on a subscription to Netflix so that they actually have something to watch on the telly as they stay in the hoose night after night, day after day.

[Bairnardo]

I mean, woe betide folk who spunk out £12 a month on a subscription to Netflix so that they actually have something to watch on the telly as they stay in the hoose night after night, day after day.

Reach out from your woollen blanket only to play Connect 4 by the last remnants of the night's 1 candle, or you are a bourgeois w****r IMO.

[Left Back]

25 minutes ago, Gaz said:

He's literally talking about people going to a five-star resort complaining about heating bills. I specifically said that was an extreme example but the narrative that everyone with a Netflix subscription is utterly feckless when it comes to money and deserves to be destitute because of PRiORitIEs isn't a massive leap to make.

He's literally talking about the quote below

"These people (I include myself) should not be subsidised with £400 handouts, while loads of people slip into real fuel poverty" as in prioritise those people.

[Todd_is_God]

7 minutes ago, Left Back said:

He's literally talking about the quote below

"These people (I include myself) should not be subsidised with £400 handouts, while loads of people slip into real fuel poverty" as in prioritise those people.

I really don't think he was. I think it's quite clear in relation to Oaksoft's question that he feels people should prioritise expenditure to cope with the cost increase. In this particular example, these people should be prioritising their energy bills instead of a nice holiday, and also not grumble because at least they can afford the increase. He's not talking about the UK Gov prioritising low income families at this point.

And, like has been pointed out already, just because someone is on holiday in 2022 (that could have been paid for before Covid), is really is no reason to decide that they can either afford or can't complain about the projected increase in energy prices in 2023.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Todd_is_God

[superbigal]

FFS to elaborate on my tiny post you are arguing over.

I do not believe "myself" (I won't categorise everyone) who can afford a 5 star holiday should be receiving state handouts for Fuel price increases.

Govt should direct all the help they can muster to where it is really required.

Those that are contemplating turning the hot tub down by 2 degrees no special sympathy.

But yes I am still annoyed at how the market operates and can have a moan like us all.

Particularly that in Scotland the requirements for Gas to generate electricity are virtually Zero.

People forget before Green Levies we used to pay an extra premium to get "Hydro Electricity"  from the company that is now OVO owned but formally Scottish Hydro Electric.

Edited August 17, 2022 by superbigal

[The Minertaur]

So I've finally managed to get a gas quote for the new house I've moved into.  Gas is either gonna be around £160 a month on the variable rate of be £340/month for a fixed term of 1 year.  Grim.

Electricity I'm still to get an actual quote for which is infuriating.  Was on hold for ages with SSE, gave up and tried a live chat.  47th in the queue  

[strichener]

2 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

Fine, a typo, it reduced the amount of gas available. The point remains the same.

What is the cause then? What has caused the wholesale price of gas to skyrocket if not the shortage it coincides with?

It wasn't a typo though, it completely mixed up two entirely different energy sources.

I think I have already stated on multiple posts in this thread what is causing the massively disproportionate increase in cost. 

I note that you ignored my post regarding price predictions.  In all your posts blaming geopolitical activities you have never once looked at the actual market.  EEX is one of the largest energy exchanges in the world and has seen volumes go through the roof.  How does this stack up with your insinuation that Russia and COVID are responsible?

Quote

The EEX Natural Gas Derivatives markets grew more than five times in comparison to July 2021 to reach 351.6 TWh. Trading on the German THE (85.6 TWh), the French PEG (27.9 TWh), the Spanish PVB hub (7.4 TWh) and the Belgian ZTP hub (13.5 TWh) resulted in new monthly records.

Just out of curiosity do you happen to know how Germany's gas storage for winter is going at the moment with the lack of gas in the market?

[Todd_is_God]

1 minute ago, strichener said:

It wasn't a typo though, it completely mixed up two entirely different energy sources.

It was a typo. It was (or at least should have been) clear that I was talking about a gas pipeline.

 

2 minutes ago, strichener said:

EEX is one of the largest energy exchanges in the world and has seen volumes go through the roof.  How does this stack up with your insinuation that Russia and COVID are responsible?

How does it not? Scarcity of a commodity will always lead to an increase in sale price of said commodity. Plus, a greater volume of transactions taking place via EEX is not proof of the total volume of gas available not reducing

"FRANKFURT, April 13 (Reuters) - Volumes of EEX's flagship power and gas futures products rose sharply in the first quarter of 2022, the European Energy Exchange said on Wednesday, as operators hedged their positions amid a surge in market volatility due to the Ukraine crisis.

EEX chief Peter Reitz noted Russia's invasion of Ukraine had raised concerns about European energy security and drove operators to the exchange, as they sought to move away from uncleared over-the-counter markets to reduce counterparty risks and save money.

The exchange's clearing house functions means it acts as an intermediary between buyers and sellers, saving those market participants from having to validate and complete their trades - which Reitz said had increased appeal in reducing risk."

8 minutes ago, strichener said:

Just out of curiosity do you happen to know how Germany's gas storage for winter is going at the moment with the lack of gas in the market?

About 66% capacity a few weeks ago. They are also heavily reliant on maintaining increased LPG imports currently to get through winter because, wait for it, the Nord Stream Gas pipeline is currently only supplying 20% of the volume it can.

"The War in Ukraine isn't driving the increase in gas costs" is an incredible statement. That you think the volume of gas available hasn't decreased either is amazing.

[superbigal]

22 minutes ago, strichener said:

It wasn't a typo though, it completely mixed up two entirely different energy sources.

I think I have already stated on multiple posts in this thread what is causing the massively disproportionate increase in cost. 

I note that you ignored my post regarding price predictions.  In all your posts blaming geopolitical activities you have never once looked at the actual market.  EEX is one of the largest energy exchanges in the world and has seen volumes go through the roof.  How does this stack up with your insinuation that Russia and COVID are responsible?

Just out of curiosity do you happen to know how Germany's gas storage for winter is going at the moment with the lack of gas in the market?

Yes Germany is doing very well for itself.  Target for capacity recently 31st August of 75% well exceeded already. 

Even if the Russians cut off all supply they will have plenty reserves through to the 2nd quarter of 2023.

Edited August 17, 2022 by superbigal

[Todd_is_God]

12 minutes ago, superbigal said:

Yes Germany is doing very well for itself.  Target for capacity recently 31st August of 75% well exceeded already. 

Even if the Russians cut off all supply they will have plenty reserves through to the 2nd quarter of 2023.

Aye, smashing it right enough...

"Germany’s gas storage levels could reach 90 percent by 1 November, even under the scenario where flows from Russia through the crucial Nord Stream pipeline remain curbed, the association of gas storage system operators in Germany INES told news agency dpa. The calculations are based on the assumption that liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports remain high and gas transport through the Nord Stream 1 Baltic Sea pipeline continues at only 20 percent of its maximum capacity. If supply through the pipeline were to halt fully, the situation would have to be further assessed, said INES head Sebastian Bleschke. He said that even with storage levels above 90 percent, less gas than is usually needed would be available during winter if Nord Stream flows remain at today’s level. “The system will then only be balanced by a reduction in demand,” said Bleschke."

They've also introduced a €500 gas levy because they are doing very well for themselves...

[die hard doonhamer]

50 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

In my case, if my calculations are correct based on the projected increase in October, I can run one 1.5kW oil heater in each of two rooms for about 2.5 hours for a similar price to having the GCH on for an hour.

The question then is whether those oil heaters can warm the room sufficiently for our liking within that time period AND how long it takes before the oil heaters (once switched off) cool down enough for us to need to reheat. That'll give me two values for "numbers of hours of comfortable temperature" for equivalent energy costs from each source - one for oil heaters and one for GCH. I'll know at that point which is better for me to be running.

Central heating would heat the whole house though, rather than just 2 rooms. The adjacent rooms being warmer will also slow the cooling. 

[Left Back]

25 minutes ago, die hard doonhamer said:

Central heating would heat the whole house though, rather than just 2 rooms. The adjacent rooms being warmer will also slow the cooling. 

If you wanted to do a like for like comparison you'd have to switch off the radiators in all the other rooms.  If you left them on to heat the whole house you'd be pumping heat into those rooms as well.  Agree it would slow the cooling process as you've put more heat overall into the house if you left the radiators on in the other rooms but more heat = more gas used to produce that heat.

As pointed out yesterday there's no sense here.  Assuming you heat the room to the same temperature in both scenarios it will take slightly more energy in gas to achieve that result, as gas isn't 100% efficient.  roughly 10-15% more.  Gas is however less than a third of the cost of electricity so wins hands down.