
Why your electricity bill is set to spike within WEEKS
Australians in one state are facing a $228 annual hike in their electricity bills with the pain likely to get worse as government-funded rebates end and more charge electric cars at home.
The Australian Energy Regulator final determination report, released on Monday, had bad news for consumers, starting on July 1 as winter pushes up demand for heaters.
This is based on what retailers can charge customers in NSW, south-east Queensland and South Australia during the next financial year under a default market offer.
High demand and network outages were blamed for the steep wholesale prices feeding into higher retail prices, along with low levels of renewable energy as Australian governments try to phase out coal-fired power stations.
'These spot prices were partially driven by a greater frequency of high price events, which resulted from a range of factors including high demand, coal generator and network outages, and low renewable generation output,' the AER said.
In regional New South Wales, Essential Energy residential customers face the biggest increase of $228 or 9.1 per cent, with the AER citing 'improved network resilience to address climate change-related risks' along with 'the integration of consumer energy resources including rooftop solar, batteries and electric vehicles'.
This takes the average annual electricity bill for 2025-26 to $2,741 , which is even steeper than the $188 or 8.5 per cent increase for Endeavour Energy customers in Sydney, who will be paying $2,411.
The increases in NSW were up to 6.7 per cent above forecast inflation, with more homes having a smart meter monitoring when residents used electricity.
'Retail costs have risen for all customers in each region of NSW, primarily due to increases in retailers' operating costs,' the AER said.
'Increases in bad and doubtful debt costs and smart meter costs also contributed to the overall increases.'
In south-east Queensland, Energex's increases were more moderate at $77 or 3.7 per cent, or 1.3 per cent above forecast inflation to an average of $2,143.
South Australians were set to see a $71 or 3.2 per cent increase, which was 0.8 per cent above predicted inflation for SA Power Networks customers, for an average bill of $2,301.
Canstar data insights director Sally Tindall said the increases were bad news for customers.
'These electricity price hikes will knock the wind out of the sails for many families, just when they thought they'd turned a corner in the cost-of-living crisis,' she said.
'Price hikes of up to $228 for an average household will be too much for some families to bear, particularly as we enter one of the most energy-intensive periods of the year.'
The AER projected bigger increases for customers without a controlled load, where an electrical appliance like a dishwasher can be operated at a different time to the rest of the home to save money during an off-peak period.
The federal government's quarterly $75 rebates were extended until the end of December in the pre-election March Budget, where the price came off the bill without customers having to lodge an application for relief.
This has seen electricity bills fallen by 9.6 per cent in the year to March, helping to reduce headline inflation to just 2.4 per cent.
The AER argued its determination regarding existing customers struck a balance between 'protecting consumers from unjustifiably high prices, while also allowing retailers to recover costs'.
'Retail costs have seen larger increases in all regions,' it said.
'While this source of costs makes up a smaller portion of the total price, the rate of growth means it has contributed more than other elements to the price rises in some regions.'
Wholesale power prices make up 31 to 45 per cent of the AER's default market offer arrangement on electricity bill increases, compared with 11 to 16 per cent for retail costs.
Network costs made up 33 to 48 per cent of the approved price rise.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
30 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump budget bill would kill subsidies that made home solar mainstream
June 5 (Reuters) - A last-minute tweak to the Republican budget bill passed by Congress last month would immediately end subsidies for solar leasing companies that help make rooftop systems affordable to homeowners, likely leading to a massive drop in the pace of installations, according to industry representatives. President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill," now being taken up by the Republican-controlled Senate, would eliminate a 30% tax credit for solar leasing companies that charge homeowners a monthly fee for panels - one of numerous cuts directed at clean energy subsidies passed by former President Joe Biden. That provision, inserted shortly before the bill passed the House of Representatives on May 22, risks stifling a sector that buys American-made equipment, employs thousands of people and relieves strain on the grid, according to industry backers. "That's one of the harsher components of the one big, beautiful bill currently," said Gabe Rubio, a principal in the business incentives and tax credits practice at professional services firm BDO. Tax credits for homeowners who own their own rooftop systems would also be eliminated. The changes could result in as much as 40% less residential solar capacity being installed over the next five years, according to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie. Solar companies are lobbying the Senate to make changes to the bill before it becomes law. "America's home solar and storage industry is a powerful economic growth engine," Sunrun (RUN.O), opens new tab CEO Mary Powell said in a statement. "Senate Republicans now have an opportunity to advance the administration's energy independence agenda by amending this bill to keep American energy prices low and create well-paying U.S. manufacturing jobs." Trump campaigned on a promise to repeal the clean energy tax credits in Biden's 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, arguing they are expensive, unnecessary and harmful to business. Republican backers of the bill say the subsidy cuts would free up billions of dollars for other priorities. More than 5 million U.S. homes have solar panels, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. An earlier version of the bill had protected the credit for leased solar systems, but fiscal hawks including Representative Chip Roy of Texas have said publicly that they pressed for deeper cuts to clean energy credits at the eleventh hour. Roy's office did not respond to a request for comment. Solar leasing was pioneered two decades ago by companies including Sunrun and SolarCity, which is now owned by Elon Musk's company Tesla(TSLA.O), opens new tab , and quickly became the primary way home solar panels were financed. Under the model, solar installers partner with financiers that own the rooftop panels and offset their federal tax bills by claiming the credit. Homeowners either pay a monthly fixed fee to lease the equipment or pay for the electricity the system generates under a power purchase agreement (PPA). In what some analysts have said could be a loophole, the House bill directly references leased systems but does not mention PPAs. About 44% of residential systems sold today are under such arrangements, according to EnergySage, an online solar marketplace. Solar installers say undermining the subsidies could have a ripple effect on U.S. manufacturers that supply them. Freedom Forever, a top privately-held installer based in Temecula, California, said in two years it has gone from using no U.S.-made equipment to now sourcing 85% of it from American facilities. That is thanks to another IRA subsidy that provides bonus 10% tax credits for using American-made equipment. "The administration wants to bring manufacturing back to the United States, and that's what our industry has been doing for the last two to three years," Freedom Forever CEO Brett Bouchy said.


Metro
2 hours ago
- Metro
Do Trump's hardline tariffs and travel bans put off Brits from visiting the US?
Tariffs, travel bans, mass firings – if there's one thing you can be sure about with Donald Trump, it's that he'll make news. Constantly . That's even the case here in the UK, where most of his decisions have no direct impact. But is all that coverage having an effect on Brits hopping across the pond for a vacation? If you look at the dry numbers from the US National Travel and Tourism Office, you might think the answer is no. In January, the month of Trump's second inauguration, the number of UK visitors to the US was 5% higher than the previous January. February and April also saw more Brits going to the US than the same months in 2024, suggesting that far from putting people off, we may even be more keen to visit the country when it's run by Trump. ABTA, the British trade association for the travel industry, tells a similar tale. They 'haven't seen any significant changes in terms of UK-US travel post-Trump administration', a spokesperson told Metro, with 'no noticeable shifts away' from the States. But that may not be the full story. Australia-based tour company Intrepid Travel offers small-group trips to destinations as diverse as Nepal, the Galápagos Islands, Antarctica – and the United States. However, the latter has had a significant fall in interest over the past five months, with bookings from UK customers down 12%. That decline appears to be driven by one age group in particular: 21 to 30-year-olds, with whom bookings have fallen by almost a quarter. There was less of an impact for customers above that age bracket. Joanna Reeve, Intrepid's General Manager for the UK & Ireland, told Metro: 'While there is no way to know for sure what is causing the dip, negative perception of the US under the new administration could be playing a part in people's travel choices. 'New immigration rules and travel restrictions could be off-putting for potential visitors.' The country still remains popular overall, she said. According to the Office for National Statistics, the US was the sixth most popular country visited by UK residents in 2023 – though it wasn't far off Portugal and Greece in fifth and fourth place respectively. A survey for ABTA taken in summer last year – before Trump was elected, but while the presidential election campaign was in full swing – found the US came third after only Spain and France when people were asked where they planned to visit in the next 12 months. Even those who disagree with the direction of the Trump administration might want to consider visiting the US in order to mitigate its impact, Joanna suggested. She said: 'There are ways to travel there in a way that supports local people, like through supporting indigenous-led experiences. More Trending 'We're also encouraging people to visit and support the National Parks as they are facing huge cuts to their funding.' Interestingly, the attitude of young travellers with Intrepid – if they are indeed being put off by Trump – does not appear to reflect the broader UK. An Ipsos poll from just before Inauguration Day in January found 18 to 34-year-olds were the most likely age group in the UK to have a favourable view of the US President. However, 47% of Brits between those ages still disliked him compared to 31% who felt the opposite. Those aged 35 to 54 were 64% unfavourable, while 72% of those aged 55 or over felt the same. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Donald Trump roasts Elon Musk and suggests he has 'Trump derangement syndrome' MORE: Donald Trump's travel ban isn't actually about protecting Americans MORE: Fears of a serial killer prowling Texas after 38 bodies pulled from lake in three years


BreakingNews.ie
2 hours ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Windfarm must shut down three turbines and pay €360,000 damages to couple, High Court orders
A windfarm must fully shut down three of its six turbines and pay a total €360,000 damages, including €60,000 aggravated damages, to a couple over its adverse impact on them, a High Court judge has ordered. ABO Energy Ireland Ltd and ABO Energy O&M Ireland Ltd, operators of the wind farm at Gibbett Hill, near Bunclody, Co Wexford along with its owner, Wexwind Ltd, also face a potential legal costs bill of €2.3 million incurred by Raymond Byrne and Lorna Moorhead in their proceedings. Advertisement Mr Justice Oisín Quinn refused to grant a stay, pending appeal, on orders made in a judgment on Friday so as to permit the three turbines closest to the couple's home to partially operate over certain fixed hours. The defendants failed to engage 'in any meaningful way' with the 'genuine and substantive' complaints made by the couple over 12 years since the turbines began operating in 2013, he said. The defendants' 'seriously unimpressive' approach represented a threat to the goal of developing wind farms and wind energy here, he said. Addressing wind turbine noise in a substantial way is seen as 'critical' to the future success of wind as a major source of renewable energy. The trial had heard that engineers and other experts are used to engaging with nearby residents and others and there are 'usually many solutions available', short of shutting down wind turbines, he noted. Advertisement The defendants' approach merited aggravated damages, he said, but he would not award exemplary damages for reasons including the impact of the shut down order and positive behaviour of the defendants during the trial, including their admitting liability for nuisance on day 11 of the hearing. In their proceedings, the couple claimed the defendants had wrongfully caused or permitted noise, vibration and shadow flicker to be emitted from the wind farm which caused, and continues to cause them, stress, anxiety and sleep disturbance, 'destroyed' the use and enjoyment of their property and devalued it. Represented by John Rogers SC, instructed by solicitor Joe Noonan, they initiated their action in 2018. The defendants had contested the claims but, last March, on the 11th day of the hearing of their full action, the defence admitted liability in relation to the claims of nuisance and switched off the turbines from 10pm to 7am daily. Advertisement At the end of the six week trial on April 4th, the defendants apologised for the nuisance and told the court they would also switch off the turbines from 7am to 11am at weekends and public holidays, would pay damages for nuisance to date and into the future and would address shadow flicker. In his 100 page judgment on Thursday, Mr Justice Quinn said the plaintiffs expert evidence was that the nuisance was 'one of the worst cases of wind farm noise impact' and the defence expert said it was 'an outlier'. Ireland Ireland has warmest spring in 126 years – Met Éire... Read More He awarded annual damages of €10,000 and €15,000 respectively to Mr Byrne and Ms Moorhead for the 12 years of the nuisance from May 2013, meaning €120,000 and €180,000 general damages respectively. It was not appropriate to permit the defendants to pay additional damages rather than have the three turbines shut down, he held. The 'fair, just and appropriate' outcome was a permanent order directing their full shut down as that was the only order which would prevent what the defendants admitted was a serious nuisance. Advertisement If an evidential basis for a solution, or combination of solutions, had been put forward by the defendants, that could have avoided the full shutdown of the turbines, he said. His conclusions, he stressed, were limited to the circumstances of this case, including the defendants decision to 'largely ignore' and then fail to engage in any meaningful way with a 'substantial and serious problem' they had belatedly admitted.