Poll: If PP offered an incentivised tariff for EV owners , would you be prepared to pay more?


  • A poll. Should customers who don't have electric vehicles support those who do?

    Once again,this poll was prompted by a recent post.
    Whilst I appreciate it may not be the only solution, let's suppose that in order to offer a tariff which incentivised EV ownership, such as lower rates at night for example (there are other options), that PP had to slightly increase the rates for all customers.
    How would you feel about that?
    Maybe you feel the gain in air quality and emissions is easily offset by the extra percentage, so you are happy, or maybe you don't see why only EV owners (driving their flash £60,000 vehicles) should get a benefit that you can't have?

    The phrasing above is deliberately provocative and in no way reflects my onion pi (re-arrange into well known word)

    ​Please vote! (and comment).
    Last edited by woz; 10-08-19 at 18:07.
    1
  • Once again,this poll was prompted by a recent post.
    Whilst I appreciate it may not be the only solution, let's suppose that in order to offer a tariff which incentivised EV ownership, such as lower rates at night for example (there are other options), that PP had to slightly increase the rates for all customers.
    How would you feel about that?
    Maybe you feel the gain in air quality and emissions is easily offset by the extra percentage, so you are happy, or maybe you don't see why only EV owners (driving their flash £60,000 vehicles) should get a benefit that you can't have?

    The phrasing above is deliberately provocative and in no way reflects my onion pi (re-arrange into well known word)

    ​Please vote! (and comment).
  • As the, so far, only person who has said 'yes we should,' I'm going to offer some slight 'justification' of my viewpoint.

    If, by paying a bit extra, I'm supporting someone else's decision to do what I cannot - run a theoretically 'cleaner' car, then so far as I'm concerned - that's a good thing.

    Pretty much every adult in the UK pays for something that they aren't always able to 'take advantage' of, its called being part of a 'civilised society' - we pool our resources, and ultimately everyone should benefit.

    In the longer term, by the 2030s/2040s almost everyone who has a new car, will have some form of 'non-polluting at source' propulsion, whether that be Electric, Hydrogen, or something else, so eventually, we'll all be paying for each others cars, and it will no longer matter.

    2
  • As the, so far, only person who has said 'yes we should,' I'm going to offer some slight 'justification' of my viewpoint.

    If, by paying a bit extra, I'm supporting someone else's decision to do what I cannot - run a theoretically 'cleaner' car, then so far as I'm concerned - that's a good thing.

    Pretty much every adult in the UK pays for something that they aren't always able to 'take advantage' of, its called being part of a 'civilised society' - we pool our resources, and ultimately everyone should benefit.

    In the longer term, by the 2030s/2040s almost everyone who has a new car, will have some form of 'non-polluting at source' propulsion, whether that be Electric, Hydrogen, or something else, so eventually, we'll all be paying for each others cars, and it will no longer matter.

  • Hi woz.

    I think you need to amend the poll slightly as i have another option which i would be happy with.
    Octopus energy have a super cheap tariff for ev users, but its only for 4 hrs per night 00.30-04.30. So in that light if PP could have a super cheap 4 hr period and standard tariff the rest of the time, BUT and its a big BUT everyone should be on the same pricing plan. So those folk who have an EV or those bothered enough can take advantage of the cheap period.
    Obviously an enabled smart meter would be needed. If one not fitted then a presumed % is used to calculate ones cheap usage.
    3
  • Hi woz.

    I think you need to amend the poll slightly as i have another option which i would be happy with.
    Octopus energy have a super cheap tariff for ev users, but its only for 4 hrs per night 00.30-04.30. So in that light if PP could have a super cheap 4 hr period and standard tariff the rest of the time, BUT and its a big BUT everyone should be on the same pricing plan. So those folk who have an EV or those bothered enough can take advantage of the cheap period.
    Obviously an enabled smart meter would be needed. If one not fitted then a presumed % is used to calculate ones cheap usage.
  • hi jon1
    I beg to differ, I knew about Octopus (although didn't realise it was 4 hours), it among other things, was one of the reasons I posted.

    It isn't possible to amend the poll but my feeling is it still stands as is, because if PP pay for their energy and allow some of it to be consumed at a cheap rate, the money has to come from somewhere, so ultimately it would almost certainly affect the unit rates.
    Despite what you may think I was very careful with my wording, but I'd like to have seen my text above the poll rather than below it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon1 View Post
    Hi woz.

    I think you need to amend the poll slightly as i have another option which i would be happy with.
    Octopus energy have a super cheap tariff for ev users, but its only for 4 hrs per night 00.30-04.30. So in that light if PP could have a super cheap 4 hr period and standard tariff the rest of the time, BUT and its a big BUT everyone should be on the same pricing plan. So those folk who have an EV or those bothered enough can take advantage of the cheap period.
    Obviously an enabled smart meter would be needed. If one not fitted then a presumed % is used to calculate ones cheap usage.
    1
  • hi jon1
    I beg to differ, I knew about Octopus (although didn't realise it was 4 hours), it among other things, was one of the reasons I posted.

    It isn't possible to amend the poll but my feeling is it still stands as is, because if PP pay for their energy and allow some of it to be consumed at a cheap rate, the money has to come from somewhere, so ultimately it would almost certainly affect the unit rates.
    Despite what you may think I was very careful with my wording, but I'd like to have seen my text above the poll rather than below it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon1 View Post
    Hi woz.

    I think you need to amend the poll slightly as i have another option which i would be happy with.
    Octopus energy have a super cheap tariff for ev users, but its only for 4 hrs per night 00.30-04.30. So in that light if PP could have a super cheap 4 hr period and standard tariff the rest of the time, BUT and its a big BUT everyone should be on the same pricing plan. So those folk who have an EV or those bothered enough can take advantage of the cheap period.
    Obviously an enabled smart meter would be needed. If one not fitted then a presumed % is used to calculate ones cheap usage.
  • Why dress it up only as an EV thing though? For example, dishwashers and washing machines often have a delayed start so they can come on at night to make use of lower rate tariffs.

    That said, I voted No anyhow as the washing machine/dishwasher is not allowed on overnight....just in case! (Not that we've ever had an issue with either before)
    2
  • Why dress it up only as an EV thing though? For example, dishwashers and washing machines often have a delayed start so they can come on at night to make use of lower rate tariffs.

    That said, I voted No anyhow as the washing machine/dishwasher is not allowed on overnight....just in case! (Not that we've ever had an issue with either before)
  • I voted no because if you can afford a Tesla EV you can afford to pay full rate, of course when I'm issued with my Trabant EV I'll vote yes.
    2
  • I voted no because if you can afford a Tesla EV you can afford to pay full rate, of course when I'm issued with my Trabant EV I'll vote yes.
  • The overnight wholesale rate (the amount Pure Planet pays) is negative. Therefore if EV owners are charged for using more electricity at night that they otherwise wouldn't use, the profit would go towards reducing the overall cost of electricity for ALL customers.
    Last edited by Marc; 13-08-19 at 10:51. Reason: Removing section which criticises community member
    0
  • The overnight wholesale rate (the amount Pure Planet pays) is negative. Therefore if EV owners are charged for using more electricity at night that they otherwise wouldn't use, the profit would go towards reducing the overall cost of electricity for ALL customers.
  • So if I buy more EVs I can save even more? Remember the advert?

    Whereas there may be some incentives from energy producers for companies to try and take up very off peak consumption the fact that we don't have split metering you don't know when PP customers consumption is happening, so to say that EV owners are paying more per se is wrong. If we had an economy 7 style Day rate / night rate and both the same then night only users would be subsidising day users.

    Looking on the web at the 2017 wholesale electric prices for 11pm to 6am is 4.99p per unit and its 24.99p per unit for 4pm to 9pm so I don't see where your negative figure comes from, also considering that with the current setup whilst you can get an approximate Mw cost the contract prices between Generators and Suppliers is confidential.

    I think that when we are all on smart meters split pricing will be so much easier than it was years when you required extra meters and time switches, anyone remember the old RH1, RH2 or RH3 tariffs?

    Maybe PP will offer split pricing on smart meters when the industry gets them to run perfect all the time.
    2
  • So if I buy more EVs I can save even more? Remember the advert?

    Whereas there may be some incentives from energy producers for companies to try and take up very off peak consumption the fact that we don't have split metering you don't know when PP customers consumption is happening, so to say that EV owners are paying more per se is wrong. If we had an economy 7 style Day rate / night rate and both the same then night only users would be subsidising day users.

    Looking on the web at the 2017 wholesale electric prices for 11pm to 6am is 4.99p per unit and its 24.99p per unit for 4pm to 9pm so I don't see where your negative figure comes from, also considering that with the current setup whilst you can get an approximate Mw cost the contract prices between Generators and Suppliers is confidential.

    I think that when we are all on smart meters split pricing will be so much easier than it was years when you required extra meters and time switches, anyone remember the old RH1, RH2 or RH3 tariffs?

    Maybe PP will offer split pricing on smart meters when the industry gets them to run perfect all the time.
  • I agree. It most definitely requires split metering/ 1/2 hourly smart metering. Interesting that isn't mentioned by Pure Planet in their thread about encouraging EV adoption when this is probably one of the biggest benefits to all customers, EV and non-EV alike.

    My awareness of the negative rates comes from an interview I heard with someone in the industry who is privy to the information. I am using it to illustrate the point which is being so misunderstood and promoted by many within this community. However, even the level of your figures above point to the benefit of overnight use of electricity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I think the wording of this poll is counterproductive. It strongly alludes to and reinforces the misconception that if Pure Planet were to offer an incentivised tariff for EV owners that non-EV owning customers would inevitably have to subsidise such customers. The opposite is more likely. I think this should be taken into consideration. It is really just a moot point. I am not sure what this poll is trying to achieve. Perhaps Woz can explain further?
    0
  • I agree. It most definitely requires split metering/ 1/2 hourly smart metering. Interesting that isn't mentioned by Pure Planet in their thread about encouraging EV adoption when this is probably one of the biggest benefits to all customers, EV and non-EV alike.

    My awareness of the negative rates comes from an interview I heard with someone in the industry who is privy to the information. I am using it to illustrate the point which is being so misunderstood and promoted by many within this community. However, even the level of your figures above point to the benefit of overnight use of electricity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I think the wording of this poll is counterproductive. It strongly alludes to and reinforces the misconception that if Pure Planet were to offer an incentivised tariff for EV owners that non-EV owning customers would inevitably have to subsidise such customers. The opposite is more likely. I think this should be taken into consideration. It is really just a moot point. I am not sure what this poll is trying to achieve. Perhaps Woz can explain further?
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    I agree. It most definitely requires split metering/ 1/2 hourly smart metering. Interesting that isn't mentioned by Pure Planet in their thread about encouraging EV adoption when this is probably one of the biggest benefits to all customers, EV and non-EV alike.

    My awareness of the negative rates comes from an interview I heard with someone in the industry who is privy to the information. I am using it to illustrate the point which is being so misunderstood and promoted by many within this community. However, even the level of your figures above point to the benefit of overnight use of electricity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I think the wording of this poll is counterproductive. It strongly alludes to and reinforces the misconception that if Pure Planet were to offer an incentivised tariff for EV owners that non-EV owning customers would inevitably have to subsidise such customers. The opposite is more likely. I think this should be taken into consideration. It is really just a moot point. I am not sure what this poll is trying to achieve. Perhaps Woz can explain further?

    Hi Bobbin,

    Some good points raised.

    I am always wary of facts in interviews as things can be edited to suit a particular point. My guess would be it could be a theoretical negative rate rather than an actual rate and is used to encourage use, a loss leader as it were (maybe from a government subsidy).

    I won't answer for Woz as it's his poll but I took the poll to be a more open general EV subsidy point rather than a purely PP tariff issue. Should we encourage EV use and should PP have an EV tariff restricted to only EV charging is possibly a different question. But either way are you prepared to chip in if you will not benefit?

    As for splits, I would not say half hourly splits, but at the same time blocks that the generators use for their wholesale prices something possible with smart meters. OK our membership fees might need to be adjusted but if you time your usage you could really save.

    Just my thoughts.

    X Driver
    2
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    I agree. It most definitely requires split metering/ 1/2 hourly smart metering. Interesting that isn't mentioned by Pure Planet in their thread about encouraging EV adoption when this is probably one of the biggest benefits to all customers, EV and non-EV alike.

    My awareness of the negative rates comes from an interview I heard with someone in the industry who is privy to the information. I am using it to illustrate the point which is being so misunderstood and promoted by many within this community. However, even the level of your figures above point to the benefit of overnight use of electricity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I think the wording of this poll is counterproductive. It strongly alludes to and reinforces the misconception that if Pure Planet were to offer an incentivised tariff for EV owners that non-EV owning customers would inevitably have to subsidise such customers. The opposite is more likely. I think this should be taken into consideration. It is really just a moot point. I am not sure what this poll is trying to achieve. Perhaps Woz can explain further?

    Hi Bobbin,

    Some good points raised.

    I am always wary of facts in interviews as things can be edited to suit a particular point. My guess would be it could be a theoretical negative rate rather than an actual rate and is used to encourage use, a loss leader as it were (maybe from a government subsidy).

    I won't answer for Woz as it's his poll but I took the poll to be a more open general EV subsidy point rather than a purely PP tariff issue. Should we encourage EV use and should PP have an EV tariff restricted to only EV charging is possibly a different question. But either way are you prepared to chip in if you will not benefit?

    As for splits, I would not say half hourly splits, but at the same time blocks that the generators use for their wholesale prices something possible with smart meters. OK our membership fees might need to be adjusted but if you time your usage you could really save.

    Just my thoughts.

    X Driver
  • The interview was with the CEO of an energy company. Can't remember which one. They were discussing the possibility of paying EV users to charge overnight. I looked into this a little as I couldn't quite believe it myself. There is a lot of talk about businesses being paid to use electricity at night. Someone has to pay for that. My guess it's everyone using peak electricity and daytime electricity.

    @woz You said this poll was promoted by a recent post. It would be good to know which post and why?

    I still don't really understand the question. "Should customers who don't have electric vehicles support those who do?" The answer would depend largely on the nature of that support. It then goes on to ask: "If PP offered an incentivised tariff for EV owners , would you be prepared to pay more?"

    This suggests that the nature of the support would be financial and that Non-EV owners are being asked if they would pay more for their electricity so that Pure Planet could offer better rates to EV owners for charging their vehicles.

    You then go on to explain the question is based around the supposition that in order to do this PP would have to increase the rate for other customers. This question is only relevant if this supposition is correct. Why have you made this supposition and do you think it is correct?
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 14-08-19 at 17:05. Reason: Spelling error
    0
  • The interview was with the CEO of an energy company. Can't remember which one. They were discussing the possibility of paying EV users to charge overnight. I looked into this a little as I couldn't quite believe it myself. There is a lot of talk about businesses being paid to use electricity at night. Someone has to pay for that. My guess it's everyone using peak electricity and daytime electricity.

    @woz You said this poll was promoted by a recent post. It would be good to know which post and why?

    I still don't really understand the question. "Should customers who don't have electric vehicles support those who do?" The answer would depend largely on the nature of that support. It then goes on to ask: "If PP offered an incentivised tariff for EV owners , would you be prepared to pay more?"

    This suggests that the nature of the support would be financial and that Non-EV owners are being asked if they would pay more for their electricity so that Pure Planet could offer better rates to EV owners for charging their vehicles.

    You then go on to explain the question is based around the supposition that in order to do this PP would have to increase the rate for other customers. This question is only relevant if this supposition is correct. Why have you made this supposition and do you think it is correct?
  • For energy companies smart meters are the answer. This way they can track exact usage habits of every customer and build detailed usage patterns. Energy creators have a fine balance to maintain in providing enough energy at the right times, increasing and decreasing creation at the right times so there is enough in the grid.

    So then expect more time targetted tariffs to become the norm where high costs are at peak usage (half time in sports or ad breaks in Corrie etc ) with cheaper tariffs at low usage time.

    For all that smart meters make life easier for the end customer....I can't help but feel it is the energy companies who will benefit in the long run.
    2
  • For energy companies smart meters are the answer. This way they can track exact usage habits of every customer and build detailed usage patterns. Energy creators have a fine balance to maintain in providing enough energy at the right times, increasing and decreasing creation at the right times so there is enough in the grid.

    So then expect more time targetted tariffs to become the norm where high costs are at peak usage (half time in sports or ad breaks in Corrie etc ) with cheaper tariffs at low usage time.

    For all that smart meters make life easier for the end customer....I can't help but feel it is the energy companies who will benefit in the long run.
  • hi @bobbin2u
    have a read of THIS, sorry it's a bit lengthy.
    @Jenam93 and in the same spirit, when time targeting comes (as it inevitably will) there will be those who think it's a benefit and those who think they are being penalised because they can't choose to use their energy off peak.
    0
  • hi @bobbin2u
    have a read of THIS, sorry it's a bit lengthy.
    @Jenam93 and in the same spirit, when time targeting comes (as it inevitably will) there will be those who think it's a benefit and those who think they are being penalised because they can't choose to use their energy off peak.
  • I've just read it. There's only one very small comment about supporting EV users and sadly it refers the citizens advice research document and the EV tariff thread. I really don't think PP have a strategy here yet. Seems like they are biding their time. Perhaps losing customers is what they need to provoke some real action and proper communication. Even the CEO seems reluctant to address the topic. His response is already outdated and now inaccurate. That's how fast things are moving.

    It really doesn't mention anything about an EV tariff increasing costs to other customers either. I still don't understand the reasoning behind your supposition in your poll?
    0
  • I've just read it. There's only one very small comment about supporting EV users and sadly it refers the citizens advice research document and the EV tariff thread. I really don't think PP have a strategy here yet. Seems like they are biding their time. Perhaps losing customers is what they need to provoke some real action and proper communication. Even the CEO seems reluctant to address the topic. His response is already outdated and now inaccurate. That's how fast things are moving.

    It really doesn't mention anything about an EV tariff increasing costs to other customers either. I still don't understand the reasoning behind your supposition in your poll?
  • About how PP buy their energy:-
    ​---------------------->
    Question 3 from @Lenny
    Hello Chris,
    I'm just trying to reconcile the fact that the electricity unit cost members pay is stable for months at a time, while your wholesale costs clearly fluctuate rapidly? I appreciate that buying in advance can mitigate here, but I'm not sure how the members' stable unit rate can be accurately linked to Pure Planets' more volatile rare without some degree of retrospective reconciliation?
    Hi @Lenny
    Thanks for your question, which gets straight to the heart of managing the trading side of an energy supply business!
    As you may be aware, there are quite a number of moving parts and assumptions being made between our estimate of the electricity of gas which our Members use and sending out a statement. I’ll try to set out the steps in order below and then (hopefully!?) get to the substance of your question.
    Here’s what we do to supply a more stable price to our members.


    1. Each day we get a forecast of how much electricity and gas all our Members will use, by day, for the next year. For those interested, we get one daily volume for gas, but electricity is split into 48 half-hourly periods, so we get 365 x 48 = 17,520 estimates.
    2. For the longer-term purchasing, we add those forecasts up so we can see how much electricity and gas our Members will use each month over the next year. With this information we can purchase the electricity and gas “forward”, which means we agree a price now that we will pay for that energy in the future. This is referred to as “hedging”. We make those forward purchases gradually over time, so as we get closer to the date of “delivery”, we will have agreed a price for the majority of our Members’ expected usage.This means we have an increasingly clear idea of the cost of the electricity and gas as we get closer to the date of delivery.
    3. In the short-term, because the expected usage changes every day based on the weather, we then have to make small adjustments to the amount of electricity and gas we have bought, in order to match as close as possible the amount our Members are forecast to use. In line with most other electricity market participants (suppliers, generators, etc) we put the difference between the electricity we’ve already bought and the forecast into the daily auction, where we may be selling in some time periods and buying in others. We are automatically allocated a price for these volumes. This adds some uncertainty to the final electricity price, but typically represents a small percentage of the total cost and therefore is manageable. Gas is slightly easier, since this can be adjusted at any point up to the day the gas is actually being used. Again, in normal conditions (ie not a Beast-from-the-East scenario) this is also a relatively small percentage of the total, so should not influence the overall price significantly.


    So, when we set our retail prices, we are taking into account the cost of the electricity and gas we’ve already purchased, plus the prices that we can see in the market for whatever extra we need purchase for around a year ahead. So, while prices fluctuate daily, hopefully that gives you an idea of how we’ve smoothed those very short-term changes with the longer-term hedges in order to get to a stable retail price which we can keep in ‘balance’ over a reasonable period of time.
    I appreciate that’s quite a bit to be taking on board and might sound rather complicated. All at once, it is!
    But if you have the time (and the inclination!) to follow all that through, I’m sure it will begin to make sense. If it doesn’t, then it will be my inadequate description which is causing any confusion.
    0
  • About how PP buy their energy:-
    ​---------------------->
    Question 3 from @Lenny
    Hello Chris,
    I'm just trying to reconcile the fact that the electricity unit cost members pay is stable for months at a time, while your wholesale costs clearly fluctuate rapidly? I appreciate that buying in advance can mitigate here, but I'm not sure how the members' stable unit rate can be accurately linked to Pure Planets' more volatile rare without some degree of retrospective reconciliation?
    Hi @Lenny
    Thanks for your question, which gets straight to the heart of managing the trading side of an energy supply business!
    As you may be aware, there are quite a number of moving parts and assumptions being made between our estimate of the electricity of gas which our Members use and sending out a statement. I’ll try to set out the steps in order below and then (hopefully!?) get to the substance of your question.
    Here’s what we do to supply a more stable price to our members.


    1. Each day we get a forecast of how much electricity and gas all our Members will use, by day, for the next year. For those interested, we get one daily volume for gas, but electricity is split into 48 half-hourly periods, so we get 365 x 48 = 17,520 estimates.
    2. For the longer-term purchasing, we add those forecasts up so we can see how much electricity and gas our Members will use each month over the next year. With this information we can purchase the electricity and gas “forward”, which means we agree a price now that we will pay for that energy in the future. This is referred to as “hedging”. We make those forward purchases gradually over time, so as we get closer to the date of “delivery”, we will have agreed a price for the majority of our Members’ expected usage.This means we have an increasingly clear idea of the cost of the electricity and gas as we get closer to the date of delivery.
    3. In the short-term, because the expected usage changes every day based on the weather, we then have to make small adjustments to the amount of electricity and gas we have bought, in order to match as close as possible the amount our Members are forecast to use. In line with most other electricity market participants (suppliers, generators, etc) we put the difference between the electricity we’ve already bought and the forecast into the daily auction, where we may be selling in some time periods and buying in others. We are automatically allocated a price for these volumes. This adds some uncertainty to the final electricity price, but typically represents a small percentage of the total cost and therefore is manageable. Gas is slightly easier, since this can be adjusted at any point up to the day the gas is actually being used. Again, in normal conditions (ie not a Beast-from-the-East scenario) this is also a relatively small percentage of the total, so should not influence the overall price significantly.


    So, when we set our retail prices, we are taking into account the cost of the electricity and gas we’ve already purchased, plus the prices that we can see in the market for whatever extra we need purchase for around a year ahead. So, while prices fluctuate daily, hopefully that gives you an idea of how we’ve smoothed those very short-term changes with the longer-term hedges in order to get to a stable retail price which we can keep in ‘balance’ over a reasonable period of time.
    I appreciate that’s quite a bit to be taking on board and might sound rather complicated. All at once, it is!
    But if you have the time (and the inclination!) to follow all that through, I’m sure it will begin to make sense. If it doesn’t, then it will be my inadequate description which is causing any confusion.
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    The interview was with the CEO of an energy company. Can't remember which one. They were discussing the possibility of paying EV users to charge overnight. I looked into this a little as I couldn't quite believe it myself. There is a lot of talk about businesses being paid to use electricity at night. Someone has to pay for that. My guess it's everyone using peak electricity and daytime electricity.

    @woz You said this poll was promoted by a recent post. It would be good to know which post and why?

    I still don't really understand the question. "Should customers who don't have electric vehicles support those who do?" The answer would depend largely on the nature of that support. It then goes on to ask: "If PP offered an incentivised tariff for EV owners , would you be prepared to pay more?"

    This suggests that the nature of the support would be financial and that Non-EV owners are being asked if they would pay more for their electricity so that Pure Planet could offer better rates to EV owners for charging their vehicles.

    You then go on to explain the question is based around the supposition that in order to do this PP would have to increase the rate for other customers. This question is only relevant if this supposition is correct. Why have you made this supposition and do you think it is correct?

    I wonder if it was one of the recent discussions about how to increase the use of EVs to match other countries, free Home charge points, vehicle subsidies, more "charge point filling stations", promotional tariffs, etc. A sort of why can't we have a take up like Norway without investing the same.

    I think the poll at present shows that people don't want to appear to subsidise others directly. Who was the one that said yes?
    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    The interview was with the CEO of an energy company. Can't remember which one. They were discussing the possibility of paying EV users to charge overnight. I looked into this a little as I couldn't quite believe it myself. There is a lot of talk about businesses being paid to use electricity at night. Someone has to pay for that. My guess it's everyone using peak electricity and daytime electricity.

    @woz You said this poll was promoted by a recent post. It would be good to know which post and why?

    I still don't really understand the question. "Should customers who don't have electric vehicles support those who do?" The answer would depend largely on the nature of that support. It then goes on to ask: "If PP offered an incentivised tariff for EV owners , would you be prepared to pay more?"

    This suggests that the nature of the support would be financial and that Non-EV owners are being asked if they would pay more for their electricity so that Pure Planet could offer better rates to EV owners for charging their vehicles.

    You then go on to explain the question is based around the supposition that in order to do this PP would have to increase the rate for other customers. This question is only relevant if this supposition is correct. Why have you made this supposition and do you think it is correct?

    I wonder if it was one of the recent discussions about how to increase the use of EVs to match other countries, free Home charge points, vehicle subsidies, more "charge point filling stations", promotional tariffs, etc. A sort of why can't we have a take up like Norway without investing the same.

    I think the poll at present shows that people don't want to appear to subsidise others directly. Who was the one that said yes?
  • It was Gwyndy, and you can read read his cogent reply above.

    Quote Originally Posted by X Driver View Post
    I wonder if it was one of the recent discussions about how to increase the use of EVs to match other countries, free Home charge points, vehicle subsidies, more "charge point filling stations", promotional tariffs, etc. A sort of why can't we have a take up like Norway without investing the same.

    I think the poll at present shows that people don't want to appear to subsidise others directly. Who was the one that said yes?
    0
  • It was Gwyndy, and you can read read his cogent reply above.

    Quote Originally Posted by X Driver View Post
    I wonder if it was one of the recent discussions about how to increase the use of EVs to match other countries, free Home charge points, vehicle subsidies, more "charge point filling stations", promotional tariffs, etc. A sort of why can't we have a take up like Norway without investing the same.

    I think the poll at present shows that people don't want to appear to subsidise others directly. Who was the one that said yes?
  • Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    About how PP buy their energy:-
    ​---------------------->
    Question 3 from @Lenny
    Hello Chris,
    I'm just trying to reconcile the fact that the electricity unit cost members pay is stable for months at a time, while your wholesale costs clearly fluctuate rapidly? I appreciate that buying in advance can mitigate here, but I'm not sure how the members' stable unit rate can be accurately linked to Pure Planets' more volatile rare without some degree of retrospective reconciliation?
    Hi @Lenny
    Thanks for your question, which gets straight to the heart of managing the trading side of an energy supply business!
    As you may be aware, there are quite a number of moving parts and assumptions being made between our estimate of the electricity of gas which our Members use and sending out a statement. I’ll try to set out the steps in order below and then (hopefully!?) get to the substance of your question.
    [SIZE=2][COLOR=#444444][FONT=Roboto][FONT=arial]Here’s what we do to supply a more stable price to our members.
    What relevance does any of that have as to why PP is unwilling/unable to provide an EV tariff which would benefit all customers? I can see no reason here as to why they couldn't purchase lower-cost electricity at night if they had customers with the corresponding demand.

    At the end of the day, we are not treating our planet with respect and Pure Planet sell themselves on this philosophy. However, they are currently doing nothing to promote or support the adoption and use of EVs. Don't you wonder why this is?
    Last edited by bobbin2u; 14-08-19 at 22:26. Reason: quote didn't work, grammar
    0
  • Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    About how PP buy their energy:-
    ​---------------------->
    Question 3 from @Lenny
    Hello Chris,
    I'm just trying to reconcile the fact that the electricity unit cost members pay is stable for months at a time, while your wholesale costs clearly fluctuate rapidly? I appreciate that buying in advance can mitigate here, but I'm not sure how the members' stable unit rate can be accurately linked to Pure Planets' more volatile rare without some degree of retrospective reconciliation?
    Hi @Lenny
    Thanks for your question, which gets straight to the heart of managing the trading side of an energy supply business!
    As you may be aware, there are quite a number of moving parts and assumptions being made between our estimate of the electricity of gas which our Members use and sending out a statement. I’ll try to set out the steps in order below and then (hopefully!?) get to the substance of your question.
    [SIZE=2][COLOR=#444444][FONT=Roboto][FONT=arial]Here’s what we do to supply a more stable price to our members.
    What relevance does any of that have as to why PP is unwilling/unable to provide an EV tariff which would benefit all customers? I can see no reason here as to why they couldn't purchase lower-cost electricity at night if they had customers with the corresponding demand.

    At the end of the day, we are not treating our planet with respect and Pure Planet sell themselves on this philosophy. However, they are currently doing nothing to promote or support the adoption and use of EVs. Don't you wonder why this is?
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    What relevance does any of that have as to why PP is unwilling/unable to provide an EV tariff which would benefit all customers? I can see no reason here as to why they couldn't purchase lower-cost electricity at night if they had customers with the corresponding demand.

    At the end of the day, we are not treating our planet with respect and Pure Planet sell themselves on this philosophy. However, they are currently not doing anything to promote or support the adoption and use of EVs. Don't you wonder why this is?
    Except initiating a discussion about how best they can do it - which you have been able to use to express your views very clearly.
    Last edited by stephenrand; 14-08-19 at 22:51.
    1
  • Quote Originally Posted by bobbin2u View Post
    What relevance does any of that have as to why PP is unwilling/unable to provide an EV tariff which would benefit all customers? I can see no reason here as to why they couldn't purchase lower-cost electricity at night if they had customers with the corresponding demand.

    At the end of the day, we are not treating our planet with respect and Pure Planet sell themselves on this philosophy. However, they are currently not doing anything to promote or support the adoption and use of EVs. Don't you wonder why this is?
    Except initiating a discussion about how best they can do it - which you have been able to use to express your views very clearly.
  • Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    Except initiating a discussion about how best they can do it - which you have been able to use to express their your views very clearly.
    Precisely. Talk is cheap. There is no action. Plus, in that discussion, they cite outdated and insufficient research and encourage the opinion that an EV tariff would be punitive towards non-EV customers which resulted in the title of this thread and the nature of the question in this poll.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    hi jon1
    I beg to differ, I knew about Octopus ... it among other things, was one of the reasons I posted.

    ... my feeling is it still stands as is, because if PP pay for their energy and allow some of it to be consumed at a cheap rate, the money has to come from somewhere, so ultimately it would almost certainly affect the unit rates.
    @woz do you still believe this to be the case?
    1
  • Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    Except initiating a discussion about how best they can do it - which you have been able to use to express their your views very clearly.
    Precisely. Talk is cheap. There is no action. Plus, in that discussion, they cite outdated and insufficient research and encourage the opinion that an EV tariff would be punitive towards non-EV customers which resulted in the title of this thread and the nature of the question in this poll.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    hi jon1
    I beg to differ, I knew about Octopus ... it among other things, was one of the reasons I posted.

    ... my feeling is it still stands as is, because if PP pay for their energy and allow some of it to be consumed at a cheap rate, the money has to come from somewhere, so ultimately it would almost certainly affect the unit rates.
    @woz do you still believe this to be the case?