Great British Energy - How will it work??

[ellroy]

Cupid-stunt said:

It’s going to be a st show.
How a govt can operate in an established market that changes and has up to 8760 prices in a year is a car crash waiting to happen.

With recent spot prices seeing the greatest volatility I’ve seen in 25+ yrs working in the energy sector, with more Renewables coming on that will increase this, and with consumers not fully flexing with demand, to think an inept govt with their bloatware can run a successful business is futile.

This.

It’s going to be an utter debacle that costs a fortune.

[macron]

alangla said:

There actually was a publicly owned & government backed energy supplier up here for a while, but it was a total stshow (I remember having to repeatedly chase them for bills & I got the feeling meter readings were being copy/pasted from the online form into Excel, especially when you got an acknowledgment from a different real person several days after submitting each one). It eventually went bust and was swallowed up by Utilita.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Power

If you’re wondering how I became a customer, a comparison site told me they were cheapest for my consumption profile.

Edited by alangla on Thursday 16th May 12:07

More than one council thought they could buy low sell high.

Bristol city council has never admitted just how much is owed and how much council tax will need to be paid to cover the Bristol Energy losses, at least £52M has been identified, it's probably a st load more than that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Energy

[Newc]

CraigyMc said:

Scotty2 said:

Sounds like market interference that won't go well...

Energy price caps are market interference, without which how would things have gone during the price spikes of 2022?

The point of renationalising power (along with other monopolistic industries such as rail, or water) is that market forces aren't working for consumers or for the state.

What's been happening in all 3 examples is that privatisation has provided less reliable, lower quality service with undue costs being carried by the state and profits (in the years available, even if it means taking on debt) going to the investors.

In all 3, failures are carried by the state because they can't just stop service.

Water definitely didn't take on debt to pay dividends. Never looked at the others so can't say for sure but in general pitching your bankers with "I'd like a loan please so I can take your money and give it to these other people" doesn't go well.

How do you envisage a state-run Nat Power Biz would have reacted any differently in the face of the 2022 wholesale market spikes ?

[glazbagun]

Newc said:

Water definitely didn't take on debt to pay dividends. Never looked at the others so can't say for sure but in general pitching your bankers with "I'd like a loan please so I can take your money and give it to these other people" doesn't go well.

That's basically what Macquarie is accused of doing. Used Thames to raise debt & then bumped up the dividend before getting out in 2017.

[CraigyMc]

glazbagun said:

Newc said:

Water definitely didn't take on debt to pay dividends. Never looked at the others so can't say for sure but in general pitching your bankers with "I'd like a loan please so I can take your money and give it to these other people" doesn't go well.

That's basically what Macquarie is accused of doing. Used Thames to raise debt & then bumped up the dividend before getting out in 2017.

This.
Eon started it, then Macquarie did it about 3x more.

[Timothy Bucktu]

BoRED S2upid said:

Gecko1978 said:

I suspect as it would be state run with lots of union control it would be costly to run and assuming other competitors in the market would loose market share and fail unless we are saying no private energy in which case a monopoly an cost of energy would go up

Sounds about right.

I doubt it'll ever happen...I mean it can't really. But if it did happen, it's a pretty accurate synopsis of what would happen. Probably.

[Slowboathome]

I hope it happens.

Because then we'll see which of the lefties really live their values - by paying more for their energy than they could for the private sector alternative.

[Gecko1978]

Slowboathome said:

I hope it happens.

Because then we'll see which of the lefties really live their values - by paying more for their energy than they could for the private sector alternative.

I could see all police, fire, hospitals, prisons, schools, councils, civil servants all having to buy energy from the state supplier. Pushing up costs of providing services

[CraigyMc]

CraigyMc said:

glazbagun said:

Newc said:

Water definitely didn't take on debt to pay dividends. Never looked at the others so can't say for sure but in general pitching your bankers with "I'd like a loan please so I can take your money and give it to these other people" doesn't go well.

That's basically what Macquarie is accused of doing. Used Thames to raise debt & then bumped up the dividend before getting out in 2017.

This.
Eon started it, then Macquarie did it about 3x more.

Coincidentally... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw4478wnjdpo

[We are all Brexiteers now]

alangla said:

There actually was a publicly owned & government backed energy supplier up here for a while, but it was a total stshow (I remember having to repeatedly chase them for bills & I got the feeling meter readings were being copy/pasted from the online form into Excel, especially when you got an acknowledgment from a different real person several days after submitting each one). It eventually went bust and was swallowed up by Utilita.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Power

If you’re wondering how I became a customer, a comparison site told me they were cheapest for my consumption profile.

Edited by alangla on Thursday 16th May 12:07

I had the same experience with Ebico. Really, really bad.

[Electro1980]

Gecko1978 said:

Slowboathome said:

I hope it happens.

Because then we'll see which of the lefties really live their values - by paying more for their energy than they could for the private sector alternative.

I could see all police, fire, hospitals, prisons, schools, councils, civil servants all having to buy energy from the state supplier. Pushing up costs of providing services

What’s your evidence for this, other than “lefty bad! Public sector bad!!!!!” Because energy prices have gone up since privatisation, as have profits, to companies including to EDF… the ownership of which seems to be something that has passed many by…

I’m guessing it’s nothing more than ideology.

Edited by Electro1980 on Monday 20th May 10:25

[anonymoususer]

Scotty2 said:

As someone who has worked in the energy sector for over 30 years, I have not seen any detail on exactly how GBE would work?
As announced by the SNP. they were going to have a "National" energy company that never happened, Nottingham's "Robin Hood" energy went under with losses of millions.
I just can't see how it is (not) going to work?
The energy market is pretty complex, even more so now so many smaller generators and renewables are in the picture. People don't seem to accept that we need quick response units for when there is no sun or wind and that these units would need to be on standby so need to be maintained for when needed.

How will it work?

It won't and will be likely quietly forgotten about

[Slowboathome]

Electro1980 said:

Gecko1978 said:

Slowboathome said:

I hope it happens.

Because then we'll see which of the lefties really live their values - by paying more for their energy than they could for the private sector alternative.

I could see all police, fire, hospitals, prisons, schools, councils, civil servants all having to buy energy from the state supplier. Pushing up costs of providing services

What’s your evidence for this, other than “lefty bad! Public sector bad!!!!!” Because energy prices have gone up since privatisation, as have profits, to companies including to EDF… the ownership of which seems to be something that has passed many by…

I’m guessing it’s nothing more than ideology.

Edited by Electro1980 on Monday 20th May 10:25

I know!! Infuriating isn't it???!!!!

[pghstochaj]

Timothy Bucktu said:

BoRED S2upid said:

Gecko1978 said:

I suspect as it would be state run with lots of union control it would be costly to run and assuming other competitors in the market would loose market share and fail unless we are saying no private energy in which case a monopoly an cost of energy would go up

Sounds about right.

I doubt it'll ever happen...I mean it can't really. But if it did happen, it's a pretty accurate synopsis of what would happen. Probably.

Once again, this looks to be just replicating GIB/GIG, so it has already happened previously and many would argue that GIB went well.

I work for (foreign) investment funds building power stations. It would be much more cost effective if the money came from the government (at lower interest rates) and with an opportunity for dividends to remain within the UK.

[dundarach]

It'll be a pointless buying quango thingy, which will cost a fortune to set up and offer people the opportunity to bulk buy through a central contract.

Suppliers will offer cheaper tariffs to entice people to join, which will be similar to those offered all the time to new customers.

People will save small amounts, that when aggregated will appear to show that customers are saving millions by using a branded bulk scheme that simply resells existing stuff.

[pghstochaj]

dundarach said:

It'll be a pointless buying quango thingy, which will cost a fortune to set up and offer people the opportunity to bulk buy through a central contract.

Suppliers will offer cheaper tariffs to entice people to join, which will be similar to those offered all the time to new customers.

People will save small amounts, that when aggregated will appear to show that customers are saving millions by using a branded bulk scheme that simply resells existing stuff.

Are you sure? I don't think it's anything to do with becoming an energy wholesaler or retailer as you suggest above, but an investment fund into generating and transmission assets. Where have you found out otherwise?

[Scotty2]

Well Sir Keir in Scotland announcing HQ of GBE will be in Scotland creating jobs.
Who is going to pay the wages?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrre16k21no

[S600BSB]

Scotty2 said:

Well Sir Keir in Scotland announcing HQ of GBE will be in Scotland creating jobs.
Who is going to pay the wages?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrre16k21no

The oil and gas firms - worth reading the article you linked.

[Hants PHer]

Scotty2 said:

Well Sir Keir in Scotland announcing HQ of GBE will be in Scotland creating jobs.
Who is going to pay the wages?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrre16k21no

GBE will be funded by windfall taxes on North Sea oil & gas. In 2023/24 the total tax take (corporation, petroleum revenue tax and the windfall tax levy) was forecast at £6.2 billion. That's forecast to fall to £2 billion p.a. by 2028/29. That's with a total tax rate of 75%. AIUI Labour's proposal is to raise the total tax rate to 78%.

Are they saying that the extra 3% will generate an extra £8.3 billion over five years? That just doesn't add up. If they're counting the existing windfall receipts, then what will they cut if they divert windfall taxes into GBE?

And, of course, there's the small matter of the jobs that will be lost by not approving new extraction licences. Labour's policy will provide jobs for oil companies in (among others) the Middle East, the USA and Africa instead of in Scotland. Then that oil and gas will have to be imported expensively rather than using own own fossil fuel treasure. It's madness. Even the SNP loons can see that!

[Ronstein]

The BBC did an analysis of this on Breakfast this morning and confirmed it's based on a combination of wild assumptions and smoke and mirrors.