
Energy price cap scrap would save households hundreds, analysis finds
Households could be saving £200 a year with 'fairer' energy pricing, experts say, as they call for the Ofgem price cap to be phased out.
A flexible system of energy pricing would reduce the price of electricity by 4p/kWh over the next 15 years, a new report from The Resolution Foundation finds.
A key measure under this system would include 'locational pricing', where households pay for energy according to costs in their area. This could reduce system costs by £3.7 billion a year, the report says, equivalent to £40 per household.
The most savings could be made from introducing more time-of-use tariffs, where households can pay cheaper energy rates depending on the time of day it is used. This would save an average of £160 per household by 2040 according to the report.
This measure would particularly benefit electric vehicle (EV) owners, researchers say, with an average £120 saving a year to be had compared to the price cap. This is because most EV owners will charge their vehicles overnight, when electricity would be cheaper.
EVs are rising in popularity in the UK, accounting for 19 per cent of all car sales in 2024. This is expected to increase quickly in the coming years as a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars comes into force in 2030.
This demand is so great that EVs, alongside electric heating, are set to be the main drivers behind a 40 per cent increase in residential electricity use by 2035.
But this flexible electricity model could also come with higher price risks for households, as they would be more directly subject to volatility in the electricity market.
A report for Octopus Energy by FTI in February investigated how locational – or zonal – pricing could impact household energy costs across the country.
Their analysis found that average zonal wholesale prices in the north are lower than in the south, with those in London facing bills nearly seven times higher than those in Scotland if bills were mapped directly to zone-based wholesale costs.
Zachary Leather, Economist at the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Britain's net zero transition – in terms of both energy production and energy consumption – should be a cost of living win for consumers, but it will put more pressure on the electricity grid and could create more price volatility.
'Switching to flexible pricing for consumers could address these risks and reduce bills for everyone in the process.'
Hashtags

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


The Sun
33 minutes ago
- The Sun
Shocking moment £50k EV EXPLODES sending flames billowing into sky destroying 2 cars parked nearby
THIS is the dramatic moment a £50,000 electric vehicle explodes into a huge fireball - destroying both cars next to it. The shocking footage shows the Mercedes EQA going up in flames in a matter of seconds while parked up in Sheffield, South Yorkshire. 5 It can be seen smoking for a few seconds before it spontaneously explodes in the quiet residential street. The explosion - which set a nearby shed ablaze and damaged part of the road - is believed to have been caused by a faulty battery. The blaze also destroyed two other nearby cars. James Musonda, who owns the courtesy car, was woken up by the loud bang, mistakenly thinking a tree had fallen on his house. The 33-year-old pensioner consultant told MailOnline that he was "hysterical" when he eventually realised it was his car and has vowed to steer clear of EVs. He said: "When I realised it was my car I was screaming and hysterical. "All I could see was flames when I opened the door. We couldn't get out the house because of the flames. "My daughter was in the house. I could have died if I was in that car." Mr Musonda continued to explain that the fire brigade managed to get them out, but it kept making little explosions. They were left very shaken up, and left keen to keep their distance from electric cars. Two seriously injured as 14 homes evacuated after huge explosion rips through SIX houses in Halifax Fire crews attended the scene until noon the following day, The Mercedes was recalled to the factory for "safety work" by the German manufacturer in October 2024. The father-of-one explained that Mercedes had the car until mid-January this year. The incident occurred six weeks after he got his car back. Mercedes told MailOnline that it was sorry to learn of the incident that took place in March. A spokesperson explained that the customer services team have been in contact with Mr Musonda and have kept him mobile in a courtesy car. In October last year, a similar incident occurred in Northamptonshire, when CCTV captured the terrifying moment an electric Mercedes went up in flames. The owner of the vehicle, Scott Bayliss said: "The pace and ferocity at which the fire took hold and engulfed the entire car and pretty much the entire front of our house was scary beyond belief. He also explained that the initial investigator concluded that the vehicle was in such a bad state that it was difficult to establish what the fault was. A Mercedes spokesperson said the company could not comment while the investigation was ongoing, but did stress that the company had reached out to the family. A 70,000 Alfa Romeo was also caught bursting into flames in a Birmingham shopping centre carpark last December. The terrifying moment saw emergency crews rush to the fourth floor of Selfridges Moor Street to put out the blaze, which managed to destroy one other car. In an update, a fire service spokesman reported: "Faulty engine from a petrol powered car caused this fire. An incident recently occurred in Bournemouth too, which saw a 27-year-old woman narrowly escape the flames. The vehicle suddenly erupted into flames while the driver was dropping off her fiance. The driver who was inside the car told the news site "it just started smoking and I got out of the car, then it caught fire". 5 5


Telegraph
34 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump wins tax breaks for US with threat of ‘revenge' raid on foreign business
Donald Trump has extracted tax breaks for US companies after threatening to impose a 'revenge' levy on foreign businesses that moved money out of the US. G7 countries are to abandon plans to make US companies pay a minimum level of corporation tax in return for Mr Trump dropping the threat of 'revenge tax'. Scott Bessent, the US Treasury secretary, said that he has asked both houses of the US Congress to remove a Trump's tax proposal, known as Section 899, from the budget bill after an agreement with the other G7 countries. Section 899 is part of Mr Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax and spend bill, and would have enabled the US president to retaliate against countries that harm American interests with 'discriminatory' tax policies by taxing any money taken out of the country. The power threatened to be hugely costly to British businesses. Some of Britain's biggest companies, including AstraZeneca, BAE and Barclays, have significant operations in the US that could be at risk of being targeted. Fears had mounted that the powers could be used on the UK as a way of forcing Sir Keir Starmer to water down or abolish Britain's digital service tax, which applies to US tech giants. On Thursday night, Mr Bessent wrote on X: 'After months of productive dialogue with other countries on the OECD Global Tax Deal, we will announce a joint understanding among G7 countries that defends American interests. 'President Trump paved the way for this historic achievement. On January 20, the President issued two executive orders instructing [the US] Treasury to defend US tax sovereignty, and as a result of President Trump's leadership we now have a great deal for the American people.' Mr Bessent said the G7 had agreed not to impose what is known as OECD Pillar 2 on US companies. That refers to a 15pc minimum corporate tax rate, which was agreed in principle by 140 countries to be imposed on companies with global revenues of more than €750m (£639m). The idea was to stop multinationals shunting profits from one country to another to take advantage of lower tax rates. Economists complained that it would be only a matter of time before the minimum rate was hiked, locking countries into ever-higher taxes, globally enforced. Joe Biden was an enthusiastic backer of a global minimum rate of corporation tax. Mr Bessent said: 'By reversing the Biden administration's unwise commitments, we are now protecting our nation's authority to enact tax policies that serve the interests of American businesses and workers.' Mr Trump had claimed that the tax deal 'not only allows extraterritorial jurisdiction over American income but also limits our nation's ability to enact tax policies that serve the interests of American businesses and workers'.


Auto Blog
42 minutes ago
- Auto Blog
Why Tesla Faces Crackdown $58K Daily Fine Over Its Marketing
France takes aim at Tesla's sales practices The French Ministry of the Economy has threatened to hit Tesla with a $58,000 daily fine if the automaker doesn't end what the department considers deceptive commercial practices. France is the latest country to take issue with the Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) feature's name since the software isn't fully autonomous or operating at Level 5 autonomy. The ministry's investigation began in 2023 following reports to France's consumer complaint service SignalConso. 0:00 / 0:30 In addition to ruling that Tesla was responsible for misleading business practices regarding the fully autonomous driving capacity of its vehicles and the availability of certain options and trade-in offers, the department viewed Tesla as not specifying the date, deadline, or location for car deliveries, not detailing if a purchase was made on credit, and having customers make payments before the withdrawal period enjoyed by the consumer when they finance their purchase with an assigned credit ended, according to Electrek. Additionally, Tesla was described as not providing receipts when customers made partial cash payments and not rightfully refunding within the deadlines for orders. Tesla has four months to comply with the ministry's order before fines begin. 2025 Tesla Model Y — Source: Tesla This isn't the first time FSD terminology has come under fire In April, China began cracking down on Tesla's FSD marketing with new rules banning car companies from using words like 'self-driving,' 'autonomous driving,' 'smart driving,' and 'advanced smart driving.' Instead, China's government recommended automakers describe features like FSD as 'combined assisted driving.' This regulation arrived after Tesla had already changed FSD's name in China to 'Intelligent Assisted Driving' following its China launch, implying the transition occurred as the investigation unfolded. While Tesla doesn't face any federal ban on its FSD terminology in the U.S., California lawmakers banned the company from using the marketing terminology in 2022. An excerpt from California's law reads: 'A manufacturer or dealer shall not name any partial driving automation feature, or describe any partial driving automation feature in marketing materials, using language that implies or would otherwise lead a reasonable person to believe, that the feature allows the vehicle to function as an autonomous vehicle, as defined in Section 38750, or otherwise has functionality not actually included in the feature,' according to Autobody News. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. FSD is also hitting roadblocks in Stockholm, Sweden, as the city's officials have rejected Tesla's request to test the tech in its streets. Stockholm's traffic department cited safety risks to its citizens and infrastructure and 'heavy pressure from other ongoing innovation tests,' Teslarati reports. In Australia, an ongoing lawsuit filed in February accuses Tesla of overpromising on self-driving features while flagging other issues like instances of phantom braking. Tesla Model X and Model S — Source: Tesla Final thoughts Tesla's regulatory scrutiny from France is part of a global trend targeting the automaker's sales practices. The $58,000 fine Tesla faces from France's Ministry of the Economy, China's new guidelines, and California's ban show how consumer protection is becoming more critical as daily driving functions become increasingly automated and confusion about their capabilities grows. However, Tesla's recent sales struggles could impact its decision to play ball in hopes of maintaining accessibility to major global markets. About the Author Cody Carlson View Profile