e-petition - renewable friendly energy pricing.

[mick]

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/energy-pricing/

This requests that the structure of domestic energy tariffs be reversed so that first (essential use) are the cheap ones and the subsequent units are the expensive ones - in order to be fairer and to encourage energy saving / discourage profligate use.

Would make renewables much more cost effective too - an sort of indirect subsidy to advance our need for carbon reduction, etc.

Be good if lots signed it so please pass the link on if you can.

Mick.

[CeeBee]

I'm trying, without much success, to think whether (and why) this scheme might be good/bad/unworkable/unenforceable/whatever. And has the PM got any power to say what pricing schemes energy companies come up with? Thought the idea was that if you didn't like a scheme, you leave that supplier and find another (mind you, if they're all about the same...).

We all know why the energy companies structure their 'expensive initial units' plans - to give a similar effect to a standing charge, but without one. So cheaper initial units would be like a negative standing charge, i.e. they pay you for being a customer? Or the first units being free, and then you start to pay?

Anyway, I'm already with http://www.ebico.co.uk/ so all units are the same price (and no standing charge).

[rhys]

Done there are now 19 of us!!! Not quite in the Clarkson for PM league, and they took no notice of that either.

[KenB]

Mick,

This is a good idea, and well in line with thinking by leading environmentalists such as George Monbiot and David Strahan.

Allowing every consumer their own personal energy (carbon) allowance at reasonable cost, and after that has been spent on fuel and energy, extra credits can be bought at much higher cost.

It would encourage natural rationing, and put an end to a system that has been designed to extract a minimum tariff from all customers regardless of their overall usage.



Ken

[CeeBee]

Allowing every consumer their own personal energy (carbon) allowance at reasonable cost, and after that has been spent on fuel and energy, extra credits can be bought at much higher cost...

Now that's more like it. It's got to be 'every consumer' as you say, and not just 'every elec/gas account', otherwise you'd get all kinds of anomalies. And where would we want the extra dosh for excess use to end up? Presumably not with the utility companies.

[marktime]

I don't normally go in for these on-line petitions, they can just become on-line popularity contests between pressure groups, I became aware of one where a flying club was opposing a wind farm and it simply came down to which on-line community could raise the most support from the WWW when it was really a local issue.

Anyway this looks like a very sensible proposition and it now has one more signature.

MarkTime

[martin]

and mine too! - I'm quite sure the second blacked out van that's drawn up down the road, and the helicopter in permanent geostationery orbit over the place are entirely unconnected............

[damnager]

Make that 22 of us now. Brilliant idea but the companies will never do it as they need to ensure a money up front business model and not at the end. It makes people like us more inclined to do our best for the environment AND will make others look at our efforts in a different light when we are paying 25-50% less than they are for their energy.

Keith

[rhys]

and mine too! - I'm quite sure the second blacked out van that's drawn up down the road, and the helicopter in permanent geostationery orbit over the place are entirely unconnected............

Don't wory they are still rounding up the Clarkson for PM petrolheads.

[djh]

I think the 100% carbon tax refund seems a good idea. 

The government collects a tax on carbon emissions/fuels. This seems pretty easy to implement since large quantities of hydrocarbons are easy to spot.

They then add up the total and divide it by the number of people in the country and give that amount to each person. So they give back the whole tax. This bit sounds easy but I suspect there are quite a few wrinkles to be thought about to avoid fraud and other exploitation. But it should be doable.

And that's it. Everybody who cares about the climate and everybody who cares about their money will cut down on consumption. Average Joe who does nothing sees extra cash coming in every month which somehow leaves him the same amount of dosh to buy beer each week.

Then ramp up the tax rate until the desired outcome is achieved. 

What can go wrong?

[Ivan]

increasing the taxes is the easy part. Giving it back.....hmmm.....we'll need to run a white paper and a few consultations with the think tank about that bit. We'll get back to you in 4 years time

[djh]

Hmm, I seem to have killed the thread    Let's try again ...

Allowing every consumer their own personal energy (carbon) allowance at reasonable cost, and after that has been spent on fuel and energy, extra credits can be bought at much higher cost.

Absolutely agree with the first part. Suggest that the cost is zero if the allowance is 'reasonable' And 'consumer' needs to be defined to exclude energy tourists.

But the key bit is this "extra credits can be bought at much higher cost". Specifically, the only way to buy extra credits should be from somebody else who has them. The market can settle the price.

But buying a credit from somebody who subsequently dies through 'fuel starvation' should be a criminal offence punishable by life!

[longstroke]

Have joined the petition....now just wondering when the newspaper headline will come out 'MI5 leave cd of downing street petition signatories on train'  ?