Good Energy

[purple.hippy]

Does anyone use this company?

http://www.good-energy.co.uk/

We are thinking of switching. Uswitch says they will cost us £130.02 more a year but we think she it could be worth it what you guys think?

[Martin]

not a much-loved company amongst those generating green power! A friend of mine was offered 2p per kw/hr for everything he generated! (NPower pay over 9p!) - and then have the cheek to charge more than the other companies when you need to buy some back!

[Andy Hamilton]

I'm with ecotricity and have had no problems with them, not noticed much of a price difference really, probally because I am making efforts to use less electricity.

Stoney had a problem with good energy as they took too much money out on his standing order. Worth paying by phone when you get the bill is the short answer about that.

[Muddypause]

what you guys think?

Never one to pass up such an invitation...

Depends what you think 'good energy' might be.

For example, my own view on wind farms in particular is that they are every bit as bad as any other sort of powerstation - hugely destructive and intrusive. Make no mistake, they are industrial complexes, with investors out to maximise their returns - they are not about saving the planet, they are about cashing in on a lucrative opportunity. I hate the things - manic swirling representations of our ever growing, and increasingly meaningless need to consume.

The idea of selling energy as 'good' energy is a marketing ploy to make you think that staying on the consumerist treadmill is OK afterall. 'Good energy' is not about you consuming less; it's to make you feel OK about consuming more. It doesn't address the core issue, that we have to face a cultural change; one that will be difficult and uncomfortable. A cultural change about reassessing what we value. We have to consume less.

For as long as we consume on-grid energy, I think it's an almost impossible moral conundrum to resolve. Changing power companies may be yet another sacrifice we make on the alter of consumer choice - 'consumer choice' being the mantra of the consumerist, and the choice we demand is of how we make things worse.

[red]

I always wonder... if there is only a small percentage of the energy produced in this country is 'green' - then does signing up for it make a difference? I guess there is the argument that if enough people ask for it, maybe there will be a push to increase that percentage? But surely, if say 5% of the energy we make in uk is sustainable (to pick a figure out of the air) perhaps that means only 5% of the population can feel they are doing 'their bit', but not everyone can make that choice as there is not enough to go around?

[Martin]

what gets my goat about "Good-energy" is that they are selling ludicrously expensive electricity propped up with some lame excuses about it being renewably generated.
Leaving aside the "wind farm" argument for a moment, there are many people who live in the sticks who'd like a proper domestic sized turbine (1kw to 20kw) to supply their power needs - it is exactly those people who are actively DIScouraged from doing do by the meanness of the price paid for exported electricity - they quote 4.5p per unit, but when you actually try to sell to them, it drops to 2p!.............(I'm guessing you need a BIG turbine to get the higher rates)
So, they're buying in at around 3p per unit average and flogging it at 12p per unit...........................there is profit, and there is obscene profiteering!
In my humble opinion, a company like NPower is doing far more for the uptake of wind by small personal and local generators of power than this bunch of greenwashed cowboys ever will, merely by paying a fair rate for what's generated!

[mew]

Ive been using good energy for just over a year now, no problems at all, very friendly people to deal with. And they are the only company to offer 100% renewable energy. Eco-tricity are also good but they still use the nuclear industry and fossil feeds.

I think the buy back rate of good energy might be low, however I think some of you are assuming that they simply buy at 2p and sell back at 12p, not quite that easy. The government insist that all renewable energy is sold at auction, so that the big boys can buy up the allocation to meet targets. So good energy have to sell all the electricity they generate themselves and from microgenerators to this auction facility where the big boys up the price by bidding for huge chunks of it and while good energy may well make money from doing this they have to buy back far more than they sell consequently they are more expensive. And this also explains why the prices go up along with other suppliers. Other so called green tariffs can dilute this extra cost with other fossil feeds etc.

This is probably the only reason why they are the only company to exclusively deal with renewable energy.

Please don't tell me that npower etc. are doing more for the renewable market, they only do things because the targets dictate it. I think you'll find that good energy's owner the monkton group at year end 05 had made pre tax profit of just over £86,000. I think npower might make that in a couple days. Good energy are to me THE ethical choice.

[Stonehead]

Stoney had a problem with good energy as they took too much money out on his standing order. Worth paying by phone when you get the bill is the short answer about that.

It was a lot more complicated than that and has taken more than four years to sort out.

Good Energy finally discovered that they'd set me up with two accounts, changed the direct debits (not standing orders) without advising me, undercharged me, overcharged me, denied dealing with me (the two accounts things in action - someone would get the details from one account and not the other or vice versa), and ignored the fact that I paid them quite large amounts of money when my monthly financial review showed I was using more electricity than they were charging me for.

In the end, I contacted their PR people as I'd heard they were in line for an award and asked if I should contact the media to give a contrary viewpoint.

One of their senior people then became involved, I got an apology, the remaining amount owed cancelled and then a bottle of organic wine arrived a couple of weeks ago.

I was told the problem was caused because they're a small company going up against the big boys. Erm, I don't think poor customer service and appalling record keeping can be blamed on the competition.

They did apologise in the end but after more than four year's hassle I'm not going back to them, no matter how "green" they claim to be, appear to be, actually are, or anything else.

[jimmysavill]

Bonjourno fellow forum users!!!

How are we all!?

I haven't been on the site for a while so thought i'd come and say hello.

Actually, it's interesting to find this post because we are currently looking at getting a better more efficient energy deal and so i wonder if anyone can help!?

I've been looking at http://www.moneysupermarket.com/utiliti ... icity.aspx which seems to be pretty good to compare the market but i'm not 100% sure on who is the best for green energy. Obviously, this site shows price but i'd like to compare 'green' instead.

I saw one tariff which although was from one of the bigger providers, it did include a £30 donation to the RSPB each year on your behalf.

Mind you, this isn't really helping to solve anything is it. We all need a cultural change in our ways to make a real difference. Use less energy and get on our bikes.

Any feedback would be much appreciated.

Jimmy

[biffvernon]

Ecotricity are the folk who make a difference. They use the profits on electricity retail trade to build more wind turbines. The company is a generation as well as a distribution company. I live near one of their windfarms.
http://ecotricity.co.uk/

[Muddypause]

Jimmy - re. your comment about getting a 'more efficient energy deal' is an interesting phrase - I wonder what you mean by it? Do you mean efficiency in the sense of making the best use of the energy, or in getting as much energy as you can for your money? The former may be the most environmentally friendly, the latter is, arguably, quite the oppostie. The former is about using less energy, the latter about using more.

It's a thorny problem that cuts deep to the core of our way of life - how can we ethically consume things in the way we have been for the past few decades? Can we actually avoid making some pretty uncomfortable changes to our lives? And if so, at what cost?

Personally, I think it's a good idea to examine what it is we actually need energy for; how we can stop wasting it; how we can make what we have go further. Better not to spend the money in the first palce, rather than see how much more we can get for our money.

For example, in terms of heating your home, much better to make an initial outlay on as much insulation and draught-proofing as you can. Then, you'll need less energy in the first place. Fit low-energy lightbulbs. Add an extra layer to the hot water tank. If you take a bath every day, take a shower instead. Extending it further, maybe we should consider dumping the TV and learning the art of conversation; ask ourselves if we actually need another dust-buster; whether we need all those lights in the kitchen, and whether that fugging electric golf cart is just a little too ostentatious...

From your link, I think the phrase "...change to a cheap price plan to do your bit for the environment." is highly dubious. Translation - "change to a cheap price plan so that you can consume more without having to worry about the environment." In other words, green-wash.

Ecotricity are the folk who make a difference.

<shudder> Seems to me the whole point of wind farms is that they are precisely about not making a difference. Business as usual. No need for you, the consumer, to change anything about your consumption habits. They are just another way of making sure our ability to live beyond our means continues to grow unchecked.

[biffvernon]

Ecotricity are the folk who make a difference.

<shudder> Seems to me the whole point of wind farms is that they are precisely about not making a difference. Business as usual. No need for you, the consumer, to change anything about your consumption habits. They are just another way of making sure our ability to live beyond our means continues to grow unchecked.

Oh absolutely not. Business as usual is not an option. We are facing a serious electricity generation crisis as North Sea gas depletes, competition for Russian gas increases, nuclear power stations get too old, and we realise that burning more coal is too risky from the CO2 emission view. We have to both reduce electricity demand and replace existing generating capacity with renewables. On present plans the energy gap will not be met.

[Wombat]

From your link, I think the phrase "...change to a cheap price plan to do your bit for the environment." is highly dubious. Translation - "change to a cheap price plan so that you can consume more without having to worry about the environment." In other words, green-wash.

I love that term Stew, it is yours?

Nev

[Muddypause]

Ecotricity are the folk who make a difference.

<shudder> Seems to me the whole point of wind farms is that they are precisely about not making a difference. Business as usual.

Oh absolutely not. Business as usual is not an option.

Hi BV, are you connected with Ecotricity in some way? Just wondring if you are commenting from an involved point of view. Anyway, FWIW, here's my point of view...

Actually, you make my point - we are facing an energy gap, and all the plans, windfarm or otherwise, are about closing the gap by increasing production, not reassessing the way our economy works. Not even Ecotricity can survive by trying to sell us less of its product. Not one politician is saying "This economy, which depends upon growth in consumption to create its wealth, is utter madness, and must eventually come crashing down". Not one of them is suggesting we cut production of consumer goods and services (even the Tory's latest proposal to restrict individual flights still depends upon an overall growth in air transport, and an overall increase in aviation fuel consumption). And, in fact, not one of them is proposing that we should reduce our overall electricity consumption - the graph of energy consumption must continue on its upward journey as it always has done.

Instead, every one of them is promoting expansion, growth and consumerism. We won't just need to plug the gap because the gap is going to keep growing, so we will need to continue with energy expansion. There won't be a time when we say "Right, that's all the windfarms we will ever need" - we will go on needing more and more. The economy depends upon it. Business as usual.

Maybe if we lived in a land where we had masses of empty space, extensive windfarms would have a place in a structured renewable energy programme. But here, on an overcrowded island where open spaces are scarce, they do not. Don't forget, it is the cities that make the predominant demands for an increasing energy supply, but we are paying for that by industrialising our countryside.

...green-wash.

I love that term Stew, it is yours?

Nooooo... It's been around for ages, Nev.

Anyway, I'm not that cynical, am I?

Am I?

[biffvernon]

Hi BV, are you connected with Ecotricity in some way?

Yes. The Ecotricity turbines are connected to the grid and so is my house. They supply me with electricity and I pay them. Pretty normal relationship. Oh, and Dale Vince is a really good bloke.