advertisement


Gas and Electricity Prices

MVHR, - positive ventilation with heat recovery, before all other measures - is the utmost ROI. Even in historical buildings.

Seriously - the payback is in months; and the positive background ventilation, a boon to indoor air quality (& hey, if you want HEPA filtering, you can have it.)

I've posted a lot about this previously.
 
I'm convinced BG are screwing me over. My "fixed" tariff that I started last Nov has now almost doubled the direct debit and I'm certain my usage is almost identical as nothing has changed at my end. Not sure how I'd go about proving it though but I'm confused as to how a previously accurate estimate of theirs from my tariff before this one is now suddenly almost 100% out given no change.
 
I've got a late 1970s detached house with London brick walls (no render). I haven't got cavity wall insulation and won't have it as my house really gets the weather and the bricks are quite porous, neighbour has plenty of trouble with his filled cavities

Wasn't aware of brick type being a factor in the efficacy of cavity wall insulation. I also thought that London bricks were pretty hard, and think that's what I have here. I've always been in favour of this since my first house in '75, but couldn't then because only the ground floor was cavitied (odd !). I then made a horrendous error in having Rentokil down to fill the walls in my 1870 detached multi-room house with 3 walls thick in the servants' quarters. Rentokil had to get another lorry load of rockwool sent down (to Ramsgate) from London, because the cavities were over 2" wide. Unfortunately, debris had built up or simply been deposited by the builders, which breached the few air-bricks and engineering brick DPC. Many dry-rot years later........!

I had my next 1964 suspended floor house filled, with added air-bricks, which was okay, and my current 1962 house with concrete floors; again, no prob's 21 years later. Concrete floors, nowt to rot; suspended, could be a problem unless suitably ventilated sub-floor. Obv. you're concerned about the insulation getting wet; maybe rusting the tie-bars (as happened on a neighbour's property)? I do believe it works, but side-effects can be a worse problem than cold. Interior Celotex is a good if laborious solution i.m.o.but you do need interior space not to compromise capacity.
 
I'm convinced BG are screwing me over. My "fixed" tariff that I started last Nov has now almost doubled the direct debit and I'm certain my usage is almost identical as nothing has changed at my end. Not sure how I'd go about proving it though but I'm confused as to how a previously accurate estimate of theirs from my tariff before this one is now suddenly almost 100% out given no change.

They're probably trying to protect themselves in case you can't or won't pay the bills ie building up a buffer.

I'm much the same, our energy usage for last month was £150 billed £299 taken from the direct debit plus we're actually about £60 in credit at the moment.

We're with Octopus on the price cap tariff previous mob went bust so we ended up with them.
 
They're probably trying to protect themselves in case you can't or won't pay the bills ie building up a buffer.

I'm much the same, our energy usage for last month was £150 billed £299 taken from the direct debit plus we're actually about £60 in credit at the moment.

We're with Octopus on the price cap tariff previous mob went bust so we ended up with them.

I get a billed every 6 months, even with the slight increase they had already applied before this one they reckon I was £12 in debit when previously I have been in credit. This is on a fixed tariff from last November. Started out at £42 p/m and is now almost £80.
 
I get a billed every 6 months, even with the slight increase they had already applied before this one they reckon I was £12 in debit when previously I have been in credit. This is on a fixed tariff from last November. Started out at £42 p/m and is now almost £80.

How can a fixed price tariff increase, how long is it for?

Sounds weird to me.
 
How can a fixed price tariff increase, how long is it for?

Sounds weird to me.

12 months.

It does say it can change with usage in the small print and I'd get that if I'd moved in a Mrs and kid or started mining crypto since the tariff started, but I was already with them so they have over two years of data to figure out my usage. If anything this past year I've used less!!
 
Wasn't aware of brick type being a factor in the efficacy of cavity wall insulation.
It isn't.

And cavity wall insulation on older UK houses with the likely 2" un-insulated cavity (comon from 1880mumble for a century, is a bad idea - it's not worth the effort/cost (for just 50mm of post-hoc, under-performing insulant) when there are far lower-hanging fruit to pick in total energy performance as a home!

And -

- to add something into the cavity, that defeats what it was designed to do, bridges the space, esp with likely non-galvanised wall ties - imperils the fabric integrity in the long term - or less. I cannot recommend such a route, at all.
 
A fixed tariff fixes the unit rates (URs) and standing charges for the duration of the contract - if you use more energy, it costs more (obvs).

@matt j you need to look at your bills to see what your actual energy usage is (rather than just guessing/assuming), and see if if has/hasn't changed?
Also, It could be that they are trying to build credit with an eye to the (presumably significant?) increase coming when your current fix ends? What are your current URs - current estimates for October's SVT are generally circa 45p/kWh (electricity) and 14p/kWh (gas)
(though one analyst's most recent prediction is 53p/kWh and 15p/kWh, on average)
 
Wasn't aware of brick type being a factor in the efficacy of cavity wall insulation. I also thought that London bricks were pretty hard, and think that's what I have here. I've always been in favour of this since my first house in '75, but couldn't then because only the ground floor was cavitied (odd !). I then made a horrendous error in having Rentokil down to fill the walls in my 1870 detached multi-room house with 3 walls thick in the servants' quarters. Rentokil had to get another lorry load of rockwool sent down (to Ramsgate) from London, because the cavities were over 2" wide. Unfortunately, debris had built up or simply been deposited by the builders, which breached the few air-bricks and engineering brick DPC. Many dry-rot years later........!

I had my next 1964 suspended floor house filled, with added air-bricks, which was okay, and my current 1962 house with concrete floors; again, no prob's 21 years later. Concrete floors, nowt to rot; suspended, could be a problem unless suitably ventilated sub-floor. Obv. you're concerned about the insulation getting wet; maybe rusting the tie-bars (as happened on a neighbour's property)? I do believe it works, but side-effects can be a worse problem than cold. Interior Celotex is a good if laborious solution i.m.o.but you do need interior space not to compromise capacity.

Yes the type of bricks can make a difference. My bricks seem to soak the water up and the joints are useless, wish they’d used a bit more cement as there’s some repointing to be done in places. The other thing is my house is on a ridge and gets horizontal rain hitting it at times. There’s not a sign of damp in my house. I think doing the celotex thing in the internal walls is a good solution. It’s not a big problem for me as I do the whole thing myself. The only awkward part is re-positioning the coving and bringing the electrical sockets forward. My daughter’s room is next on the list, a long north facing wall so should be good.
 
It isn't.

And cavity wall insulation on older UK houses with the likely 2" un-insulated cavity (common from 1880mumble for a century, is a bad idea - it's not worth the effort/cost (for just 50mm of post-hoc, under-performing insulant) when there are far lower-hanging fruit to pick in total energy performance as a home!

And -

- to add something into the cavity, that defeats what it was designed to do, bridges the space, esp with likely non-galvanised wall ties - imperils the fabric integrity in the long term - or less. I cannot recommend such a route, at all.

I understand your reservations re. purpose of the cavity, Martin and would agree in principle, but after s/steel wall-ties came in (60s?) the likelihood of corrosion largely or wholly diminished. Generally, I've found, cavity wall construction only came in during the latter twenties. My 1870 house was bespoke and an exception; there are obv. many other exceptions (though maybe not so old) but you can guarantee that, at least in the south, that detached houses built from, say, 1935 are probably cavitied (easy to determine, of course).

A.f.a.I k.,houses are still being built with cavities, but maybe the insulation is inserted as part of the construction. Not sure about your 'lower-hanging fruit', as surely one would want to install as many insulation methods as is practical; cav. wall insulation was touted as one of the most efficient (and cheapest, with the schemes there used to be).


Yes the type of bricks can make a difference.

Martin above disagrees (wonderful to have such diverse opinions :)) and my limited experience leads me to think that some bricks are softer/more porous than others. My previous 1964 house seemed to have used sand instead of cement. When trying to erect my G23 aerial (monstrous beast) on the back of the house (chimney too small), I couldn't get a firm fixing; either brick moved or the mortar came out. A couple of years later, my chimney needed completely rebuilding after a storm (it only had a 6 element aerial attached !) because the consistency of the cement was crap. Happy days ! Thank heavens my similarly ages (1962) house was properly built, and luckily in a sheltered position largely protected from the north by hill and neighbour's new garage.
 
The only snag we found was with cavity wall insulation. .

FWIW That was done here by the people we bought the house from. There is also some loft insulation. But it isn't as effective as more modern methods I think and looks a bit thin. So needs adding to or replacing with something that provides more insulation.
 
I would always advocate insulation before other investments. "Living in the attic" as such is quite common in older buildings, certainly old stone farmhouses in our part of Scotland. Installing "adequate" levels of insulation is likely to be very disruptive though as plasterboard (or lath and plaster) will need to come down in order to access the rafters.

We have a panel at the back of one of the built-in bedroom cupboards as easy access to the loft space. I've used it at times to get to fiddle with UHF/VHF antennas. In fact, the cupboards can be taken apart fairly easily if a bigger opening is needed. You can see the rafters, etc, as the insulation there at present is only between them. So I'm sure that by modern standards it is thin.
 
Meanwhile, Labour's plans have been announced:

-- Freeze the cap at £1971 for six months this winter.
-- Extend the windfall tax to pay for it.
-- Scrap the planned £400 rebate.
-- Rules out Nationalisation on cost grounds.

Scrapping the £400 rebate because it's now entirely funded from the windfall tax and means we save the £10bn of government spending that was currently contributing to that.

Truss will have to match this when she takes over, or at least it's hard to see how if she doesn't match this she will lose the next election. Which raises questions about her competency and blatant lying to Conservative party members during this leadership campaign. I suspect she will pull some "New information has come to light" type switcheroo in September / October.
 
I am not sure how practical that is given the size and composition of the wholesale energy markets and how you would effectively be restricted to UK based companies.

Also I haven't done the maths but I strongly suspect that rather than a surplus, if you took all of the production from Shell, BP, etc. you'd be looking at buying more from foreign suppliers. I think there are also issues surrounding the type of oil and gas as well.

The point of a Government decree is that it would overrule the 'market' so far as the extractors are concerned. They would be required - to keep their licenses - to supply the UK customers (the 'retail' companies we as people buy from) a set amount at a set price. If that was all the can extract, they still make a profit of the same size as they did pre Ukraine. if they have more, good luck to them.

We could still buy in other oil/gas at World price. But a large amount of what we get would be at our UK determined price.

Not perfect, but a LOT better than the current prospect. Once the crisis is over maybe we can go back to 'business as usual'. Or maybe in the long term this may have taught us a lesson when it comes to renewing extraction contracts for Crown assets.
 
^^ The majority of shares in Shell, BP are almost certainly owned by non-UK nationals. Their production is not in the UK. They would not be 'UK based' for long if measures like that were implemented.

They are "UK based" in the sense that any resources in the UK sector are by International Law, UK Crown assets. They have 'licenses' to extract awared by UK Government. But in times of National Emergency/War a Nation can step in and alter any such licenses. After the crisis is passed, things could then revert. Doesn't matter if the offshore companies are 'UK' ones or not.
 
Meanwhile, Labour's plans have been announced:

-- Freeze the cap at £1971 for six months this winter.
-- Extend the windfall tax to pay for it.
-- Scrap the planned £400 rebate.
-- Rules out Nationalisation on cost grounds.

Problem 1 being that we still end up paying the high costs/kWh one way or another. Although good if we can shift the burden away from the poor, I suspect we'll find it harder to get it onto the ultra-wealithy. The Prince of Darkness is still there.

Problem 2 is that capping the companies that sell to the end-user still leaves them having to buy from the extraction companies *at World price*. That means some will go bankrupt though no fault of their own. Loss of competiton, also.

Agree about Nationalisation as it would be a waste of money and effort. We don't want the offshore infrastructure, just to fix the profits they can grab from us and prevent them getting rich off our backs, and the harm being done to Ukraine. Why should they profiteer from war as people here struggle?
 
Not sure on what legal basis this "decree" would work, and overall I think I prefer Labour's plan.

You are unaware that a fair bit of UK 'law' comes from Ministers who issue some form of decree (various legal terms are used)? And if we declare a National Emergency that power gets extended for the duration. Parliament gets to argue after the fact.
 


advertisement


Back
Top