I say again - my man, you need to stop the smug, condescending, "aren't they adorable trying to figure things out for themselves", wise old all-knowing American cosplay attitude. With immediate effect. You sound like a moron.Okay. Perhaps the character of your people has changed for the better, and you should move toward less government, more freedom and individual responsibility. Welcome to reality, it feels great!
Because the increase in energy bills are not just about the price of electricity or gas, but include potentially massive increases in standing charge costs as well... one could cut one's energy use to an absolute minimum and still face massively higher bills.Why don't they just use £/kWh? prices...
I suppose the 'average energy bill price' per household is likely to be a closer representation than average yearly petrol/diesel costs per driver as yearly mileage varies massively from one person to another. Much of the yearly total is standing charges anyway, which everyone pays. It's like if you rolled into the yearly petrol prices, your MOT, tax and servicing costs.I get the sentiment, but I don't like how this is generally reported. "Energy bills will rise to £3,549 in October", is just flat out misleading, and likely causes panic among people that don't know how that sum was arrived at. Why don't they just use £/kWh? prices... still not 100% accurate but makes a lot more sense and is less sensational. It's like reporting petrol prices as £1274 per year, instead of £1.80/litre -- which do they think is more useful??
Because the increase in energy bills are not just about the price of electricity or gas, but include potentially massive increases in standing charge costs as well... one could cut one's energy use to an absolute minimum and still face massively higher bills.
I suppose the 'average energy bill price' per household is likely to be a closer representation than average yearly petrol/diesel costs per driver as yearly mileage varies massively from one person to another. Much of the yearly total is standing charges anyway, which everyone pays. It's like if you rolled into the yearly petrol prices, your MOT, tax and servicing costs.
A kilowatthour is the supply of 1kW for 1 hour. Multiply power supply in kW by time in hours to arrive at the consumption in kWh.Does anyone know the sum to arrive at the figure of elec costs running a PC using say 100watts, for lets say 2 hours?
Based on oct elec price of 0.52p pkwh.
Cheers.
Not thinking ever of not using my PC but want some perspective and then i can work out other usages.
So running a PC costs very little then.A kilowatthour is the supply of 1kW for 1 hour. Multiply power supply in kW by time in hours to arrive at the consumption in kWh.
100W for 2 hours is therefore 0.1 x 2, or 0.2kWh (or 200Wh).
Assuming you mean 52p, as that's the projected cost per kWh, 52p x 0.2kWh = 10.4p.
I don't know. Is 100W typical usage for a PC? My GPU uses twice that (220W) at peak, and it's not exactly a high-powered gaming machine. If you take into account the screen you need, it's likely to be much more.So running a PC costs very little then.
That's really going to depend on the business.Going to be some serious pain coming up, can you imagine the knock on effects to business's costs, thus passed on costs to consumers.
It'll make covid seem like a balll.
Imo it doesn't matter, it's still the same rise regardless of unit. The average person doesn't have a frame of reference for £/kwh, but they know their rough yearly spend. People should be angry and panicked about this, as we are about to be absolutely Donald Ducked and we need to collectively take action.I get the sentiment, but I don't like how this is generally reported. "Energy bills will rise to £3,549 in October", is just flat out misleading, and likely causes panic among people that don't know how that sum was arrived at. Why don't they just use £/kWh? prices... still not 100% accurate but makes a lot more sense and is less sensational. It's like reporting petrol prices as £1274 per year, instead of £1.80/litre -- which do they think is more useful??
The only additional thing I would like the reporting to do is then divide it by 12 and give a monthly figure and 52 for a weekly figure, as for many those are the most relevant. Just saying that it's £295 a month or £68.25 a week would be far more helpful.Imo it doesn't matter, it's still the same rise regardless of unit. The average person doesn't have a frame of reference for £/kwh, but they know their rough yearly spend. People should be angry and panicked about this, as we are about to be absolutely Donald Ducked and we need to collectively take action.
The implication is that someone who's high use at the moment will see a smaller increase than someone who's low use - when it's the opposite that is true.Imo it doesn't matter, it's still the same rise regardless of unit.
They don't have a frame of reference for how close to 'typical' usage they are, or even which side of the average they are? At least their rates are on their bills, which they should absolutely be looking at now.The average person doesn't have a frame of reference for £/kwh
People should informed, and I don't believe this statement is informative "It's just been confirmed: energy bills will rise to £3,549 in October."People should be angry and panicked about this, as we are about to be absolutely Donald Ducked and we need to collectively take action
Since I was trying to get an idea of exactly how much energy this bill equates to I had a look at the Ofgem website. Of the typical £3549 bill*, this will include a capped standing charge** for electricity and gas of £167.90 and £102.20 per year respectively, totalling £270.10 per year (£22.51/mo, £5.19/wk for Scaff) - this means that 92.3% of the 'typical' bill arises from consumption.Because the increase in energy bills are not just about the price of electricity or gas, but include potentially massive increases in standing charge costs as well... one could cut one's energy use to an absolute minimum and still face massively higher bills.
Seem spot on to me.The implication is that someone who's high use at the moment will see a smaller increase than someone who's low use - when it's the opposite that is true.
They don't have a frame of reference for how close to 'typical' usage they are, or even which side of the average they are? At least their rates are on their bills, which they should absolutely be looking at now.
People should informed, and I don't believe this statement is informative "It's just been confirmed: energy bills will rise to £3,549 in October."
Since I was trying to get an idea of exactly how much energy this bill equates to I had a look at the Ofgem website. Of the typical £3549 bill*, this will include a capped standing charge** for electricity and gas of £167.90 and £102.20 per year respectively, totalling £270.10 per year (£22.51/mo, £5.19/wk for Scaff) - this means that 92.3% of the 'typical' bill arises from consumption.
If that's the case I would still be recommending people did as much as they could to eliminate consumption. Reading more about what Ofgem say...
At the current capped rates of 52p and 15p per kwh (electricity and gas respectively), and Ofgems typical medium usage scenarios the amounts of energy breakdown as follows: 2900 kWh and 12000 kWh (electricity and gas respectively) per year, costing £1508 and £1800 respectively, add back in the standing charge and you get £3578... which is fairly close to what's being quoted.
Ofgem's Low and High useage scenarios can also be calculated:
Low usage (1800kWh/8000kWh) works out as £2406 per year (£200.50/mo, £46.27/wk)
Medium useage (2900kWh/12000kWh) works out as £3578 per year (£298.18/mo, £68.81/wk)
High usage (4300kWh/17000kWh) works out as £5056 per year (£421.34/mo, £97.23/wk)
It does appear that cutting consumption will help significantly even if the standing charges are sat at the capped rate.
*as far as I can tell this amount relates to a house that uses both gas and electric.
**I understand that a price capped bill isn't actually capped because usage can change, but I'm assuming the standing charge is effectively fixed useage.
If I've got the wrong end of the stick on any of these calculations please do correct me.
I can't disagree with this, but it goes back to what I said a couple of pages back... energy has been very high value, fairly low cost, for years, increases that take that to ~£270 year might be unjustified, but are insignificant next to the cost of just trying to keep a roof over your head. £270 a year becomes a cost of living crisis because this has been allowed to happen...Taking into account cost of energy production and and global trading is one thing and I’d expect a kWh rise. The standing charge however is not for the cost of that, but just the supply to your home and it’s upkeep. So while I agree a small increase in that to cover wages etc of engineers and cost of maintaining I don’t think such a huge increase, the likes we have seen is needed.
I agree whole heartedly.I can't disagree with this, but it goes back to what I said a couple of pages back... energy has been very high value, fairly low cost, for years, increases that take that to ~£270 year might be unjustified, but are insignificant next to the cost of just trying to keep a roof over your head. £270 a year becomes a cost of living crisis because this has been allowed to happen...
View attachment 1188324
Crazy if new:Crazy if true
100W can be quite a sizeable figure for just typical usage for a modern PC unless it is quite inefficient or quite a low figure if one is gaming for majority of that time. 250W usage for ten hours a day even if you had a really high-end gaming PC including a typical LCD monitor will still take some doing to average, unless you are a heavy gamer playing for majority of the time or use PC continously doing tasks that require high levels of processing power like rendering stuff.I don't know. Is 100W typical usage for a PC? My GPU uses twice that (220W) at peak, and it's not exactly a high-powered gaming machine. If you take into account the screen you need, it's likely to be much more.
A quick Google suggests an average of 250-400W for a regular desktop and 600W for a gaming PC, including the display. Used 10hr a day (my PC is on 14hr a day at best) that's £475 of electricity consumption per year.
1080p 60hz, rtx 3070, according to MSI its using 60-70watts at peak on MSFS.I don't know. Is 100W typical usage for a PC? My GPU uses twice that (220W) at peak, and it's not exactly a high-powered gaming machine. If you take into account the screen you need, it's likely to be much more.
A quick Google suggests an average of 250-400W for a regular desktop and 600W for a gaming PC, including the display. Used 10hr a day (my PC is on 14hr a day at best) that's £475 of electricity consumption per year.
That's.... Odd.View attachment 1188854
This is all over the local papers today. Well, all the Reach Group ones.
I won't bother linking it, but that's it. That's the art. It's a large picture upon which several candles have been placed, and that qualifies it as a portrait made out of candles, somehow.