I find it very interesting the idea of supplying energy as a service rather then the traditional pay-per-consumption billing. A number of other utilities such as Good Energy and Orsted are also going down this route. It makes sense in respect that this is how we are getting used to paying for services, like broadband, mobile phone contracts and Netflix, a monthly subscription change where you can use as much as you like. The utilities are obviously hoping this will maximise revenue however I would like to understand how people would be rewarded for being more efficient with their energy.
With a subscription model where you can use as much as you like, there seems no incentive for switching off lights and appliances that aren't being used. Does this have a danger of driving up our energy usage as it makes no difference to our bill? It's not just total energy usage either, it's the time of use. Will there be any benefit to switching your usage to times of lower demand to avoid strains on the grid network?
I'm really keen to hear people's thoughts on this as I'm sure we'll see many other utilities follow suit.
One of the principal findings from CAG’s research was that new and emerging business models for supply charging stood to “break the link” between consumption volume and cost, indicating that subscription-based or ‘energy as a service’ models could be more equitable ways of charging consumers in the future.