[hugh]

Residents who use the least amount of electricity in the province by avoiding the use of electric heating and other power-hungry appliances can expect to pay up to 12 per cent more beginning Nov. 1.

As of Nov. 1, consumers will begin paying 5.6 cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity up to 1,000 kilowatt-hours each month. Above that, the rate climbs to 6.5 cents per kilowatt-hour.


The current rate, in effect since May, was 5 cents per kilowatt-hour below a monthly threshold of 600 kilowatt-hours and 5.9 cents per kilowatt-hour for any consumption above that threshold.

For folks in other provinces. Ontarians then pay a delivery charge, Regulatory charge, a debt retirement charge and GST.

The result is the kwh rate is about double the stated rate.

 

[99gecko]

I am sooooo looking forward to time-of-use billing.

 

[wgauci]

Cool, 20 Grand in energy upgrades to my house just so I can pay the same amount of hydro next year.

 

[recneps77]

Though really, this 0.6c extra is nothing once you add in all the extra fees.
it's ~5% more. All of you paid 30% increase in gas prices this summer (if you drive)
That probably cost you more than this increase in electricity will.

 

[txv]

The increase is going to be negligible, given that the electricity rate only makes up half of the bill.

This is just a normal rate adjustment based on projected weather related demand and fuel costs.

Use electricity wisely and the bills will be low; there's no reason for the average house with gas fired heating/water heating to consume more than 20 kWh per day. (<=15 kWh per day can be achieved by eliminating standby loads, getting a few CFLs, and applying common sense. . No need for expensive appliance/HVAC upgrades)

 

[wgauci]

Yes, TXV is right, I lowered my hydro usage significantly this summer even before I upgraded my HVAC. It just annoys me seeing energy costs going up while I'm making improvements that would be saving me even more money. My old leaky house was rated at a 68 on our audit and our hydro and gas bills were pretty high even with an older HE furnace. I'm looking forward to significant reduction's in our usage this year, our new rating is at 82. It really is annoying though when you see the largest portions of your bills are not usage but fees. After seeing how little water was actually costing on our bill this year and most of the charges were fees, I decided to keep my lawn alive in the summer and watered it at will. My water bill barely went up and I probably used 50% more this summer.

 

[smootherator]

Dont you love how they want people to conserve energy and then raise the rates making those saving null.

I guess conservation is not good for profits.

 

[57]

The recent posts are not logical. They are for fixed costs, but the topic here is increased pricing. With increased pricing your savings do increase with more energy efficiency. The higher the energy costs, the more you save (you also pay more, but "less more" than if you hadn't made the improvements in your home).

Higher costs do encourage conservation - just look at what happened with vehicle sales with higher gas prices.

BTW, rates for summer and winter have been different for several years. The winter rates have been higher, but there has also been a higher "threshold" for the change from the lower rate to the higher rate (1000 vs 600 kWh). There is not really anything "new" in this thread, it's basically just posting the latest rates.

 

[smootherator]

its just frustrating to upgrade your units to save cash and end up paying the same as you did the year before.

So considering the added cost of the energy efficient units and the ever increasing energy costs your return on investment will take longer than the usefull life of the appliance.

 

[57]

Not true, the higher the energy costs, the larger the savings (difference between what you pay now compared to what you would have paid), so the payback is shorter not longer.

Do I need to provide an example of arithmetic?

Previous energy cost - say $2000, if you save 20%, that's $400.

New energy cost - say $2100, if you save 20%, that's $420.

If the item that saved you the 20% cost $4000, the payback was reduced from 10 years to 9.5.

Another way to look at it. If an item saves you 1000 kWh/year, then as the cost per kWh increase, so do your savings.

 

[smootherator]

well really then...problem with your theory is you USE LESS...around 20% less electricity.

making it a simple equation

1000 kwh per month @ 5 cent per month= 50 bucks

900 KWH per month @ 6 cent per month = 54 bucks

You use 10% less electricity but your costs increase.

800 KWH per month @ 6 cent per month = 48 bucks

You need to cut your use by 20% to see a reduction in your bill.

Point being the more we save the more they raise the rates to cover their costs.

People have to significantly reduce their usage to be able to keep the bills the same and when they achieve that another rate increase happens.

 

[jpb]

smootherator said
"Point being the more we save the more they raise the rates to cover their costs.
People have to significantly reduce their usage to be able to keep the bills the same and when they achieve that another rate increase happens"


Actually the rates have been both higher and lower than this in the recent past.

May 1, 2006 till Nov 1, 2006 was 5.8 cents for 600kW and 6.7 cents above that
Nov 1, 2006 till May 1, 2007 was nearly the same 5.5 cents for 1000 and 6.4 cents above that
It's only last year that the price went down for the full year. I suspect that next May we'll be at or near the same price we paid for the past 12 months.
Demand is reducing steadily and with an almost certainty of recession I believe that trend will continue enough to lower the need to use higher priced forms of electrical generation.

 

[recneps77]

Yeah, they have "summer" and "winter" rates.
It will probably go down a bit later on.

Also, you do indeed seem to be spending more with your example
1000 kwh per month @ 5 cent per month= 50 bucks

900 KWH per month @ 6 cent per month = 54 bucks

However, you're not making a valid comparison. True, you've spent $x to save that 10%, fair enough.
But you have to consider what you'd pay if you didn't spend that $x.
So really you're looking at it this way:

1000kWh @ 5c = $50
1000kWh @ 6c = $60
1000kWh @ 7c = $70
1000kWh @ 8c = $80

now if you spend $x to reduce by 10%:
1000kWh @ 5c = $50
900kWh @ 6c = $54
900kWh @ 7c = $63
900kHw @ 8c = $72
and so on. as the price increases, you're still saving 10% compared to if you did not upgrade to more efficient items.
In the above example, if each tier is a year of usage, you'd have saved:
50(12) + 60 (12) + 70(12) +80(12) = $3120
With your 10% efficiency increase:
50(12) + 54(12) + 63(12) + 72(12) = $2868

You saved $252 in those 4 years by reducing your usage by 10%, even though the price rose 1 cent consecutively for each year.
So then, you have to consider how much an upgrade costs - if you didn't need to replace it and it cost you $4000 to save 250 over 4 years, was it worth it?

 

[smootherator]

So then, you have to consider how much an upgrade costs - if you didn't need to replace it and it cost you $4000 to save 250 over 4 years, was it worth it?

yes that is what i was trying to get at.

The incentive to upgrade is alot less especially when you realize the energy efficient stuff always seems to be premium priced comparative to other units.

Altough I understand 57's point also.

 

[99gecko]

Point being the more we save the more they raise the rates to cover their costs.

People have to significantly reduce their usage to be able to keep the bills the same and when they achieve that another rate increase happens.

I think the point you've missed is that the rate increase will happen whether you reduce you usage or not. In fact if nobody reduced their usage, the rate increases would either be bigger or come more frequently. Their costs are directly proportional to the amount of electricity that everybody consumes.

 

[smootherator]

I think the point you've missed is that the rate increase will happen whether you reduce you usage or not. In fact if nobody reduced their usage, the rate increases would either be bigger or come more frequently. Their costs are directly proportional to the amount of electricity that everybody consumes.

If that were the case less demand would equal less production costs. That is the reason why they want us to conserve aint it? So that they dont have to purchase electricity at higher costs.

If that is the case why not pass on the savings to the customer doing the saving?

Instead people have to do the saving just to be able to maintain their monthly costs the same as they had. The incentive should be to lower the monthly costs.

 

[99gecko]

please reread post #12 above.
They have passed the savings on to consumers in the past.

 

[hugh]

What annoys the hell out me is that my electricity charges are less than half my total bill!

 

[57]

That's because the charges are attempting to reflect the way the costs are incurred. There are certain "fixed costs" (same as the cost of operating your vehicle - depreciation (or loans or leases), insurance, etc) and then there are the variable costs (like gasoline or maintenance). The vehicle analogy works quite well - people always complain about the cost of gasoline, which may only represent 10-20% of the total cost of owning a vehicle. The yearly cost of an "average" vehicle today is around $10k/year, while gas may be $1-2k of that. For electricity costs, the split is more like 50/50.

I guess some people don't like the "truth in advertizing" approach.

There's simply no way to please everyone - we've discussed this with Rogers bills for example - lots of detail about the costs, etc, while some people just care about the "bottom line".

For the people who don't like the details, I say look at the bottom line only.

Some on-line bills are now available in two formats - detailed or "not" (summary). My online phone bill from Bell can be customized by me to view various contributors to the overall cost.

My online electrical bill (Toronto Hydro) can also show a summary or details...