Energy costs. Oh dear.......

[scrumpyjack]

As I understand it the Government proposed that from 2026 you won't be able to replace your fossil-fuel boiler if you are off the gas grid.

I have no idea of the status of this proposal.

[BullDog]

[
British Gas says -

The main thing to know is that there is no ban in place (or planned!) on gas boilers in the homes we live in today.

From -

https://www.britishgas.co.uk/the-source ... -2025.html

Thanks, but that answers a different question. Not one I get asked much but granted, some people do worry the Gas Police will come round one day and cap off their boiler!

The question that bothers people is "When this boiler packs up, will I be allowed to replace it with a new gas boiler?"

As I read it, the answer is "yes you will". But it's only a matter of time before that situation changes. Of that you can be certain whilst the lunatics remain in control of the asylum.

[CliffEdge]

If energy companies are making huge profits, why does the price cap have to rise?

[dealtn]

If energy companies are making huge profits, why does the price cap have to rise?

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

[servodude]

If energy companies are making huge profits, why does the price cap have to rise?

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

How BP doing? Suffering much?

[XFool]

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

Yeah. We know which ones, don't we?

[dealtn]

If energy companies are making huge profits, why does the price cap have to rise?

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

How BP doing? Suffering much?

Not that I can see, in fact doing pretty well on a cash generation basis, but less well on a profits basis due to write offs.

However the question referred to the domestic price cap. BP isn't directly supplying this market so a question on how BP's profitability neccisitates a change in the price cap is complicated and not straightforward.

If you wanted a literal interpretation of CliifEdges question using BP as your energy company would it be appropriate to point out that BP has lost $11bn in its last 6 months, not made a profit, let alone a huge one?

[servodude]

If energy companies are making huge profits, why does the price cap have to rise?

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

How BP doing? Suffering much?

Not that I can see, in fact doing pretty well on a cash generation basis, but less well on a profits basis due to write offs.

However the question referred to the domestic price cap. BP isn't directly supplying this market so a question on how BP's profitability neccisitates a change in the price cap is complicated and not straightforward.

If you wanted a literal interpretation of CliifEdges question using BP as your energy company would it be appropriate to point out that BP has lost $11bn in its last 6 months, not made a profit, let alone a huge one?

Would it?
Only if you're considering stuff in an isolated and possibly tendentious context But don't let that stop you

-sd

[Mike4]

An oddity about accounting convention is that if BP say, made £7bn profit then spent that £7bn on say, installing electric car charging points in all the BP garages, the accounts still say they made £7bn profit.

[dealtn]

If energy companies are making huge profits, why does the price cap have to rise?

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

How BP doing? Suffering much?

Not that I can see, in fact doing pretty well on a cash generation basis, but less well on a profits basis due to write offs.

However the question referred to the domestic price cap. BP isn't directly supplying this market so a question on how BP's profitability neccisitates a change in the price cap is complicated and not straightforward.

If you wanted a literal interpretation of CliifEdges question using BP as your energy company would it be appropriate to point out that BP has lost $11bn in its last 6 months, not made a profit, let alone a huge one?

Would it?
Only if you're considering stuff in an isolated and possibly tendentious context But don't let that stop you

-sd

I'm not the one considering it in a simple isolated way though. I'm the one saying its complicated. You have a chain from wholesale supplier down to retail consumer, and at one end of that chain you have unprofitable but cash generative companies and the other squeezed consumers of an inelastic product.

How would anyone encapsulate an answer to CliifEdges question? I suggest a flippant use of a company not supplying the retail market where the cap applies, and one not making a profit, isn't the best way to start.

[CliffEdge]

The price cap applies to retail customers. The suppliers of energy to those retail customers aren't making huge profits. In fact some have gone bust.

How BP doing? Suffering much?

Not that I can see, in fact doing pretty well on a cash generation basis, but less well on a profits basis due to write offs.

However the question referred to the domestic price cap. BP isn't directly supplying this market so a question on how BP's profitability neccisitates a change in the price cap is complicated and not straightforward.

If you wanted a literal interpretation of CliifEdges question using BP as your energy company would it be appropriate to point out that BP has lost $11bn in its last 6 months, not made a profit, let alone a huge one?

Would it?
Only if you're considering stuff in an isolated and possibly tendentious context But don't let that stop you

-sd

I'm not the one considering it in a simple isolated way though. I'm the one saying its complicated. You have a chain from wholesale supplier down to retail consumer, and at one end of that chain you have unprofitable but cash generative companies and the other squeezed consumers of an inelastic product.

How would anyone encapsulate an answer to CliifEdges question? I suggest a flippant use of a company not supplying the retail market where the cap applies, and one not making a profit, isn't the best way to start.

The implication of what you say is that the current arrangements do not serve the domestic customer well and need to be challenged.
Are the likes of BP ultimately making huge profits out of the likes of me? I don't know.

[servodude]

How BP doing? Suffering much?

Not that I can see, in fact doing pretty well on a cash generation basis, but less well on a profits basis due to write offs.

However the question referred to the domestic price cap. BP isn't directly supplying this market so a question on how BP's profitability neccisitates a change in the price cap is complicated and not straightforward.

If you wanted a literal interpretation of CliifEdges question using BP as your energy company would it be appropriate to point out that BP has lost $11bn in its last 6 months, not made a profit, let alone a huge one?

Would it?
Only if you're considering stuff in an isolated and possibly tendentious context But don't let that stop you

-sd

I'm not the one considering it in a simple isolated way though. I'm the one saying its complicated. You have a chain from wholesale supplier down to retail consumer, and at one end of that chain you have unprofitable but cash generative companies and the other squeezed consumers of an inelastic product.

How would anyone encapsulate an answer to CliifEdges question? I suggest a flippant use of a company not supplying the retail market where the cap applies, and one not making a profit, isn't the best way to start.

The implication of what you say is that the current arrangements do not serve the domestic customer well and need to be challenged.
Are the likes of BP ultimately making huge profits out of the likes of me? I don't know.

Pretty obvious there's a huge, and insulating, disconnect between the generators and consumers.
That's a choice that was made
Now there's another choice as to who bears the cost of that decision when the system breaks... the consumer, or the corporation (/shareholders)?

Why not consider ownership of a utility implicit underwriting?
The business model couldn't have been sustainable if it leads to mass penury; which appears to be a possible outcome?

[dealtn]

Not that I can see, in fact doing pretty well on a cash generation basis, but less well on a profits basis due to write offs.

However the question referred to the domestic price cap. BP isn't directly supplying this market so a question on how BP's profitability neccisitates a change in the price cap is complicated and not straightforward.

If you wanted a literal interpretation of CliifEdges question using BP as your energy company would it be appropriate to point out that BP has lost $11bn in its last 6 months, not made a profit, let alone a huge one?

Would it?
Only if you're considering stuff in an isolated and possibly tendentious context But don't let that stop you

-sd

I'm not the one considering it in a simple isolated way though. I'm the one saying its complicated. You have a chain from wholesale supplier down to retail consumer, and at one end of that chain you have unprofitable but cash generative companies and the other squeezed consumers of an inelastic product.

How would anyone encapsulate an answer to CliifEdges question? I suggest a flippant use of a company not supplying the retail market where the cap applies, and one not making a profit, isn't the best way to start.

The implication of what you say is that the current arrangements do not serve the domestic customer well and need to be challenged.
Are the likes of BP ultimately making huge profits out of the likes of me? I don't know.

Pretty obvious there's a huge, and insulating, disconnect between the generators and consumers.
That's a choice that was made
Now there's another choice as to who bears the cost of that decision when the system breaks... the consumer, or the corporation (/shareholders)?

Why not consider ownership of a utility implicit underwriting?
The business model couldn't have been sustainable if it leads to mass penury; which appears to be a possible outcome?

I'm not here defending the model, but explaining it.

Similarly a replacement model that relieves such penury but doesn't reward investment and continuous supply (and future societal stability) would also be unsustainable.

[scrumpyjack]

It's funny, I don't seem to recall there being a flood of sympathy and a desire to contribute when the oil price was $20 a barrel and BP was making huge losses, nor when they lost $70 billion in the Macondo accident?

AFAIAW BP does not supply gas or electricity to UK customers

The vast majority of BPs business is not in the UK

Still why spoil the journalistic narrative with facts?

[pje16]

agreed @scrumpyjack
Nor when they lost billions owing to the Deepwater disaster
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater ... _oil_spill

[scotview]

agreed @scrumpyjack
Nor when they lost billions owing to the Deepwater disaster
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater ... _oil_spill

Good point. There's a bit more to it than that, for all the oil majors.

Firstly, they are not charities.

Secondly, they take HUGE risk when they decide to develop a project. If a project delivers they win, if a project fails they lose massively.

To penalise success will mean less investment in future viable and essential energy projects.

I, for one, do not particularly wish to see development restrictions forced on these vital companies. Energy security isn't an experiment.

[pje16]

Secondly, they take HUGE risk when they decide to develop a project. If a project delivers they win, if a project fails they lose massively.

agreed
and if they win the media moans "oooohhhh look at all the profit"
when they lose you never hear about it

[MrFoolish]

When my boiler went kaput for a couple of winter weeks during lockdown, I got used to the cold conditions after the first week. Basically stopped noticing it.

I reckon you can reset your expectations, but only if you avoid going anywhere warm.

[UncleEbenezer]

When my boiler went kaput for a couple of winter weeks during lockdown, I got used to the cold conditions after the first week. Basically stopped noticing it.

I reckon you can reset your expectations, but only if you avoid going anywhere warm.

Exactly. The whole point of being warm-blooded is that we can regulate our own body temperature to a wide range of external conditions, including all the seasons we get in Blighty. If you're not brought up to be warm (other than when the weather is warm), you don't miss it.

Though I do like my hot shower. And very occasional hot bath. Not to mention my hot food & drinks.

[Mike4]

Though I do like my hot shower. And very occasional hot bath. Not to mention my hot food & drinks.

Those take a trivial amount of energy compared to keeping the whole of an average family house at 22 degrees C 24/7/365 as most people expect nowadays. When I was a kid only one room in the house was heated - the living room - and I can see that returning.

Some re-calibration is coming whether people like it or not. A bloke on the wireless was pointing out that the gas price will keep on rising until a balance is achieved between demand and supply. The market WILL force consumption down eventually. We just haven't found the balance point yet.