British billpayers saved £300m through energy flexibility in 2024, figures show
British billpayers saved more than £300 million by switching the time at which they turned on their washing machines or ovens, according to figures released by the industry body for network operators.
The data shows households and businesses reduced their bills by changing the time or day they used electricity – such as by cooking or washing earlier or later in the day, or setting electric cars to charge at specific times.
In the past when most of the UK's electricity generators were fossil-fuel power plants, supply of electricity adapted to demand.
Today as the wind and the sun influence when renewables are being produced, incentivising users to adapt their demand to when there is a lot of supply can help take pressure off the grid.
Flexibility can also be a valuable tool to optimise capacity while longer-term infrastructure upgrades are planned and delivered.
The Energy Network Association (ENA) on Thursday said electricity networks in Great Britain secured a record high of 9 gigawatts (GW) of flexibility last year.
In turn, a total of 22 gigawatt-hours of flexibility was harnessed across the network – enough to power almost 7,000 average UK households for a full year, according to the figures.
It represents a three-fold increase since the previous year, which is the biggest jump since data collection began in 2017, ENA said.
The industry group also revealed that flexibility is projected to deliver over £3 billion in savings over the next three years.
This will be driven by lower contributions to infrastructure costs, reduced connection charges and the increased use of low-carbon energy sources, it said.
Dr Avinash Aithal, head of open networks at ENA, said: 'It's been tremendous to see the boom in the flexibility market over the past year.
'Flexibility is becoming more mainstream thanks to industry efforts to remove barriers to participation and simplify the market processes overall. The outcome of our efforts are now clear to see, with significant savings for consumers and the wider energy industry.
'Great Britain is now a global leader in energy flexibility,' he added.
'Together, ENA and industry have paved the way for the whole of Great Britain to participate in and benefit from the energy flexibility market.'
Last year, a majority (80%) of flexibility came from non-fossil fuel sources – 10 times the capacity of the UK's largest solar farm, ENA said.
While the majority of flexibility services came from commercial organisations, householders can also reap the benefits of using electric car chargers and heat pumps, for example, at non-peak times.
It comes as Ofgem said the energy market needs more complex time-based tariffs to encourage consumers to use power at different times.
The regulator's chief executive, Jonathan Brearley, told MPs that the tariffs would in some cases 'dramatically reduce bills'.
The tariffs, also called time-of-use (TOU) tariffs or multi-rate tariffs, offer cheaper electricity at times when there is lower demand on the National Grid.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
32 minutes ago
- Reuters
Canadian funds shelve $6 billion sale of renewables company Cubico, sources say
LONDON/NEW YORK, June 26 - Two Canadian pension funds have halted a long-running auction for renewable energy developer Cubico Sustainable Investments that they had hoped could be valued at more than $6 billion, including debt, three people familiar with the matter said. The Montreal-based Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP) and Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan (OTPP) decided to explore a sale of the company that operates wind and solar farms across Europe, North and South America and Australia, nearly two years ago, when low-carbon energy companies were enjoying a period of rising valuations. However, the offers made were not enough to persuade the shareholders to agree to a sale, two of the people said. The process was not expected to restart imminently, one of the people and a third one said. Some bidders valued Cubico at around 5 billion euros ($5.9 billion) including debt, two of the sources said. Spanish infrastructure fund Qualitas Energy and KKR-backed power producer ContourGlobal were among the parties interested, the people said. Cubico, PSP, Qualitas, ContourGlobal and OTPP declined to comment. A representative for KKR had no immediate comment. Some investor interest in the sector has waned, especially in the United States, due in part to a rush for more power sources, including polluting ones, to meet soaring power demand for artificial intelligence projects, and Donald Trump's continued support for fossil fuels on his return to office. The owners originally expected the sale to fetch a valuation, including debt, of around 10 times Cubico's 2023 earnings of $625 million before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation, Reuters reported previously. The process had attracted interest from at least one corporate utility as well as financial firms betting that clean power companies would become more valuable as governments pushed to reduce planet-warming emissions. Bankers were hoping Trump's drive to loosen regulations would drive a deals boom, but market volatility and geopolitical concerns have hampered some activity so far. Counting all its concentrated solar power and transmission line technology, Cubico has a total 2.8 gigawatts of generation capacity. It was formed in 2015 when the two funds partnered with Banco Santander. They bought equal shares of the Spanish bank's stake in 2016. ($1 = 0.8538 euros)
The Sun
34 minutes ago
- The Sun
I've made £6.7k on Vinted & here's 10 rules I follow to guarantee sales – from uploading times to second-chance keywords
A VINTED pro has shared her top selling tips after making more than £6,000 on the app - and when you upload items makes all the difference. Laura Egan, from Glasgow, has seriously topped up her bank account by flogging second-hand clothing on the online marketplace. The newlywed - who sells under @activegirlglasgow - has racked up almost 400 glowing, five-star reviews from satisfied buyers and cashed in £6,711.44 to date. And she's now revealed the 10 rules she follows to sell items fast on Vinted. So if you're eager to make money fast and have a wardrobe full of clothes you never wear, you've come to the right place. In a TikTok post (@lauraegaann), Laura said: "I've sold a lot of clothes! I don't resell, I just buy a LOT of clothes, tend to wear them once or twice and then sell them on! "I've most recently been selling my full bridal wardrobe (yes, the engagement party dresses, hen do heels, wedding morning robes - all of it!) and I've learned some pretty good lessons along the way." First up, Laura says uploading items daily is very important when it comes to getting your items noticed. To earn a "frequent uploader" badge on Vinted, sellers must post a minimum of five items over a 30-day period, which can boost your listings. But Laura recommends uploading three to five items every DAY instead as Vinted "rewards consistency". She added: "Posting little and often keeps your items at the top of the feed. "I upload at peak times when people will be scrolling eg. on the commute to work, after dinner etc." I've found the rudest Vinted seller ever - people are stunned when I show them her 'unhinged' messages pestering me The savvy seller also strives to make her account look "curated" with a similar style throughout her posts to avoid it looking like a jumbled car boot sale. "And make sure you've got a good bio telling people what they can expect to find on your shop", she advises. Laura always uses natural daylight for photos to ensure they're as clear and bright as possible. She urges fledgling sellers to avoid artificial lighting and taking photos at night, and says you should never edit your photos. "Everything should show up looking true to the photos". she said. "Either hang clothes on a plain background or lay them flat on a white sheet. "People like to see clothes with no distractions. Clean background equals faster sale." The description is just as important as the pictures, according to Laura. She said: "If an item is flawed, don't forget to mention it. I include size, condition, RRP, how many times I've worn it, where I wore it etc. "Add every detail to the description. Give people a reason to trust you." And if an item doesn't sell within a week, it is swiftly deleted and reuploaded. Laura insists this gives listings "another shot with the algorithm" and is the perfect chance to include better keywords. She said: "I've always found I get more views the second time. Understanding tax implications According to HMRC guidance, there is no new tax rule for people selling unwanted items online. But you may need to register for Self Assessment and pay tax if you buy goods for resale with the intention of selling them for profit and generate total income exceeding £1,000 before expenses in any tax year. In other words, anyone buying items specifically to resell them may be subject to tax, while personal decluttering remains tax-free. How you acquire your items matters, because personal possessions and purchased inventory are taxed at different rates. "If you're buying stock to resell, track all your expenses including packaging, postage, and the original cost of items," Oakenfull advises. "These can be deducted from your profits when calculating any potential tax liability." The key is knowing the difference between casual selling and running a small business, and planning accordingly. "Make sure you've got good SEO keywords in the listing eg if it's from your bridal wardrobe list things as 'perfect for hen do', 'gorgeous bridal party dress' etc." She continued: "Be quick and detailed with replies to messages, fast communication builds buyer confidence "Package your items well. I always use the TikTok Shop postage bags and if anything is delicate I use tissue paper/bubble wrap. "I also add in a thank you note which tends to go a long way with reviews, but not essential. "And post your items quickly. People don't want to hang around when they're excited about their purchase. I aim to post next day when possible."
The Sun
34 minutes ago
- The Sun
Millionaire toy maker's son fighting to block half-brother from dad's £14.5m fortune after mum's secret affair revealed
A MILLIONAIRE toy maker's son is fighting to boot his illegitimate half-brother out of his dad's £14.5m family fortune after their mum's secret affair was revealed. Stuart Marcus built a lucrative games empire after he began selling dolls' houses from a room above a small East London toy shop in the 1960s. 3 Shortly before he died, he put £14.5m worth of company shares into trust for his "children," with brothers Edward, 47, and Jonathan, 43, both benefiting. But the family was thrown into turmoil after the revelation that Edward was not Stuart's son, but instead the product of an affair between his mum, Patricia Marcus, and lawyer Sydney Glossop. Last year, a judge ruled that Stuart was not Edward's dad, but said that Edward could still benefit from the £14.5m fortune on the basis that both brothers were intended to share. This week, the case came back to court, with lawyers for Jonathan arguing that it was wrong to let solicitor Edward share the wealth when he was not Stuart's biological son. Barrister Thomas Braithwaite, for Jonathan, insisted that the word "children" in the trust document meant "biological children" and so could not include Edward. Stuart Marcus - dubbed "a modest man with a big dream and a big heart" by business colleagues - founded Kitfix Hobbies in 1962 and carved out a major niche in toys, board games and craft kits, later transferring the company HQ to Swaffham, in Norfolk. The disputed trust he set up holds shares valued at £14.5m in the family companies, in which both brothers worked as the brand grew and diversified into other fields such as property, with Jonathan heading up successful commercial operations in Germany. But since 2016, relations between the two brothers soured, climaxing in the High Court clash, in which Jonathan claimed Edward should be excluded from benefiting under the trust. Jonathan claimed Edward was the product of a one-night stand his mum Patricia Marcus, 82, had with a lawyer named Sydney Glossop while his dad was away on business. That claim was based on Jonathan's discovery in 2023 of the "monumental" news that Patricia had confided in Edward that he wasn't Stuart's son during a confidential chat 14 years ago. Although Edward kept his secret for more than a decade, when Jonathan learned the news it triggered a court fight as he tried to have Edward removed as a beneficiary of the multimillion-pound family trust established before Stuart's death, aged 86, in 2020. Jonathan commissioned DNA evidence to back his claim, while his mum told the court herself that she had no doubt that Edward's real dad was Sydney, with whom she had a brief encounter over 40 years ago. From the witness box, Edward told how his mum suddenly spilled the revelation about her affair and his paternity during a meeting at his home in 2010. He said he then searched online for anything about his mystery dad, finally tracking him down to a retirement home near Birmingham, which he and his mum visited in order to meet Sydney. Once there, he witnessed the pair of them "cuddling," said Edward, telling the court: "I saw her sit on the bed and cuddle him and I was shocked to see her behaving that way because it wasn't the way I saw her behave with my father." However, he said he began to harbour doubts about his mum's news and claimed she went back on her account in 2010 when she told him she was wrong about Sydney being his dad. After three days in court last year judge Master Matthew Marsh, found that the evidence confirmed that Edward is not Stuart's son. But found the family trust does not exclude Edward, as in the context of the trust settlement, the word "children" meant both boys. This week, representing Jonathan in an appeal at the High Court, Mr Braithwaite argued that Master Marsh had got it wrong and that Edward should not benefit. Stuart's trust described the beneficiaries as his "children," which Mr Braithwaite insisted could only be taken in its ordinary meaning, "biological children." But for Edward, barrister Matthew Mills argued that it was obvious that Stuart had intended to benefit Edward and urged the judge to dismiss Jonathan's appeal. "Jonathan is doing this to try to take away from Edward any rights in this multi-million pound family business," he told the High Court judge. "Stuart intended to benefit Edward, who he designated and thought to be his child. Realistically, the reasonable person would think that Edward is a beneficiary of this settlement." Following a half-day in court, Sir Anthony reserved his judgment on Jonathan's bid to exclude his brother from the family fortune until a later date. 3
