How will we pay for the Energy Bill? With our energy bills!

I cannot see the point in this debate, you can insulate a home completely but at some point need to switch the heating on.If the current increases in gas and electricity continue at the rate since 2005,no one other than the rich will be able of afford to heat their homes. It is outrageous that heating is becoming a luxury for a lot of people,alongside a roof over your head and food to eat it is a basic of life. I feel the government has totally lost the plot on this issue as naturally they are not affected by price rises having ample income to pay increases. I just wish people in Britain would take to the streets like our continental neighbours(not violence) to show our parliament that we have all had enough!

I do agree with Which? that consumer interests need to be put at the heart of the energy bill if they are going to be asked to cough up through their energy bills to fund what is needed. In particular I do feel consumers will need to be somehow shown, up front and all along the way, that improvements under the bill do genuinely offer the best value for money means to meet UK’s energy needs taking least impact to the environment also into account as well as possible breaking up of UK. Also I feel domestic consumers, need to be properly protected aginst being ripped off by their own energy supplier(s) as compared to other energy suppliers – ie to make sure all folk pay the same contribution regardless of how active their current supplier may, or may not, be in making improvements under the bill. Therein however lies a fundamental question – bearing in mind the future beneficiaries of projects completed under the bill should folk pay for it by family, by household, by person etc and who should be exempt; toddlers, teenagers, unemployed, vagrants, addicts, pensioners, handicapped, prisoners, MP’s, Royalty, lower wage earners etc etc. Another question it seems to me needs sorted out up front is whether business (large and small) and government (central & local) consumers should pay for the projects needed as well as domestic consumers. I personally don’t see why they should not although the business/government costs in doing so will no doubt feed into the price domestic consumers pay for goods and services but making them pay a fair proportion according to the significance of their carbon consumption should at least focus their efforts on reducing business/government waste of energy and thereby ensure project costs for us all are reduced – as energy capacity needed should be reduced.

will those who’ve tied in come out worse for having done so, when measures Which described in recent newsletter are put into place?

With all the debate about wind energy showing that there are some doubts as to the total cost efficiency both in generating and building the wind farms WHY is there no mention of tidal wave generation. With the Bristol Channel/RivernSevern having the second highest tidal range in the world, – some 50feet- surely the tidal barrage suggested some years ago ought to be re-visited.? Again it would be costly to build but once installed the generation could be relied upon throughout the twentyfour hours. Having had Solar Panels fitted in July this year I am already benefitting from the sun and have already had a credit electricity bill in spite of the very poor summer!! Government help for ALL householders with a south facing roof to install panels would surely be a good idea?

Ken Thomas – tidal energy seems an under-exploited resource. I wonder why – it may be much more expensive. Wind farms are inefficient in the main, private solar panels are expensive and, until recently, their feed-in tariff was ludicrously high (at our expense).
Some interesting information on tidal energy can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_barrage

and

http://www.energy.siemens.com/hq/en/power-generation/renewables/hydro-power

Sirs, It is an obviously ill-conceived, hurriedly conceived plan as many of us will be paying more for our energy than we do at present as companies will raise their tariffs to the median. As a Whitehall civil servant, I’ve been involved with similarly hasty plans in the past and they have all failed.

£110 billion would go a long way to providing or subsidising self sufficient systems on homes.
This would generate jobs to replace those lost in the big energy companies.
It would reduce or even eliminate household fuel bills – lowering the cost of living.
It would eliminate big power cuts and their effects.
It would mean energy companies make less profit.
I can’t think of a downside!
We need politicians with integrity who are not controlled by big business so that they implement what people want and need and certainly pay for, over and over, in a so-called democracy.