Utility Week

Utility Week 13th October 2017

Utility Week - authoritative, impartial and essential reading for senior people within utilities, regulators and government

Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/885648

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 2 of 31

UTILITY WEEK | 13TH - 19TH OCTOBER 2017 | 3 This week 4 | Seven days 7 Policy & Regulation 7 | News Clark doubts any legal challenge over fee cap 8 | Lobby The Conservative party conference 11 Finance & Investment 11 | News Policy uncertainty is stifling investment 12 | Opinion DNOs can't own storage in a competitive market 13 | Analysis Why SSE turns in consistently solid financial results 14 | Market view Ten tips on how to grow a utility business 15 | Analysis National Grid reaps the benefit from its US expansion 18 Operations & Assets 18 | High viz Dragon UAV's Elan Valley project 19 | Expert View Chris Bye, president, Getac UK 20 | Analysis BEIS data show renewables in the ascendancy 22 | Market view The emerging market for EV charging 25 Customers 25 | News Citizens Advice calls for automatic redress 26 | Analysis Water company complaint levels 28 | Opinion Victoria Macgregor, Citizens Advice 30 Community 31 | Disconnector GAS 14 | Market view Ten tips on how to grow a utility business 19 | Expert View Chris Bye, president, Getac UK WATER 18 | High viz Dragon UAV's Elan Valley project 26 | Analysis Water company complaint levels ELECTRICITY 12 | Opinion DNOs can't own storage in a competitive market 15 | Analysis National Grid reaps the benefit from its US expansion 20 | Analysis BEIS data show renewables in the ascendancy 22 | Market view The emerging market for EV charging ENERGY 7 | News Clark doubts any legal challenge over fee cap 8 | Lobby The Conservative party conference 13 | Analysis Why SSE turns in solid financial results 25 | News Citizens Advice calls for automatic redress 28 | Opinion Victoria Macgregor, Citizens Advice 11 | News Policy uncertainty is stifling investment Pitney Bowes: Make self service smarter and more engaging http://bit.ly/2nAa2rC CGI: Energy Flexibility Transforming The Power System By 2030 http://bit.ly/2bR3zXB Knowledge worth Keeping Visit the DownloaDs section of Utility week's website http://www.utilityweek.co.uk/ downloads Leader Ellen Bennett A tale of two decisions It's little surprise that Ofgem faces a judicial review over its decision earlier this year to slash embedded benefits for distributed genera- tion. Indeed, chief executive Dermot Nolan seemed to be expecting the move last month, when he told Utility Week in an exclusive inter- view that the regulator would defend any such action "rigorously". His rationale for the cuts to embedded benefits – that distortions in the system should be eliminated – is persuasive. Indeed, it was these very embedded benefits that allowed a high proportion of diesel generation to win out in the capacity auction, undermining the core purpose of an energy market reform designed to green the system. However, the judicial review will be won or lost not on the rights or wrongs of the decision, or the current system, but on the technicalities of how it was made. Millbank will be hoping that the analysis on which it based the decision, which critics have called "rushed", will stand up to the scrutiny of the court. It would be an exaggeration to say Ofgem is spoiling for a fight, but it's certainly not dodging one. Speaking last month, Nolan seemed to anticipate further legal action to come. As the energy system becomes more complex, the current charging arrangements, governing who pays what for transmission and distribution, are no longer fit for purpose. The targeted charging review now under way is designed to address this, and Nolan was clear that the decisions Ofgem makes as it oversees the energy transition may be conten- tious. To use his own words: "Ultimately, we will make decisions, potentially difficult decisions, that we think are in consumers' inter- est, and that could lead to litigation." Isn't it interesting, then, that Ofgem's rationale for insisting the government was best placed to enforce a market-wide price cap on energy supply via legislation, was that if the regulator did so itself, it was likely to face legal challenge? What is the difference between the two decisions – one which Nolan is happy to stand up in court and defend; the other which he is adamant needs legislation to back it up? Particularly when you consider that any energy supplier taking the regulator to court over a price cap would be committing public relations suicide. There's an obvious answer, though it's probably not the one Nolan would give if asked. Can it be that the regulator doesn't believe in the price cap, doesn't think it's in customers' best inter- ests, and doesn't want to be held responsible for the unintended consequences of heavy-handed intervention in a supposedly free market? Ellen Bennett, Editor, ellenbennett@fav-house.com

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Utility Week - Utility Week 13th October 2017