Energy suppliers are still taking unnecessarily high direct debit payments from millions of customers each month.
A survey by Which? the consumer group, found that 65 per cent of respondents are in credit with their energy supplier but are still being overcharged. A quarter were owed at least £100 – despite the research taking place in winter, when energy use is normally higher.
Around 12 million households pay for their energy with direct debit, according to Ofgem, suggesting as many as 7.8 million people could be paying too much. Which? says that suppliers are using their customers’ money as “interest-free loans.”
Martyn Hocking of Which? Money said: “It seems incredible that energy companies can take hundreds of pounds more than they need to from their customers, and profit from the interest that this money will earn at our expense.
Which?’s survey also found that energy suppliers are one of the worst industries at delivering customer satisfaction. Npower was deemed the worst energy provider, with a satisfaction score of only 30 per cent. Utility Warehouse achieved the highest customer satisfaction score of 83 per cent.
full article
Wednesday 25 March 2009
Monday 23 March 2009
The World's Cheapest Car
India's Tata Motors has launched Nano, the world's cheapest car. Hormazd Sorabjee, one of the first journalists to test drive the car, says it feels more expensive than it is.
I have to admit I had a nagging fear that the Tata Nano wouldn't live up to the media frenzy that's been surrounding it.
It's been the most awaited car in the world and the delay in putting it on the road - due to the relocation of its production facilities - only increased the sense of anticipation. There's been an apprehension that Tata's self-imposed price target of 100,000 rupees ($1,979, £1,366) would make the Nano an apology of a car and sceptics expected a glorified golf cart.
However, after driving the Nano in the western Indian city of Pune - home to Tata Motors - on the highway and rural back roads, it's turned out to be quite the opposite.
The Nano feels significantly more expensive than it is and a car you certainly won't be ashamed to sit in. It thrilled me with its "proper car" feel and I also learnt to forgive it for its shortcomings. I can live with the ridiculously small 15-litre fuel tank because the car's phenomenal efficiency (18-20 kilometres to a litre) would give it decent range.
full article
Sunday 22 March 2009
Why low-energy lamps are such a bright idea
With energy bills having rocketed in recent years, more households are using energy-saving light bulbs as a way to cut their electricity costs. As energy-saving bulbs have grown in popularity, so too has the range of bulbs on offer – making it that much harder to know which ones to go for when you're out in the shops.
"The sale of traditional incandescent light bulbs is being phased out as part of the Government's plans to reduce CO2 emissions, so we'll all have to switch to energy-saving versions in the next few years," says Martyn Hocking, the editor of the consumer magazine Which?. "The good news is that, as well as being better for the environment, energy-saving bulbs are better for your wallet. Although they may be more expensive to buy than traditional bulbs, they work out cheaper in the long run because they use less electricity and don't have to be replaced as often."
Although most people associate energy-saving bulbs with a poorer quality of light and slow start-up, standards in these areas have improved enormously over the past few years. Nevertheless, quality still varies from bulb to bulb, as do prices. While it's now possible to pick up energy-saving bulbs for as little as 50p, you can spend up to £9 on a single bulb. But, as ever, the best bulbs are not always the ones that cost the most.
When the consumer group Which? recently tested 16 different bulbs, it was Ikea's Sparsam stick (pictured), priced at £3.25 a bulb, which ranked top – scoring 75 out of 100. It was way ahead of the rest of the field, and was one of few bulbs to perform well in cold as well as in warmer temperatures. It lasts for an impressive 10,000 hours – but there is a slightly green hue to the light it emits.
Two of the 16 bulbs Which? tested cost a rather steep £9 – including the bottom-ranked Omicron Dimmable Multi-tube (pictured). Although this bulb starts up relatively quickly and, as the name suggests, is usable with a dimmer, it has a lifespan of just 8,000 hours and performed very poorly in colder temperatures. Overall, it scored only 59 per cent in the Which? tests.
full article
"The sale of traditional incandescent light bulbs is being phased out as part of the Government's plans to reduce CO2 emissions, so we'll all have to switch to energy-saving versions in the next few years," says Martyn Hocking, the editor of the consumer magazine Which?. "The good news is that, as well as being better for the environment, energy-saving bulbs are better for your wallet. Although they may be more expensive to buy than traditional bulbs, they work out cheaper in the long run because they use less electricity and don't have to be replaced as often."
Although most people associate energy-saving bulbs with a poorer quality of light and slow start-up, standards in these areas have improved enormously over the past few years. Nevertheless, quality still varies from bulb to bulb, as do prices. While it's now possible to pick up energy-saving bulbs for as little as 50p, you can spend up to £9 on a single bulb. But, as ever, the best bulbs are not always the ones that cost the most.
When the consumer group Which? recently tested 16 different bulbs, it was Ikea's Sparsam stick (pictured), priced at £3.25 a bulb, which ranked top – scoring 75 out of 100. It was way ahead of the rest of the field, and was one of few bulbs to perform well in cold as well as in warmer temperatures. It lasts for an impressive 10,000 hours – but there is a slightly green hue to the light it emits.
Two of the 16 bulbs Which? tested cost a rather steep £9 – including the bottom-ranked Omicron Dimmable Multi-tube (pictured). Although this bulb starts up relatively quickly and, as the name suggests, is usable with a dimmer, it has a lifespan of just 8,000 hours and performed very poorly in colder temperatures. Overall, it scored only 59 per cent in the Which? tests.
full article
Wednesday 11 March 2009
Eco-Bulb Of The Future
LED lighting was discussed in the House of Commons, the UK’s legislative chamber, on March 5 as part of a debate on energy and climate change.
Joan Ruddock, Under-Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, was asked if there had been discussions between her department and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) on the effect on electricity consumption and CO2 emissions of the installation and use of LED lighting.
Ruddock replied that “the Government certainly recognize the potential energy savings that ultra-efficient lighting technologies such as LEDs can offer. We continue to work to stimulate development and take-up, and officials in the two Departments have worked, and will continue to work, together on this issue.” Member of Parliament Philip Hollobone then asked, “LED lighting is super-efficient. It uses just 5 percent of the wattage of a conventional light bulb; it generates very little heat, which means that it reduces fire risk in applications; and it contains no mercury, which means that it is safer to dispose of. May I urge the Minister to have discussions with DEFRA on this issue? Can she also advise the House what the low-carbon business innovation unit within her Department is doing to promote this technology?
Ruddock said that the government agrees on the “huge potential benefits” of LED lighting. “That is why we have put some LED products on to our energy technology product list and why we have made those specific types of lighting available to benefit from the enhanced capital allowance scheme, which has delivered approximately £550 million in tax relief to those who have purchased products on the Carbon Trust’s energy technology list,” she said. “The potential for the makers and retailers of LEDs is considerable, and I shall pursue the points that [the questioner] has made. As I have indicated, I am sure that our officials will continue those important discussions.”
National Geographic
An article in National Geographic compared lighting technologies, and described the LED as looking like the “eco-bulb of the future.” However, said the article, the price is high and reviews are mixed.
“LED illumination can range from warm to what technology analyst Michael Kanellos calls ‘alien autopsy’…the bulb casts its light in only one direction, which is fine for recessed lights and for spotlighting a specific area but could be a drawback in lamps or globes,” said the article.
The author said that in a few years we should expect “a cheaper, more versatile LED” and that experts currently recommend compact fluorescents (CFLs) for most home uses…although the mercury content remains a problem.
full article
Joan Ruddock, Under-Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, was asked if there had been discussions between her department and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) on the effect on electricity consumption and CO2 emissions of the installation and use of LED lighting.
Ruddock replied that “the Government certainly recognize the potential energy savings that ultra-efficient lighting technologies such as LEDs can offer. We continue to work to stimulate development and take-up, and officials in the two Departments have worked, and will continue to work, together on this issue.” Member of Parliament Philip Hollobone then asked, “LED lighting is super-efficient. It uses just 5 percent of the wattage of a conventional light bulb; it generates very little heat, which means that it reduces fire risk in applications; and it contains no mercury, which means that it is safer to dispose of. May I urge the Minister to have discussions with DEFRA on this issue? Can she also advise the House what the low-carbon business innovation unit within her Department is doing to promote this technology?
Ruddock said that the government agrees on the “huge potential benefits” of LED lighting. “That is why we have put some LED products on to our energy technology product list and why we have made those specific types of lighting available to benefit from the enhanced capital allowance scheme, which has delivered approximately £550 million in tax relief to those who have purchased products on the Carbon Trust’s energy technology list,” she said. “The potential for the makers and retailers of LEDs is considerable, and I shall pursue the points that [the questioner] has made. As I have indicated, I am sure that our officials will continue those important discussions.”
National Geographic
An article in National Geographic compared lighting technologies, and described the LED as looking like the “eco-bulb of the future.” However, said the article, the price is high and reviews are mixed.
“LED illumination can range from warm to what technology analyst Michael Kanellos calls ‘alien autopsy’…the bulb casts its light in only one direction, which is fine for recessed lights and for spotlighting a specific area but could be a drawback in lamps or globes,” said the article.
The author said that in a few years we should expect “a cheaper, more versatile LED” and that experts currently recommend compact fluorescents (CFLs) for most home uses…although the mercury content remains a problem.
full article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
