Thursday, October 31, 2013
The True Cost of Electricity & How The "Debate" Is Being Dishonestly Restricted
Shows how the electricity price rises from 2007 is largely "policy and regulation costs" ie direct state parasitism. The other is "transport costs" ie the grid, which is basically to pay for extending the grid so that windmill electricity produced in the outer isles can be transported to London. This is a hidden "green" subsidy and an extensive one.
By comparison actually producing the stuff is barely up and by 2020 will be back down to 2007 costs. I presume this is the benefit of shale more than offsetting windmill parasitism. VAT appears not to be included.
The alleged corporate greed of the "big 6" monopolists means supplier costs will go from 19% DOWN to 16%.
So clearly, even within the terms of the official "debate" the fault lies with political price raising.
But the official debate ignores the political effect of preventing the cheapest power sources (nuclear, coal & shale) being used.
Unmentioned is that Hinkley Point is costing 4 times a much (and taking 7 years longer which pushes up interest payments) than comparable Chinese ones, and nuclear is considerably cheaper than average power.
Undebated is that 90% of electricity prices (perhaps more) are government regulatory parasitism - you will never know it from BBC "news".
Even the "big six" would much rather be damned for the largely false charge of price gouging than be shown to be running expensive obsolete equipment that could not compete with engineering cost nuclear, thus they do not call the MPs the liars they certainly are. This is common among dominant companies with fixed assets.