Poll: How can Pure Planet encourage adoption of electric vehicles and support our Members who own EVs?


  • Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Hi Chris
    Great to hear you're a happy PP member!
    Welcome to the community, and thanks for posting.
    A lot of our Members agree with you, that the simple variable tariff makes sense.


    Check out this community Q&A from a few months ago, which is all about how we buy your energy.
    You'll see that we partially buy energy in advance, aka 'hedging'. So it's not that simple to work out what we think our Members will use, when.
    When we've got more smart meters in place it'll make it easier to predict. And that's when these kinds of variable night rates might start appearing. Or even hourly rates, or half-hourly.

    Nice one on getting a new Leaf. Is it the 2019 e-Plus with the 60kWh battery?
    ​(I've got the 2018 Leaf)
    Hi Marc
    I am also a very happy PP customer. The only downside is that the useage graphs in the app should be called "useless graphs" but apart from that there is so much to like about PP. My previous experiences with BG, NP, SP and a few others over the years makes PP look amazing. I could list all my reasons, but this is the wrong thread for that.

    That said, I will definitely be leaving shortly, after more than 2 blissful years with PP.

    The reason is my EV will be delivered soon. I have just had a smart EV charger installed.

    My rate with PP is around 13p and I cam get 13.5p elsewhere coupled with a MUCH cheaper overnight tariff less than half this price. Soon we will have 2 EVs so one will always need charging.

    It's a shame that PP can't/won't combine renewable electricity with an overnight tariff for EV charging. It's a huge miss.

    We will be saying goodbye in October.

    Might come back one day when PP has woken up.

    Thanks for the great service, tariff, easy meter reading submissions and accurate bills.

    - - - Updated - - -

    By the way, having done some research myself on getting a charger installed, some of your advice on this forum is misleading and inaccurate. Particularly surrounding the breaker fuse rating, the tails and the unnecessary charge PP want to levy for an isolation switch (again, unnecessary). I don't think your EV advice is up-to-date or particularly good. If PP want to encourage the adoption of EVs they need to step up their game.
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 09-08-19 at 13:42. Reason: Typo
    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Hi Chris
    Great to hear you're a happy PP member!
    Welcome to the community, and thanks for posting.
    A lot of our Members agree with you, that the simple variable tariff makes sense.


    Check out this community Q&A from a few months ago, which is all about how we buy your energy.
    You'll see that we partially buy energy in advance, aka 'hedging'. So it's not that simple to work out what we think our Members will use, when.
    When we've got more smart meters in place it'll make it easier to predict. And that's when these kinds of variable night rates might start appearing. Or even hourly rates, or half-hourly.

    Nice one on getting a new Leaf. Is it the 2019 e-Plus with the 60kWh battery?
    ​(I've got the 2018 Leaf)
    Hi Marc
    I am also a very happy PP customer. The only downside is that the useage graphs in the app should be called "useless graphs" but apart from that there is so much to like about PP. My previous experiences with BG, NP, SP and a few others over the years makes PP look amazing. I could list all my reasons, but this is the wrong thread for that.

    That said, I will definitely be leaving shortly, after more than 2 blissful years with PP.

    The reason is my EV will be delivered soon. I have just had a smart EV charger installed.

    My rate with PP is around 13p and I cam get 13.5p elsewhere coupled with a MUCH cheaper overnight tariff less than half this price. Soon we will have 2 EVs so one will always need charging.

    It's a shame that PP can't/won't combine renewable electricity with an overnight tariff for EV charging. It's a huge miss.

    We will be saying goodbye in October.

    Might come back one day when PP has woken up.

    Thanks for the great service, tariff, easy meter reading submissions and accurate bills.

    - - - Updated - - -

    By the way, having done some research myself on getting a charger installed, some of your advice on this forum is misleading and inaccurate. Particularly surrounding the breaker fuse rating, the tails and the unnecessary charge PP want to levy for an isolation switch (again, unnecessary). I don't think your EV advice is up-to-date or particularly good. If PP want to encourage the adoption of EVs they need to step up their game.
  • This is nonsense from Pure Planet. Pure planet are trying to deflect customers who own or who are ordering EVs away from energy suppliers better suited to them. They are using missleading comments and statements because they are not equipped or are unwilling to provide an EV tariff.

    Octopus, for example (there are others) have a day (or peak) tariff of only 0.59p per unit more than PP but 8.13p per unit LESS overnight when charging EVs or using a tumble dryer etc. How on earth can that not be much more cost effective than Pure Planet?! Also, Pure Planet like to quote ridiculous articles about future EV super fast charging capabilities and human behaviour. Saying things like EV drivers won't want to charge overnight! Again, missleading and ridiculous. Who would pay a high rate for superfast charging when actually being able to charge your car at home, overnight is a fraction of the cost and it's going to be sat there anyway?!
    1
  • This is nonsense from Pure Planet. Pure planet are trying to deflect customers who own or who are ordering EVs away from energy suppliers better suited to them. They are using missleading comments and statements because they are not equipped or are unwilling to provide an EV tariff.

    Octopus, for example (there are others) have a day (or peak) tariff of only 0.59p per unit more than PP but 8.13p per unit LESS overnight when charging EVs or using a tumble dryer etc. How on earth can that not be much more cost effective than Pure Planet?! Also, Pure Planet like to quote ridiculous articles about future EV super fast charging capabilities and human behaviour. Saying things like EV drivers won't want to charge overnight! Again, missleading and ridiculous. Who would pay a high rate for superfast charging when actually being able to charge your car at home, overnight is a fraction of the cost and it's going to be sat there anyway?!
  • hi bobbin2u
    I agree that there will be more cost effective options with other providers for some EV owners , which is precisely why the question " How-can-Pure-Planet-encourage-adoption-of-electric-vehicles" was asked.
    If you can show some examples of where you think PP have been misleading I'm sure PP will wish to correct them?
    Similarly of where you think PP have tried to deflect customers from making their own decisions?

    Cost is not the only metric, there are also people for whom convenience is more important.

    Also not wishing to mislead here as I can't easily check this, but I think the split at the moment is around 96-97% non-EV cars and 3 to 4% EV's, so there is a long road ahead. (pardon the pun)

    (Just opening the discussion...)

    Good luck with your new EV, keep us updated. I'd love one...

    Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    This is nonsense from Pure Planet. Pure planet are trying to deflect customers who own or who are ordering EVs away from energy suppliers better suited to them. They are using missleading comments and statements because they are not equipped or are unwilling to provide an EV tariff.

    Octopus, for example (there are others) have a day (or peak) tariff of only 0.59p per unit more than PP but 8.13p per unit LESS overnight when charging EVs or using a tumble dryer etc. How on earth can that not be much more cost effective than Pure Planet?! Also, Pure Planet like to quote ridiculous articles about future EV super fast charging capabilities and human behaviour. Saying things like EV drivers won't want to charge overnight! Again, missleading and ridiculous. Who would pay a high rate for superfast charging when actually being able to charge your car at home, overnight is a fraction of the cost and it's going to be sat there anyway?!
    1
  • hi bobbin2u
    I agree that there will be more cost effective options with other providers for some EV owners , which is precisely why the question " How-can-Pure-Planet-encourage-adoption-of-electric-vehicles" was asked.
    If you can show some examples of where you think PP have been misleading I'm sure PP will wish to correct them?
    Similarly of where you think PP have tried to deflect customers from making their own decisions?

    Cost is not the only metric, there are also people for whom convenience is more important.

    Also not wishing to mislead here as I can't easily check this, but I think the split at the moment is around 96-97% non-EV cars and 3 to 4% EV's, so there is a long road ahead. (pardon the pun)

    (Just opening the discussion...)

    Good luck with your new EV, keep us updated. I'd love one...

    Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    This is nonsense from Pure Planet. Pure planet are trying to deflect customers who own or who are ordering EVs away from energy suppliers better suited to them. They are using missleading comments and statements because they are not equipped or are unwilling to provide an EV tariff.

    Octopus, for example (there are others) have a day (or peak) tariff of only 0.59p per unit more than PP but 8.13p per unit LESS overnight when charging EVs or using a tumble dryer etc. How on earth can that not be much more cost effective than Pure Planet?! Also, Pure Planet like to quote ridiculous articles about future EV super fast charging capabilities and human behaviour. Saying things like EV drivers won't want to charge overnight! Again, missleading and ridiculous. Who would pay a high rate for superfast charging when actually being able to charge your car at home, overnight is a fraction of the cost and it's going to be sat there anyway?!
  • hi bobbin2u
    feel free to vote in the poll HERE
    0
  • hi bobbin2u
    feel free to vote in the poll HERE
  • Hi @bobbin2u
    Thanks for the feedback.
    As @woz has pointed out above , the idea is to get our Members' feedback on EVs before we decide anything, as that's how we like to do things
    It may be that since our post, the Citizen's Advice research into some of the EV charging deals being offered, that the deals available have changed. Our post was published in February - more than six months ago - and the Citizen's Advice research was (obviously!) done before that, so it's likely that it has changed.
    We also know from our Members' feedback is that they really like our one, variable tariff. No catches, no surprises.
    Of course it's also valid that EV owners might want a special deal for night charging too.
    Again, it's great feedback, thank you
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    0
  • Hi @bobbin2u
    Thanks for the feedback.
    As @woz has pointed out above , the idea is to get our Members' feedback on EVs before we decide anything, as that's how we like to do things
    It may be that since our post, the Citizen's Advice research into some of the EV charging deals being offered, that the deals available have changed. Our post was published in February - more than six months ago - and the Citizen's Advice research was (obviously!) done before that, so it's likely that it has changed.
    We also know from our Members' feedback is that they really like our one, variable tariff. No catches, no surprises.
    Of course it's also valid that EV owners might want a special deal for night charging too.
    Again, it's great feedback, thank you
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

  • Hi bobbin2u, cheap overnight tariffs are not the be all and end all for every EV owner.

    You need to also consider that a lot of people cannot overnight charge due to not having a drive, a lot of people can't even part outside their own house overnight, therefore charging/supercharging while out and about could be their only option.

    If I had an EV I also would not charge overnight, but that is because I would get it charged at work for free.

    Overnight charging works for you and that is why a night time tariff makes sense for you and prompts your move away from PP.
    1
  • Hi bobbin2u, cheap overnight tariffs are not the be all and end all for every EV owner.

    You need to also consider that a lot of people cannot overnight charge due to not having a drive, a lot of people can't even part outside their own house overnight, therefore charging/supercharging while out and about could be their only option.

    If I had an EV I also would not charge overnight, but that is because I would get it charged at work for free.

    Overnight charging works for you and that is why a night time tariff makes sense for you and prompts your move away from PP.
  • That's a pretty ridiculiously worded poll. Why would there be a requirement to sibsidise EV owners? Why would any non EV owver want to subsidise an EV owner? I don't see the value that poll is adding.

    Why don't you ask the question the other way around and see what happens?

    If PP don't offer an incentivised tariff for EV owners and you owned an EV, would you be prepared to pay more to charge it so all the non owners get cheaper electricity?
    0
  • That's a pretty ridiculiously worded poll. Why would there be a requirement to sibsidise EV owners? Why would any non EV owver want to subsidise an EV owner? I don't see the value that poll is adding.

    Why don't you ask the question the other way around and see what happens?

    If PP don't offer an incentivised tariff for EV owners and you owned an EV, would you be prepared to pay more to charge it so all the non owners get cheaper electricity?
  • Jenam93 has a good point that not all EV owners would want to charge at home, preferring free charging elsewhere or just not having off street parking.

    Pure Planet are simply misleading customers though. Their rhetoric about providing EV owners, who are able to charge at home overnight, with a better tariff means that the remaining customers are subsidising them is verging on lying. They should be discouraging such comments and polls on this forum, not encouraging it. They should and probably do, know better.

    Here's why and what Pure Planet don't seem to want customers to know...

    1. The wholesale cost of electricity overnight is negative. Consumers (usually businesses) are actually paid to use electricity overnight.
    2. One of the biggest problems facing business producing renewable electricity (the businesses Pure Planet purport to support) is electricity generated when it is not required, including overnight.
    3. EV's will provide part of the solution to this as they will not only consume electricity overnight but also store it for use during the day or at a later date.
    4. As electricity is essentially free overnight (actually better than free, at a negative cost) anyone using electricity overnight on a Pure Planet Tariff is effectively subsidising all other Pure Planet customers (or Pure Planet profit margins).

    This is what it seems that Pure Planet do not want to talk about or let their customers know. They are asking the question "what can PP do to encourage the use of EVs?" In answer to that question, discouraging EV owners (with the ability to charge overnight) from doing so is not only unsustainable but irresponsible for a company supposedly supporting the use of renewable electricity. It is also irresponsible because it encourages the current over production of non-renewable electricity overnight to keep powerstations open to meet peak demand during the day.

    Also, for Pure Planet to suggest that offering an EV friendly tariff would mean existing (non-overnight charging EV customers) would have to pay more for electricity in the daytime is also misleading and incorrect. The increase in the use of overnight electricity and the resulting profit from EV owners paying for it would actually benefit it's other non-EV customers as it would generate more profit for Pure Planet (or lower it's overall wholesale purchase price).

    It's not only the outdated Citizens Advice survey that should be taken down, but also other articles Pure Planet like to push such as the one suggesting EV owners will not want to charge at home overnight because of superfast charging becoming more widely available. This is inaccurate and shows further lack of knowledge and understanding from Pure Planet. Such charging will cost considerably more than overnight charging, shortens battery life and doesn’t help the overall production cost of electricity, particularly renewables.

    There is something Pure Planet don't want to admit to, or say, and it is most likely that they have been caught napping and are ill prepared and equipped for this change, which is coming fast!

    Come on Pure Planet, do the responsible thing and admit that ALL EV owners (with the capability of home charging overnight) need to switch away from Pure Planet ASAP! Or wake up and smell the coffee!

    Also, admit to your current non-EV owning customers that losing these EV customers will end up costing them more as well. I just don't buy the excuse that you want to ask customers what they would like first when you are holding back the facts from us.
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 13-08-19 at 01:14. Reason: grammar
    0
  • Jenam93 has a good point that not all EV owners would want to charge at home, preferring free charging elsewhere or just not having off street parking.

    Pure Planet are simply misleading customers though. Their rhetoric about providing EV owners, who are able to charge at home overnight, with a better tariff means that the remaining customers are subsidising them is verging on lying. They should be discouraging such comments and polls on this forum, not encouraging it. They should and probably do, know better.

    Here's why and what Pure Planet don't seem to want customers to know...

    1. The wholesale cost of electricity overnight is negative. Consumers (usually businesses) are actually paid to use electricity overnight.
    2. One of the biggest problems facing business producing renewable electricity (the businesses Pure Planet purport to support) is electricity generated when it is not required, including overnight.
    3. EV's will provide part of the solution to this as they will not only consume electricity overnight but also store it for use during the day or at a later date.
    4. As electricity is essentially free overnight (actually better than free, at a negative cost) anyone using electricity overnight on a Pure Planet Tariff is effectively subsidising all other Pure Planet customers (or Pure Planet profit margins).

    This is what it seems that Pure Planet do not want to talk about or let their customers know. They are asking the question "what can PP do to encourage the use of EVs?" In answer to that question, discouraging EV owners (with the ability to charge overnight) from doing so is not only unsustainable but irresponsible for a company supposedly supporting the use of renewable electricity. It is also irresponsible because it encourages the current over production of non-renewable electricity overnight to keep powerstations open to meet peak demand during the day.

    Also, for Pure Planet to suggest that offering an EV friendly tariff would mean existing (non-overnight charging EV customers) would have to pay more for electricity in the daytime is also misleading and incorrect. The increase in the use of overnight electricity and the resulting profit from EV owners paying for it would actually benefit it's other non-EV customers as it would generate more profit for Pure Planet (or lower it's overall wholesale purchase price).

    It's not only the outdated Citizens Advice survey that should be taken down, but also other articles Pure Planet like to push such as the one suggesting EV owners will not want to charge at home overnight because of superfast charging becoming more widely available. This is inaccurate and shows further lack of knowledge and understanding from Pure Planet. Such charging will cost considerably more than overnight charging, shortens battery life and doesn’t help the overall production cost of electricity, particularly renewables.

    There is something Pure Planet don't want to admit to, or say, and it is most likely that they have been caught napping and are ill prepared and equipped for this change, which is coming fast!

    Come on Pure Planet, do the responsible thing and admit that ALL EV owners (with the capability of home charging overnight) need to switch away from Pure Planet ASAP! Or wake up and smell the coffee!

    Also, admit to your current non-EV owning customers that losing these EV customers will end up costing them more as well. I just don't buy the excuse that you want to ask customers what they would like first when you are holding back the facts from us.
  • hi bobbin2u
    I don't work for Pure Planet, I'm just a happy customer like you.
    The post and poll were entirely my own and were intended to promote discussion.
    0
  • hi bobbin2u
    I don't work for Pure Planet, I'm just a happy customer like you.
    The post and poll were entirely my own and were intended to promote discussion.
  • Hi @bobbin2u
    Just wanted to flag up this post about the Pure Planet Community guidelines - please read it.
    It's fantastic to get members' feedback. And of course if that means you're not happy PP that's fine too.
    But it's not on to be critical of other community members who use this forum to discuss things and help eachother out.

    This is what our community guidelines say.

    Show respect, have patience, be helpful and stay friendly, even if you completely disagree with someone. We've all got our views and we're all entitled to them, as long as we respect each other.
    I know fellow member @woz is thick-skinned and has a good sense of humour, but it's not acceptable to criticise others' contributions just because you disagree with them. If you're passionate about EVs that's fantastic. So am I - I've got a Nissan Leaf 2018 (which, by the way, I charge both at home and at a park and ride in Bath during the day).

    Member @Jenam93 made a good point in reply to your argument that all EV owners want to charge overnight at home. Some perfer to charge on the way to work. Others have n choice but to charge on the road or at work - such as the millions of people who live in flats or in houses with no driveway.
    So we at PP want to explore all the options. What if we offered, for example, a tariff that was the same no matter where you charged, as well as what time?
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    1
  • Hi @bobbin2u
    Just wanted to flag up this post about the Pure Planet Community guidelines - please read it.
    It's fantastic to get members' feedback. And of course if that means you're not happy PP that's fine too.
    But it's not on to be critical of other community members who use this forum to discuss things and help eachother out.

    This is what our community guidelines say.

    Show respect, have patience, be helpful and stay friendly, even if you completely disagree with someone. We've all got our views and we're all entitled to them, as long as we respect each other.
    I know fellow member @woz is thick-skinned and has a good sense of humour, but it's not acceptable to criticise others' contributions just because you disagree with them. If you're passionate about EVs that's fantastic. So am I - I've got a Nissan Leaf 2018 (which, by the way, I charge both at home and at a park and ride in Bath during the day).

    Member @Jenam93 made a good point in reply to your argument that all EV owners want to charge overnight at home. Some perfer to charge on the way to work. Others have n choice but to charge on the road or at work - such as the millions of people who live in flats or in houses with no driveway.
    So we at PP want to explore all the options. What if we offered, for example, a tariff that was the same no matter where you charged, as well as what time?
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

  • Hi Marc

    Thanks for pointing out your community guidelines. I am not sure where I have stepped outside them? Is it because of this comment to Woz:

    " That's a pretty ridiculiously worded poll. Why would there be a requirement to sibsidise EV owners and why would any non EV owver want to subsidise an EV owner? I don't see the value that poll is adding. "

    Are community members not allowed to critique one another? If I have caused offence to Woz personally I most certainly apologise. It was not my intention. With over 5000 posts on this forum I am sure Woz can handle a bit of critique. He did say that he worded his poll to be intentionally inflammatory.

    I do however feel quite passionate about what I feel is a poor attitude or lack of understanding about this topic.

    It is ok to want to offer one flat tariff for EV owners and non-owners alike and if this is the intention of pure planet then pure planet should be clear that such a tariff will most likely be punitive towards non-EV home charging owners and EV home charging owners alike.

    Or you can 'shoot the messenger' and avoid addressing this point.
    0
  • Hi Marc

    Thanks for pointing out your community guidelines. I am not sure where I have stepped outside them? Is it because of this comment to Woz:

    " That's a pretty ridiculiously worded poll. Why would there be a requirement to sibsidise EV owners and why would any non EV owver want to subsidise an EV owner? I don't see the value that poll is adding. "

    Are community members not allowed to critique one another? If I have caused offence to Woz personally I most certainly apologise. It was not my intention. With over 5000 posts on this forum I am sure Woz can handle a bit of critique. He did say that he worded his poll to be intentionally inflammatory.

    I do however feel quite passionate about what I feel is a poor attitude or lack of understanding about this topic.

    It is ok to want to offer one flat tariff for EV owners and non-owners alike and if this is the intention of pure planet then pure planet should be clear that such a tariff will most likely be punitive towards non-EV home charging owners and EV home charging owners alike.

    Or you can 'shoot the messenger' and avoid addressing this point.
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post

    Are community members not allowed to critique one another? If I have caused offence to Woz personally I most certainly apologise. It was not my intention. With over 5000 posts on this forum I am sure Woz can handle a bit of critique. He did say that he worded his poll to be intentionally inflammatory.
    Hi @bobbin2u
    Nice one.
    I'm also sure @woz can handle it
    Our guidelines are in place for all community members. The reason is because we want to keep the community a safe place for all, so people know it's OK to take part, not just the thick-skinned.

    It is ok to want to offer one flat tariff for EV owners and non-owners alike
    Yep

    Such a tariff will most likely be punitive towards non-EV home charging owners and EV home charging owners alike.
    Not according to the research carried out by Citizen's Advice!
    Which is why we created this discussion in the community. To hear what people think. Do you agree with the CA findings? Do you disagree? What would PP members like? Should PP have an EV tariff? Should we stick to one tariff? Should we look at something else?

    You've made your thoughts very clear! Fantastic. Let others take part too, without jumping to the conclusion that they're wrong.
    Again, all those millions of people without a driveway in which to install an EV charger so that they can charge overnight? How can we solve this?
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post

    Are community members not allowed to critique one another? If I have caused offence to Woz personally I most certainly apologise. It was not my intention. With over 5000 posts on this forum I am sure Woz can handle a bit of critique. He did say that he worded his poll to be intentionally inflammatory.
    Hi @bobbin2u
    Nice one.
    I'm also sure @woz can handle it
    Our guidelines are in place for all community members. The reason is because we want to keep the community a safe place for all, so people know it's OK to take part, not just the thick-skinned.

    It is ok to want to offer one flat tariff for EV owners and non-owners alike
    Yep

    Such a tariff will most likely be punitive towards non-EV home charging owners and EV home charging owners alike.
    Not according to the research carried out by Citizen's Advice!
    Which is why we created this discussion in the community. To hear what people think. Do you agree with the CA findings? Do you disagree? What would PP members like? Should PP have an EV tariff? Should we stick to one tariff? Should we look at something else?

    You've made your thoughts very clear! Fantastic. Let others take part too, without jumping to the conclusion that they're wrong.
    Again, all those millions of people without a driveway in which to install an EV charger so that they can charge overnight? How can we solve this?
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

  • Lets roll this back a bit...

    My poll and post were not intentionally inflammatory, although I'll agree they were intentionally provocative and intended to promote a discussion and an alternative way of looking at the issue of how or why PP might proceed in a certain direction when it came to supporting EV owners.
    The post was prompted by bobbin2u's original post HERE where PP were accused of misleading and deflecting - strong accusations but nonetheless worthy of further civilised discussion. @bobbin2u you make some very good points about overnight usage, I don't disagree that there is a need for grid balancing and management, but your remarks are predicated on a model of electricity buying that PP don't subscribe to (as far as I know). That point is for PP to address.

    I chose my words incredibly carefully for the post and the poll, I'm sorry you thought they were ridiculous, I stand by my wording, which was based on a supposition that if PP pay a certain amount for their electricity, and offer some of it at reduced rates then the shortfall has to come from somewhere else. I suggest you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote.

    No one is shooting the messenger here, PP's current model of pricing won't suit everyone and they want to support EV owners, but they also want to get it right for the other 97% of customers, so every decision has to be weighed up in the bests interests of the customers and PP. It's a tough call and there will be many views. Every commercial decision PP takes has repercussions for all customers.
    No one is misleading or deflecting here, we are discussing.
    @bobbin2u Have you worked out how many kWh's a night in the 4 hour octopus slot, on average would you expect to consume per night given your mileage?

    Name:  thick-r.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  16.8 KB
    Name:  thumbdown.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  562 Bytes Is that going to be my badge marc?
    0
  • Lets roll this back a bit...

    My poll and post were not intentionally inflammatory, although I'll agree they were intentionally provocative and intended to promote a discussion and an alternative way of looking at the issue of how or why PP might proceed in a certain direction when it came to supporting EV owners.
    The post was prompted by bobbin2u's original post HERE where PP were accused of misleading and deflecting - strong accusations but nonetheless worthy of further civilised discussion. @bobbin2u you make some very good points about overnight usage, I don't disagree that there is a need for grid balancing and management, but your remarks are predicated on a model of electricity buying that PP don't subscribe to (as far as I know). That point is for PP to address.

    I chose my words incredibly carefully for the post and the poll, I'm sorry you thought they were ridiculous, I stand by my wording, which was based on a supposition that if PP pay a certain amount for their electricity, and offer some of it at reduced rates then the shortfall has to come from somewhere else. I suggest you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote.

    No one is shooting the messenger here, PP's current model of pricing won't suit everyone and they want to support EV owners, but they also want to get it right for the other 97% of customers, so every decision has to be weighed up in the bests interests of the customers and PP. It's a tough call and there will be many views. Every commercial decision PP takes has repercussions for all customers.
    No one is misleading or deflecting here, we are discussing.
    @bobbin2u Have you worked out how many kWh's a night in the 4 hour octopus slot, on average would you expect to consume per night given your mileage?

    Name:  thick-r.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  16.8 KB
    Name:  thumbdown.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  562 Bytes Is that going to be my badge marc?
  • Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Not according to the research carried out by Citizen's Advice!
    Which is why we created this discussion in the community. Do you agree with the CA findings? Do you disagree?
    I completely disagree and am saddened to hear that Pure Planet almost seem to base their entire discussion surrounding EV tariffs around such narrow and outdated 'research'.

    Just look at their EV driver customer profiles, it's laughable... All 3 of them drive less than 5000 miles per year (one less than 3500 and the other less than 1400!). The average annual mileage for car ownership is still 8,000. Many car owners will exceed this and in addition, we should be talking households and not individuals. Many husband and wife car owners (for example) will between then exceed 20,000 per year. I took a look at the government survey they used to gather their stats and it's not compatible. Plus, this research was simply looking at the tariffs that were out there from Energy businesses who, let's face it, design tariffs to encourage folks to pay too much for their electricity (try and argue that one). Just look at the latest government regulations. The Energy industry has a LOT to answer for.

    I am surprised at how bad that CA report is, but even more disappointed that Pure Planet is giving it so much credence. This report looked into currently available (actually now extremely outdated) tariffs and not the wholesale price of electricity and usage patterns of EV and non-EV drivers which should be encouraged as a result.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    What would PP members like?
    Cheaper electricity, increased reliance/use of renewable electricity and a simple tariff.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Should PP have an EV tariff?
    YES! PP seems to be decrying the result of their own survey on this thread and missing a major point, which is that Non-EV owning Pure Planet customers would benefit from PP offering an EV style tariff too. It would be fantastic for PP to address this point in this thread on this forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Should we stick to one tariff? Should we look at something else?
    Perhaps and YES respectively. If PP simply reduced the cost of Electricity in the super off-peak periods to encourage EV owners to charge at home overnight, you could still keep one simple tariff for all which would not be punitive to anyone. Same day rate and a cheaper super off-peak rate. Better for grid balancing, better for renewable energy producers, better for ALL Pure Planet customers and better for the Planet! Please also address this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    You've made your thoughts very clear! Fantastic. Let others take part too, without jumping to the conclusion that they're wrong.
    Great! If I have it would be brilliant to have them addressed. My main points do seem to be ignored. @woz wants to defend his "intentionally provocative" poll which IMHO wrongly suggests that any EV tariff would penalise all other non-EV home charging customers and if you don't mind me saying so, PP seems to be focussed on defending a position of customers not wanting an EV friendly tariff. If customers were given the facts to consider and have the myths dispelled for them instead of fueled, do you think that would be the case?

    Others have taken part and do also seem to be ignored. I actually agree with the majority of the posts by customers, just not the approach by Pure Planet (or Woz). Nothing against Woz personally here, just his Poll mainly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Again, all those millions of people without a driveway in which to install an EV charger so that they can charge overnight? How can we solve this?
    When you say we, do you mean Pure Planet, the energy industry as a whole or the country/government?

    There are many ways to solve this. But my main point here is that all those millions would benefit from the other many millions charging their cars at home overnight.

    Perhaps Pure Planet could join or start a lobby group to get local councils to actually spend some of that money central government has made available for installing chargers along streets in towns. Even central government is frustrated at the lack of pace by local government. Perhaps Pure Planet could help out here? Use some of the profits/additional savings generated by home EV charging to help pay for it.

    The small number of customers PP currently have who both own an EV and can charge at home is set to explode. Many of these customers go looking for companies such as Pure Planet for obvious reasons. PP should be embracing that for the benefit of ALL their customers. This is my main point of frustration when coming across this thread. It was/is doing the opposite. Good intentions you might say but the reoccurring theme is the suggestion that such a tariff would penalise other customers. Why is this?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    your remarks are predicated on a model of electricity buying that PP don't subscribe to (as far as I know). That point is for PP to address.
    How do you know? I wholeheartedly agree that is a point for PP to address and one that they seem reluctant to, on this forum anyway. Let's hope they do address it!

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    I chose my words incredibly carefully for the post and the poll, I'm sorry you thought they were ridiculous, I stand by my wording, which was based on a supposition that if PP pay a certain amount for their electricity, and offer some of it at reduced rates then the shortfall has to come from somewhere else. I suggest you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote.
    No need, it was very clear. I am sorry that you chose those words incredibly carefully. I think you have been misled here, which is my main point of frustration with PP. Let's see what PP have to say about it. Think about it, if the price of electricity is less than zero overnight, during 1am and 4am for example (I am sure even that window fluctuates), then how can a rate of say 5p/kWh invoiced to a home charging EV owner, create a shortfall that needs to be recovered from other customers? It's a myth.

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    No one is shooting the messenger here, PP's current model of pricing won't suit everyone and they want to support EV owners, but they also want to get it right for the other 97% of customers, so every decision has to be weighed up in the bests interests of the customers and PP. It's a tough call and there will be many views. Every commercial decision PP takes has repercussions for all customers.
    No one is misleading or deflecting here, we are discussing.
    I completely disagree with this, sorry. First of all, Pure Planet is in the driving seat to attract EV owners (for obvious reasons) and could easily over-index here. Where do you get your 3% from and even if 3% is accurate, do you honestly believe it will be 3% for long? You say they want to support EV owners but their rhetoric says otherwise. Personally, I just think they are not equipped for it and have been caught napping. I can't see how it is a tough call at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    @bobbin2u Have you worked out how many kWh's a night in the 4 hour octopus slot, on average would you expect to consume per night given your mileage?
    Yes, but however many it is will be a benefit to me. 20k+ miles per year = 5000kWh = my entire current Pure Planet consumption. Not all will be charged at super off-peak. Let's hazard a guess at a quarter. The day rate is only a fraction of a pence higher than PP. 7000 x 0.5p = £35/year vs 1700 x 8.8p = £150 and I think I am being conservative, I'm not including my wife here.

    Then there is the profit/cost savings I would generate for ALL other PP customers.
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 13-08-19 at 17:51. Reason: errors
    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Not according to the research carried out by Citizen's Advice!
    Which is why we created this discussion in the community. Do you agree with the CA findings? Do you disagree?
    I completely disagree and am saddened to hear that Pure Planet almost seem to base their entire discussion surrounding EV tariffs around such narrow and outdated 'research'.

    Just look at their EV driver customer profiles, it's laughable... All 3 of them drive less than 5000 miles per year (one less than 3500 and the other less than 1400!). The average annual mileage for car ownership is still 8,000. Many car owners will exceed this and in addition, we should be talking households and not individuals. Many husband and wife car owners (for example) will between then exceed 20,000 per year. I took a look at the government survey they used to gather their stats and it's not compatible. Plus, this research was simply looking at the tariffs that were out there from Energy businesses who, let's face it, design tariffs to encourage folks to pay too much for their electricity (try and argue that one). Just look at the latest government regulations. The Energy industry has a LOT to answer for.

    I am surprised at how bad that CA report is, but even more disappointed that Pure Planet is giving it so much credence. This report looked into currently available (actually now extremely outdated) tariffs and not the wholesale price of electricity and usage patterns of EV and non-EV drivers which should be encouraged as a result.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    What would PP members like?
    Cheaper electricity, increased reliance/use of renewable electricity and a simple tariff.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Should PP have an EV tariff?
    YES! PP seems to be decrying the result of their own survey on this thread and missing a major point, which is that Non-EV owning Pure Planet customers would benefit from PP offering an EV style tariff too. It would be fantastic for PP to address this point in this thread on this forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Should we stick to one tariff? Should we look at something else?
    Perhaps and YES respectively. If PP simply reduced the cost of Electricity in the super off-peak periods to encourage EV owners to charge at home overnight, you could still keep one simple tariff for all which would not be punitive to anyone. Same day rate and a cheaper super off-peak rate. Better for grid balancing, better for renewable energy producers, better for ALL Pure Planet customers and better for the Planet! Please also address this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    You've made your thoughts very clear! Fantastic. Let others take part too, without jumping to the conclusion that they're wrong.
    Great! If I have it would be brilliant to have them addressed. My main points do seem to be ignored. @woz wants to defend his "intentionally provocative" poll which IMHO wrongly suggests that any EV tariff would penalise all other non-EV home charging customers and if you don't mind me saying so, PP seems to be focussed on defending a position of customers not wanting an EV friendly tariff. If customers were given the facts to consider and have the myths dispelled for them instead of fueled, do you think that would be the case?

    Others have taken part and do also seem to be ignored. I actually agree with the majority of the posts by customers, just not the approach by Pure Planet (or Woz). Nothing against Woz personally here, just his Poll mainly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Again, all those millions of people without a driveway in which to install an EV charger so that they can charge overnight? How can we solve this?
    When you say we, do you mean Pure Planet, the energy industry as a whole or the country/government?

    There are many ways to solve this. But my main point here is that all those millions would benefit from the other many millions charging their cars at home overnight.

    Perhaps Pure Planet could join or start a lobby group to get local councils to actually spend some of that money central government has made available for installing chargers along streets in towns. Even central government is frustrated at the lack of pace by local government. Perhaps Pure Planet could help out here? Use some of the profits/additional savings generated by home EV charging to help pay for it.

    The small number of customers PP currently have who both own an EV and can charge at home is set to explode. Many of these customers go looking for companies such as Pure Planet for obvious reasons. PP should be embracing that for the benefit of ALL their customers. This is my main point of frustration when coming across this thread. It was/is doing the opposite. Good intentions you might say but the reoccurring theme is the suggestion that such a tariff would penalise other customers. Why is this?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    your remarks are predicated on a model of electricity buying that PP don't subscribe to (as far as I know). That point is for PP to address.
    How do you know? I wholeheartedly agree that is a point for PP to address and one that they seem reluctant to, on this forum anyway. Let's hope they do address it!

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    I chose my words incredibly carefully for the post and the poll, I'm sorry you thought they were ridiculous, I stand by my wording, which was based on a supposition that if PP pay a certain amount for their electricity, and offer some of it at reduced rates then the shortfall has to come from somewhere else. I suggest you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote.
    No need, it was very clear. I am sorry that you chose those words incredibly carefully. I think you have been misled here, which is my main point of frustration with PP. Let's see what PP have to say about it. Think about it, if the price of electricity is less than zero overnight, during 1am and 4am for example (I am sure even that window fluctuates), then how can a rate of say 5p/kWh invoiced to a home charging EV owner, create a shortfall that needs to be recovered from other customers? It's a myth.

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    No one is shooting the messenger here, PP's current model of pricing won't suit everyone and they want to support EV owners, but they also want to get it right for the other 97% of customers, so every decision has to be weighed up in the bests interests of the customers and PP. It's a tough call and there will be many views. Every commercial decision PP takes has repercussions for all customers.
    No one is misleading or deflecting here, we are discussing.
    I completely disagree with this, sorry. First of all, Pure Planet is in the driving seat to attract EV owners (for obvious reasons) and could easily over-index here. Where do you get your 3% from and even if 3% is accurate, do you honestly believe it will be 3% for long? You say they want to support EV owners but their rhetoric says otherwise. Personally, I just think they are not equipped for it and have been caught napping. I can't see how it is a tough call at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    @bobbin2u Have you worked out how many kWh's a night in the 4 hour octopus slot, on average would you expect to consume per night given your mileage?
    Yes, but however many it is will be a benefit to me. 20k+ miles per year = 5000kWh = my entire current Pure Planet consumption. Not all will be charged at super off-peak. Let's hazard a guess at a quarter. The day rate is only a fraction of a pence higher than PP. 7000 x 0.5p = £35/year vs 1700 x 8.8p = £150 and I think I am being conservative, I'm not including my wife here.

    Then there is the profit/cost savings I would generate for ALL other PP customers.
  • I'm a bit reluctant to enter into this discussion, given the current levels of passion!

    I'll confess to not fully understanding exactly how electricity gets bought. But given the comments about PPs purchasing policy, it seems relevant to give their own explanation: "We've one great value, simple, variable tariff, so you're always on our best rate. You pay no more than we pay for the energy you use. It's a variable rate based on wholesale prices — which means it can go down as well as up. We don't make any profit on the energy you use."

    Taken with this comment elsewhere on the web, Ofgem, I think,

    "Wholesale energy prices account for 45% of the average electricity bill in the UK. The market price is influenced by a number of factors; the price of the input fuel used to produce electricity, as well as demand spikes and supply changes. Companies buy wholesale energy weeks, months and years in advance as well as on the day of use in order to smooth the purchase price over a long period to avoid price spikes."

    does it seem possible that a company could buy nighttime electricity very cheaply in advance to create an EV tariff?

    But it also seems relevant to quote Ofgem's own comments on preparing for the EV revolution:

    "The number of EVs on UK roads has grown from fewer than 4000 in 2013 to around 160,000 as of June 2018. While growth is significant, EV numbers still represent a fraction of the UK’s 31.2 million cars. We must remain mindful that we are at the very beginning of a transition - much of the transformation (and uncertainty) is still ahead of us.
    As with the steam engine and the motorcar, the EV transition may be linked to broader societal change.
    Beyond electrification, shared vehicle access and autonomous technology could change the nature of how we own and engage with transport. We do not yet have certainty over what the future transport system will look like or how it will be used, just as we do not have certainty over what our future energy system will look like.

    While continued and widespread deployment of EVs now seems inevitable, there is substantial uncertainty around the scale and pace of EV growth. Regardless of how the transition progresses, we consider two core principles should determine industry’s approach to facilitating the EV transition:
    • Industry should focus on minimising overall system costs for all consumers (including non-EV users), by seeking to make more efficient use of our existing assets, before considering reinforcement. The development of new markets that provide flexibility will play a key role here, by incentivising or automating the shifting of load away from peak demand, even if total demand increases. This means that network companies should not expect to be remunerated for reinforcement alone when more cost-effective solutions exist.
    • Early adopters of EVs serve to promote an industry that brings both energy system and decarbonisation benefits, and contribute to learning and cost reductions that will benefit later adopters. However, if EV users choose to charge during peak times, under current arrangements they will impose considerable costs which will be borne by all consumers. An enduring charging regime should ensure costs are distributed fairly, and EV users face charges that are reflective of the costs (or benefits) they are imposing on the system. Vulnerable consumers, or those who are currently unable to share in many of the benefits of EVs, are likely to object to subsidising more affluent early adopters of EVs."

    My last comment is this: a PP member of staff has opened up this topic for comment and discussion. I would not expect him to answer every point being made; I would expect him to feed in all the comments to the policy makers in the company, and then feedback their considered view on behalf of PP to customers in due course.

    Hope that helps!?
    Stephen
    Last edited by stephenrand; 13-08-19 at 23:00.
    2
  • I'm a bit reluctant to enter into this discussion, given the current levels of passion!

    I'll confess to not fully understanding exactly how electricity gets bought. But given the comments about PPs purchasing policy, it seems relevant to give their own explanation: "We've one great value, simple, variable tariff, so you're always on our best rate. You pay no more than we pay for the energy you use. It's a variable rate based on wholesale prices — which means it can go down as well as up. We don't make any profit on the energy you use."

    Taken with this comment elsewhere on the web, Ofgem, I think,

    "Wholesale energy prices account for 45% of the average electricity bill in the UK. The market price is influenced by a number of factors; the price of the input fuel used to produce electricity, as well as demand spikes and supply changes. Companies buy wholesale energy weeks, months and years in advance as well as on the day of use in order to smooth the purchase price over a long period to avoid price spikes."

    does it seem possible that a company could buy nighttime electricity very cheaply in advance to create an EV tariff?

    But it also seems relevant to quote Ofgem's own comments on preparing for the EV revolution:

    "The number of EVs on UK roads has grown from fewer than 4000 in 2013 to around 160,000 as of June 2018. While growth is significant, EV numbers still represent a fraction of the UK’s 31.2 million cars. We must remain mindful that we are at the very beginning of a transition - much of the transformation (and uncertainty) is still ahead of us.
    As with the steam engine and the motorcar, the EV transition may be linked to broader societal change.
    Beyond electrification, shared vehicle access and autonomous technology could change the nature of how we own and engage with transport. We do not yet have certainty over what the future transport system will look like or how it will be used, just as we do not have certainty over what our future energy system will look like.

    While continued and widespread deployment of EVs now seems inevitable, there is substantial uncertainty around the scale and pace of EV growth. Regardless of how the transition progresses, we consider two core principles should determine industry’s approach to facilitating the EV transition:
    • Industry should focus on minimising overall system costs for all consumers (including non-EV users), by seeking to make more efficient use of our existing assets, before considering reinforcement. The development of new markets that provide flexibility will play a key role here, by incentivising or automating the shifting of load away from peak demand, even if total demand increases. This means that network companies should not expect to be remunerated for reinforcement alone when more cost-effective solutions exist.
    • Early adopters of EVs serve to promote an industry that brings both energy system and decarbonisation benefits, and contribute to learning and cost reductions that will benefit later adopters. However, if EV users choose to charge during peak times, under current arrangements they will impose considerable costs which will be borne by all consumers. An enduring charging regime should ensure costs are distributed fairly, and EV users face charges that are reflective of the costs (or benefits) they are imposing on the system. Vulnerable consumers, or those who are currently unable to share in many of the benefits of EVs, are likely to object to subsidising more affluent early adopters of EVs."

    My last comment is this: a PP member of staff has opened up this topic for comment and discussion. I would not expect him to answer every point being made; I would expect him to feed in all the comments to the policy makers in the company, and then feedback their considered view on behalf of PP to customers in due course.

    Hope that helps!?
    Stephen
  • Brilliant! I agree with everything you have said here and also the Ofgem comments which seem at odds with Pure Planet's approach to this topic.

    I too wouldn't expect Marc to answer every comment made (I am actually surprised Pure Planet allows a staff member to comment so freely in an open forum), but he does seem to answer the comments which aren't supporting an improved tariff to encourage overnight home charging of EVs. Something which would be a clear benefit to everyone and borne out in the guidance and comments from Ofgem.

    I very much look forward to hearing the official line from Pure Planet and I will be watching with interest. I have very much enjoyed being a Pure Planet customer, until this episode. I sincerely hope Pure Planet see sense and sort this out for everyone's benefit. In the meantime, I am switching Electricity supply to Octopus and leaving my Gas with BP, sorry PP.

    Thanks for your input. Glad the passion didn't scare you away!
    0
  • Brilliant! I agree with everything you have said here and also the Ofgem comments which seem at odds with Pure Planet's approach to this topic.

    I too wouldn't expect Marc to answer every comment made (I am actually surprised Pure Planet allows a staff member to comment so freely in an open forum), but he does seem to answer the comments which aren't supporting an improved tariff to encourage overnight home charging of EVs. Something which would be a clear benefit to everyone and borne out in the guidance and comments from Ofgem.

    I very much look forward to hearing the official line from Pure Planet and I will be watching with interest. I have very much enjoyed being a Pure Planet customer, until this episode. I sincerely hope Pure Planet see sense and sort this out for everyone's benefit. In the meantime, I am switching Electricity supply to Octopus and leaving my Gas with BP, sorry PP.

    Thanks for your input. Glad the passion didn't scare you away!
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    Something which would be a clear benefit to everyone and borne out in the guidance and comments from Ofgem.
    I'm not sure that was how I read the comments from Ofgem!! Enjoy your Octopus...
    Stephen
    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    Something which would be a clear benefit to everyone and borne out in the guidance and comments from Ofgem.
    I'm not sure that was how I read the comments from Ofgem!! Enjoy your Octopus...
    Stephen
  • Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    I'm not sure that was how I read the comments from Ofgem!! Enjoy your Octopus...
    Stephen
    Thanks for your post, it is indeed really helpful. It illustrates the seeming lack of understanding by Pure Planet, hence leading some members on this forum to infer that incentives through the tariff/cheaper rates for overnight charging would inevitably need to be subsidised by other customers and/or increase costs during the daytime.

    I was highlighting that the guidelines you posted from Ofgem are calling for ...
    "supporting an improved tariff to encourage overnight home charging of EVs. Something which would be a clear benefit to everyone and borne out in the guidance and comments from Ofgem."

    The key is that Ofgem guidelines are much about changes within the Energy sector benefiting *everyone*. I.E. Not just to accommodate EV owners and their inevitable increased demand for electricity. More demand, particularly at the wrong time, could increase prices for all.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post

    But it also seems relevant to quote Ofgem's own comments on preparing for the EV revolution:

    "we consider two core principles should determine industry’s approach to facilitating the EV transition:

    • Industry should focus on minimising overall system costs for all consumers (including non-EV users), by seeking to make more efficient use of our existing assets, before considering reinforcement. The development of new markets that provide flexibility will play a key role here, by incentivising or automating the shifting of load away from peak demand, even if total demand increases. This means that network companies should not expect to be remunerated for reinforcement alone when more cost-effective solutions exist.
    This is basically explaining the Energy industry should do everything possible NOT to build more power stations, large scale solar and wind farm installations to meet the increased demand from EV users at peak times. This will have the effect of producing EVEN MORE energy at off-peak times which is already underutilised and would inevitably increase the overall cost. It would, therefore, penalise non-EV owners by substantially increasing the cost of electricity for everyone.

    One very important way to "seek more efficient use of existing assets" and "incentivising or automating the shifting of load away from peak demand, even if total demand increases." is to encourage EV charging overnight by offering incentives to do so. Something which seems to evade Pure Planet's understanding, on this forum at least. All their rhetoric points to cheaper prices for EV overnight charging would need to be subsidised by non-EV overnight users which is untrue.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    • Early adopters of EVs serve to promote an industry that brings both energy system and decarbonisation benefits, and contribute to learning and cost reductions that will benefit later adopters.
    These customers are important to PP and all PP non-EV customers and should be encouraged to stay with PP, the poll in this thread has a clear result that PP seems to want to discourage with miss-information.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    • However, if EV users choose to charge during peak times, under current arrangements they will impose considerable costs which will be borne by all consumers.
    This couldn't be clearer. So to say that fast charging and supporting charging at peak times such as on the way to work or at work is a poor show.

    Encouraging home and overnight charging as much as possible will clearly benefit everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    Hope that helps!?
    Stephen
    It helps hugely, thanks for posting this.
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 14-08-19 at 14:52. Reason: correction
    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    I'm not sure that was how I read the comments from Ofgem!! Enjoy your Octopus...
    Stephen
    Thanks for your post, it is indeed really helpful. It illustrates the seeming lack of understanding by Pure Planet, hence leading some members on this forum to infer that incentives through the tariff/cheaper rates for overnight charging would inevitably need to be subsidised by other customers and/or increase costs during the daytime.

    I was highlighting that the guidelines you posted from Ofgem are calling for ...
    "supporting an improved tariff to encourage overnight home charging of EVs. Something which would be a clear benefit to everyone and borne out in the guidance and comments from Ofgem."

    The key is that Ofgem guidelines are much about changes within the Energy sector benefiting *everyone*. I.E. Not just to accommodate EV owners and their inevitable increased demand for electricity. More demand, particularly at the wrong time, could increase prices for all.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post

    But it also seems relevant to quote Ofgem's own comments on preparing for the EV revolution:

    "we consider two core principles should determine industry’s approach to facilitating the EV transition:

    • Industry should focus on minimising overall system costs for all consumers (including non-EV users), by seeking to make more efficient use of our existing assets, before considering reinforcement. The development of new markets that provide flexibility will play a key role here, by incentivising or automating the shifting of load away from peak demand, even if total demand increases. This means that network companies should not expect to be remunerated for reinforcement alone when more cost-effective solutions exist.
    This is basically explaining the Energy industry should do everything possible NOT to build more power stations, large scale solar and wind farm installations to meet the increased demand from EV users at peak times. This will have the effect of producing EVEN MORE energy at off-peak times which is already underutilised and would inevitably increase the overall cost. It would, therefore, penalise non-EV owners by substantially increasing the cost of electricity for everyone.

    One very important way to "seek more efficient use of existing assets" and "incentivising or automating the shifting of load away from peak demand, even if total demand increases." is to encourage EV charging overnight by offering incentives to do so. Something which seems to evade Pure Planet's understanding, on this forum at least. All their rhetoric points to cheaper prices for EV overnight charging would need to be subsidised by non-EV overnight users which is untrue.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    • Early adopters of EVs serve to promote an industry that brings both energy system and decarbonisation benefits, and contribute to learning and cost reductions that will benefit later adopters.
    These customers are important to PP and all PP non-EV customers and should be encouraged to stay with PP, the poll in this thread has a clear result that PP seems to want to discourage with miss-information.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    • However, if EV users choose to charge during peak times, under current arrangements they will impose considerable costs which will be borne by all consumers.
    This couldn't be clearer. So to say that fast charging and supporting charging at peak times such as on the way to work or at work is a poor show.

    Encouraging home and overnight charging as much as possible will clearly benefit everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    Hope that helps!?
    Stephen
    It helps hugely, thanks for posting this.
  • So it's all good then, it looks like we are all in happy agreement, the most sensible thing for EV owners, to the greater benefit of all consumers in the long run and irrespective of price, is for them to charge their vehicles when there is excess grid capacity. I haven't seen or read anything written by PP or me to say that isn't the case.

    How you get there and what customers prefer to do is a different issue and that (in part) is what this thread is about.

    Economy 7 is a good comparator here. There are lots of customers who have moved to PP who are on E7 metering; you have to ask yourself why in some cases they would do that when, especially for the higher night rate users there are tariffs out there which would be cheaper than PP. The answer in my opinion is the simplicity of a single rate appeals, they get what they perceive is the freedom to not worry about when they are using their energy. There is an argument to be made that for the greater good it would be better if they were encouraged to use more of their energy off-peak. This is no different from the EV argument, save for the fact that the growth of EV usage will doubtless be exponential, whereas normal domestic excluding EV is fairly constant.


    (@bobbin2u did you mean evade rather than allude above?)
    0
  • So it's all good then, it looks like we are all in happy agreement, the most sensible thing for EV owners, to the greater benefit of all consumers in the long run and irrespective of price, is for them to charge their vehicles when there is excess grid capacity. I haven't seen or read anything written by PP or me to say that isn't the case.

    How you get there and what customers prefer to do is a different issue and that (in part) is what this thread is about.

    Economy 7 is a good comparator here. There are lots of customers who have moved to PP who are on E7 metering; you have to ask yourself why in some cases they would do that when, especially for the higher night rate users there are tariffs out there which would be cheaper than PP. The answer in my opinion is the simplicity of a single rate appeals, they get what they perceive is the freedom to not worry about when they are using their energy. There is an argument to be made that for the greater good it would be better if they were encouraged to use more of their energy off-peak. This is no different from the EV argument, save for the fact that the growth of EV usage will doubtless be exponential, whereas normal domestic excluding EV is fairly constant.


    (@bobbin2u did you mean evade rather than allude above?)
  • There have been plenty of comments suggesting the following:
    - EV tariff incentives will increase costs for all other customers.
    - PP flat rate is already cheaper than all other EV tariffs and therefore is the correct thing to attract EV customers to PP (let alone keep the ones they have already).
    - I have already pointed out other examples where PP and some members are contradicting your greater good point here.

    What EV owners want isn't necessarily good for everyone which is also something which needs to be understood.

    Great that you agree that off peak charging of EVs would benefit everyone. You underline irrespective of price. Sadly this is the problem PP have. This will encourage on peak charging which is the very thing that is bad for all other customers. As stated by Ofgem.

    Simplicity of a low single rate will indeed appeal to many EV owners which is not necessarily a good thing for PP customers as a whole. This is where this thread is missleading or missing the point.

    We need an expert from PP to weigh in here because the single, low flat rate will begin to hurt non-EV owners soon enough unless they do something about it.

    I'm by no means an expert, as you can tell, but to me the simplest and best solution for all is a lower off peak rate for charging EVs. Do you have a better idea?

    Do you also agree that lowering the rate for off peak charging of EVs wouldn't mean price increases for everyone else?

    You said my post inspired your poll. Do you see that your poll could be misinterpreted by members to think non-EV owners would have to subsidise overnight charging?
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 14-08-19 at 19:38. Reason: Spelling error
    0
  • There have been plenty of comments suggesting the following:
    - EV tariff incentives will increase costs for all other customers.
    - PP flat rate is already cheaper than all other EV tariffs and therefore is the correct thing to attract EV customers to PP (let alone keep the ones they have already).
    - I have already pointed out other examples where PP and some members are contradicting your greater good point here.

    What EV owners want isn't necessarily good for everyone which is also something which needs to be understood.

    Great that you agree that off peak charging of EVs would benefit everyone. You underline irrespective of price. Sadly this is the problem PP have. This will encourage on peak charging which is the very thing that is bad for all other customers. As stated by Ofgem.

    Simplicity of a low single rate will indeed appeal to many EV owners which is not necessarily a good thing for PP customers as a whole. This is where this thread is missleading or missing the point.

    We need an expert from PP to weigh in here because the single, low flat rate will begin to hurt non-EV owners soon enough unless they do something about it.

    I'm by no means an expert, as you can tell, but to me the simplest and best solution for all is a lower off peak rate for charging EVs. Do you have a better idea?

    Do you also agree that lowering the rate for off peak charging of EVs wouldn't mean price increases for everyone else?

    You said my post inspired your poll. Do you see that your poll could be misinterpreted by members to think non-EV owners would have to subsidise overnight charging?