It is indeed a concern when politicians get into the act for "social" reasons and apply "solutions" that are completely against the economics of the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity to consumers.  The ESI has a large proportion of fixed costs, which ideally should be recovered by a fixed daily charge that is as high as the market will bear (without consumers disconnecting from the grid in droves and forcing the remainder of consumers to bear the costs).   However, in NZ, consumers have the option of paying a low daily charge and a higher / kWh charge, with a break-even point of 8000 kWh.  You have a choice of one or the other.   Those with their own generation like the low fixed charge option it as their generation is effectively valued at the higher avoidance cost - but of course they are not contributing.adequately to the infrastructure costs that provides their make-up energy import.   The ESI is hoping that the Government will remove the lower fixed charge option but there is resistance from the distributed generation owners.  


Don't get me started on capacity and peak charges v energy charges, which remain a bone of contention.   At least,many distribution companies are now offering time of use charges, which is at least a recognition that network capacity is expensive to provide and it is correct to signal to consumers that they should avoid increasing the peak demands placed on the network and so delay the need for its reinforcement.


By the way, NZ is a long narrow land in the antipodes of Spain and its climate runs from the "winterless north" to the deep south.   We do use space heaters!   Dunedin had -10 degrees C the other day!   


At least we have a lot of renewable generation.    


I'm getting well off the subject of TT.!


Regards


Peter Browne.      

It is indeed a concern when politicians get into the act for "social" reasons and apply "solutions" that are completely against the economics of the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity to consumers.  The ESI has a large proportion of fixed costs, which ideally should be recovered by a fixed daily charge that is as high as the market will bear (without consumers disconnecting from the grid in droves and forcing the remainder of consumers to bear the costs).   However, in NZ, consumers have the option of paying a low daily charge and a higher / kWh charge, with a break-even point of 8000 kWh.  You have a choice of one or the other.   Those with their own generation like the low fixed charge option it as their generation is effectively valued at the higher avoidance cost - but of course they are not contributing.adequately to the infrastructure costs that provides their make-up energy import.   The ESI is hoping that the Government will remove the lower fixed charge option but there is resistance from the distributed generation owners.  


Don't get me started on capacity and peak charges v energy charges, which remain a bone of contention.   At least,many distribution companies are now offering time of use charges, which is at least a recognition that network capacity is expensive to provide and it is correct to signal to consumers that they should avoid increasing the peak demands placed on the network and so delay the need for its reinforcement.


By the way, NZ is a long narrow land in the antipodes of Spain and its climate runs from the "winterless north" to the deep south.   We do use space heaters!   Dunedin had -10 degrees C the other day!   


At least we have a lot of renewable generation.    


I'm getting well off the subject of TT.!


Regards


Peter Browne.