One-off fuel payment is ruled out

[Paule]

Ministers have ruled out giving consumers a one-off payment to help with fuel bills, the BBC has learned.

The government had planned to unveil a a package to alleviate soaring gas and electricity bills this week.

But Whitehall sources said the focus of ongoing talks with energy firms was now on improving energy efficiency, not cutting costs in the short term.

A government spokesman said ministers were looking at "long-term" savings.

Overheard

It had been thought that ministers were hoping to unveil a significant package of help with fuel bills, including payments of between £50 and £100 per head.

This followed reports of a conversation involving the most senior civil servant at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (DBERR) and energy companies.

The Sunday Times reported last month that Permanent Secretary Sir Brian Bender had been overheard by other passengers on a train discussing a plan to help "ordinary people" by creating "a fuel rebate for everybody on child benefit".

At the time Number 10 confirmed that discussions were ongoing but said that no decisions had been reached.

Last week Business Secretary John Hutton declared that "the era of cheap energy is over".

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said ministers were likely to defend their plan to promote energy efficiency by arguing that it will help reduce bills not just this year but in the longer term.

One source claimed that consumers would be "better off" than they would have been if given cash help.

However, those Labour MPs and activists who have argued for a windfall tax on the energy companies are likely to regard this outcome as a significant disappointment.

A DBERR spokesman told the BBC it was "important people make savings on bills for the long term and not just now".

BBC NEWS | Politics | One-off fuel payment is ruled out

[Guest]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

One of the problems facing energy customers that has been created by this government and not the energy providers is the little known about Renewable Obligations Certificates that energy companies must now buy and the costs of which they pass onto us, their customers.

All those 70 Labour MPs demanding a windfall tax would be better employed bringing down the bills at a stroke by the simple process of stopping subsidies to windfarms - and while they are at it, pass a law to make it compulsory to show the "windfarm subsidy” element separately in their bills. Don’t blame the energy companies - blame the politicians - almost all of them.

[Niklowe]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

I believe that the government were hoping to sell more ROC's to the energy companies, but have been blocked by the EU.

[Guest]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

The EU plan, as far as I have discovered is for Britain to have 25 GW capacity in offshore wind farms – attracting 1.5 times the standard ROC, on top of 14 GW of onshore capacity by 2020. With ROCs paid out at a rate of £53 per MWh, the total annual sum for British electricity consumers will amount to a staggering £6 billion – a total of £155 billion paid to wind subsidy farmers over the expected life-times of the projects (equivalant to the cost of building over 50 nuclear power plants).

Given that the entire electricity market at 2008 prices is somewhat less that £24 billion, the effect of reaching the EU's target on wind energy would be equivalent to adding 25 percent or more to the price of domestic electricity – on top of which consumers will also have to fund the building of power stations to produce electricity when the wind is not blowing, as well as an estimated £10 billion for extensions to the National Grid to enable the turbines to be connected.

Few people at the moment realise quite what is at stake, as the ROC "contribution" is not identified on consumer bills and is currently less than £400 million a year. But, as each mast is erected to disfigure the countryside, the costs will ratchet up until we are all paying this incredible sum of £6 billion a year for the privilege.

However, the real scandal of this ridiculous farce is that wind power is fraught with problems. The turbines' siting would mean that much of the national grid would have to be restructured, costing billions and because wind power is so unpredictable it needs other sources available at a moment's notice. It is generally accepted that any contribution above 10 per cent made by wind to a grid dangerously destabilises it. In fact, two years ago much of western Europe blacked out after a rush of German windpower into the continental grid forced other power stations to close down. The head of Austria's grid warned that the system was becoming so unbalanced by the "excessive" building of wind turbines that Europe would soon be "confronted with massive connector problems".

The issue is that turbines only generate on average one third of the time and back-up is needed to provide power for the remaining two thirds.

Nothing better illustrates the fatuity of windpower than the fact that Denmark, with the highest concentration of turbines in the world, must export more than 80 per cent of its wind-generated electricity to Norway, to prevent its grid being swamped when the wind is blowing, while remaining heavily reliant the rest of the time on power from Sweden and Germany.

The Danes, who decided in 2002 to build no more turbines, have learnt their lesson. We British have still to learn it. Every time we hear that over-used term "green" we should remember it has another meaning: someone who is naively foolish and dangerously gullible.

If we don`t stop this nonsense, start building atomic powered power stations and more coal fired, we may end up green, but we'll be sitting in the dark.

[Sapphire]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

This followed reports of a conversation involving the most senior civil servant at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (DBERR) and energy companies.

Take it from me (and I know for definate) that BERR have overspent their budget already and its only September and have to wait till Jan/Feb to start the next years budget. So how the hell are they going to help anyone at all ffs.

The Sunday Times reported last month that Permanent Secretary Sir Brian Bender had been overheard by other passengers on a train discussing a plan to help "ordinary people" by creating "a fuel rebate for everybody on child benefit".

So are they saying that only people with kids are entitled to stay warm ffs. Christ almighty nearly everyone is going to need help with heating bills arn't they? Not just those on Child Benefit.

It had been thought that ministers were hoping to unveil a significant package of help with fuel bills, including payments of between £50 and £100 per head.

There's about as much chance of that happenning as there is of me going out to dinner with George Clooney or having a jump with his holiness the Pope ffs.

[scoobydoo]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

There was an interesting article with similar comments recently which went as far as saying that to build the target number of wind turbines ia not only impossible but in the writers opinion one of the biggest mistakes the uk will ever make.

On holiday last week saw local paper indicating "bribes " being paid to the community in return for approving a huge area of wind turbines in Devon.

[Niklowe]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

Can you imagine the future maintenance costs of the offshore turbines? I spend my life at sea as an engineer, and have a permanent battle against saltwater corrosion. I will guarantee that within ten years, 50% of those turbines will have ceased to operate. The cost to renew the shaft bearings alone will be enormous. If the electrical windings go, then they might as well dynamite them. I bet this government has been duped over the maintenance costs of these hideous, inefficient piles of junk.

[scoobydoo]

Re: One-off fuel payment is ruled out

yes I wonder if there ae few funny handshakes or backhanders going on somewhere as all I have read seems to be arguments against them.

Apparently there is a wave power design called a cobra - which is much more effecient.