Proposal To Cut Costs For Low Energy Users
[Updated] BELCO submitted a proposal to the Energy Commission today to revise the residential Facilities Charge to assist lower-energy-usage customers, many of whom they said have lower incomes, and if it is approved, BELCO said 44% of customers will see their monthly bills reduced.
All residential customers now pay a $33.00 per month Facilities Charge regardless of their energy usage. The charge covers the cost of specific infrastructure and business services required for each metered connection.
The new proposal is for a Graduated Facilities Charge that would reduce costs for lower-usage residential customers and slightly increase the overall cost for those who consume the highest number of kilowatt hours (kWh) per month.
The proposal is in response to the call to assist lower income customers who struggle to meet monthly bills, during these difficult economic times.
If it is approved by the Energy Commission, 44% of BELCO customers will see reductions in their overall monthly electricity bills; 28% will be unaffected; 28% of the highest energy users will see their overall monthly electricity bills increase slightly, depending upon energy consumption.
If approved, the Graduated Facilities Charge would be based on each customer’s average daily kilowatt kWh consumption over the previous 12-month period, which would be reassessed monthly, updating the Annual Rolling Average.
The only exception to the proposed Graduated Facilities Charge is for customers on BELCO’s Net Metering Programme who will remain on a fixed $33.00 per month charge. Customers on the Net Metering Programme draw energy from the grid when needed and intermittently sell excess power back to the grid when their consumption is less than what is being produced by their personal renewable energy systems.
BELCO’s proposal before the Energy Commission provides no profit to BELCO.
Why Can’t BELCO Just Lower Its Rates?
A spokesperson said, “Maintaining revenue neutrality is essential for BELCO to be positioned to successfully access capital markets for investment in new plant and equipment which provides opportunities to move to more efficient technologies, including alternative fuel options, renewable energy and longer-term improved affordability.
“This proposal follows in the wake of several substantial actions BELCO has taken, since the beginning of the recession, to reduce operating costs while maintaining a system with a 99.9% reliability rating. These steps include voluntarily: waiving a rate increase, cutting staff and reducing pension costs.
“Specifically, BELCO waived an approved 1.5% rate increase due to take effect at the start of 2011. That same year, the company achieved the equivalent of an 8-9% staff reduction through the early retirement of 26 employees.
“The company froze its Defined Benefit Pension Plan and moved all employees to a Defined Contribution Plan effective 1 January 2012. Although BELCO incurred a significant one-time expense, the change provides sizable future cost reductions.
“BELCO also continues to reimburse Government directly for the Facilities Charge paid by customers on Financial Assistance. This programme, which has been in effect for over a decade, has more than doubled in cost over the past five years. In 2013, waiving the Facilities Charge for these customers cost BELCO $274,000 in revenue for which the company seeks no recovery.
How Can Customers Monitor Avg. Daily kWh Consumption and Annual Rolling Average?
BELCO said, “Should this proposal be approved by the Energy Commission, an additional line will be added to residential customers’ monthly statements. Under the heading Consumption Comparisons the Annual Rolling Average will be added to the information.
“Customers will be able to review their Annual Rolling Average on a monthly basis, in addition to the existing Current Month, Previous Month and Same Month Last Year consumption information. This information provides individual customers’ usage trends.
“If approved by the Energy Commission this proposal incentivises conservation at the higher-use levels, as those placing the greatest demand on the system will be paying a higher overall cost. The proposed structure is also more aligned with Government’s White Paper objective to encourage conservation, as it allocates the greater cost to those with the largest carbon footprint.
“The BELCO application does not affect approved Energy Charges (cost per kWh), the on-time payment discount, or the Fuel Adjustment Rate that is calculated on a monthly basis and approved by the Energy Commission to cover the fuel cost, above $30.00 per barrel, used in the production of electricity.
“BELCO makes no profit on the Fuel Adjustment Charge, and is actively working on initiatives for alternative fuel options, newer and more efficient plant and equipment, renewable energy, efficiency and conservation. BELCO provides energy savings tips through the media, on its website www.belco.bm and in customer mailings.”
Update 1.42pm: Minister of Education and Economic Development Dr. Grant Gibbons said, “The Ministry of Education and Economic Development has been in on-going discussions with BELCO and are pleased that the utility has submitted their proposal on the restructuring of the facilities charge.
“We believe that if approved, this proposal will provide some helpful cost relief for those residential customers who are low users of electricity and who tend to be seniors, as well as families and individuals in the lower income brackets.
“It would be premature to comment further because it is the Energy Commission who must consider and rule on the submission by BELCO.
“While we await the Commission’s decision, I will add that the Ministry and the Department of Energy is working hard to ensure that we move Bermuda in a positive direction and that we implement strategies that ensure a more sustainable energy future.
“The goal is to lower the cost of energy for all individuals, businesses and organizations while maintaining the reliability that we have come to expect in our energy supply,” concluded Dr. Gibbons.
Read More About
Comments (91)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Articles that link to this one:
- BELCO Fee Changes To Take Effect June 1st | Bernews.com | May 21, 2014
Belcotricks in action.
A great day to all.
Correct me if Im wrong but all of this would mean that 56% of customers will be paying more?
No, only 28% would pay more, 28% will see no change and the other 44% are better off.
….but overall, looking at the math, it seems this does work out in Belco’s favour.
28% will be paying more. This gesture is nothing more than a ruse to raise money for BELCO.
Back up your assertion! What facts do you have to prove this is a ruse by BELCO to raise money?
It may not be a ruse, but the math is correct – Belco makes more money under this scenario. Assume 1,000 customers. Under the old method, Belco would earn $33,000. Under the new method (using their percentages of customers), Belco would now earn $33,030 per month. So an extra $30 per month per 1,000 customers or $360 per year per 1,000 customers. Not masses amounts of money, but hey, they look good AND make a tiny bit more money (maybe an extra $10,000 -$13,000 a year or so). There’s a party trick for you!
Math isn’t hard people, you should try it sometime
And the increase from $33 to $75 per month is shown as a “3.9% increase”. They definitely need a new calculator.
That is the increase on the overall bill. Obviously that particular line item is going up considerably – but as a % of your total bill, it is still small.
Correct GoF, it’s a little less than 1% in Belco’s favour – doesn’t seem a lot but I personally wouldn’t mind 1% of Belco’s facility charge for the whole of Bda in my bank account each month!
Maybe they factored in a small margin to cover the effect of customers who may now make a concerted effort to conserve energy.
28% will see higher bills.
28% will see no change.
44% will see lower bills.
But the higher bills outweigh the lower bills in terms of dollars.
It’s a way of increasing revenue, and it impacts the people who already pay the most.
Is BELCO supposed to be in the business of wealth distribution, or is it just supposed to supply electricity?
So basically they are robbing from the poor to give to the poorer! Belco is very good at voodoo accounting!
I’ll believe when I see it happen,until then,all talk,business as usual!
as the American Indians said…White man speak with Forked Tongue!
smoke screen!
Belco doesn’t want less many so they are shifting the cost from some users to others. Ascendant Group, the parent company, made $11.5 million in profit in 2012. Wouldn’t want it coming out of the bottom line.
~money~
How does that Tier 4 work? $33 to $49.50 is WAY more than a 3.8% increase in the fee they are paying – more like 60% and Tier 5 is more than a 100% increase…
BELCo…disgusting.
The increase/decrease percentage shown are representative of the increase/decrease of the total bill, not just the $33 facilities charge.
The % increase is based on the overall bill, not the facilities fee. So it’s way more than 100% increase in the facilities charge, but given the kWh consumption, it’s only a fraction of the overall bill.
Not agreeing with it, just pointing out the math….
Thanks for pointing it out. Still absurd and definitely “twists” the data to their advantage….
I was wondering if it was just me! $33 to $49.50 is 50% increase and $33 to $75 is 128% increase. Belco is making up way more than what they are losing by using a tiered fee for the facility charge. I really wish the solar companies would offer financing. Dealing with banks are another ridiculousness I don’t even want to get started on!
“Belco is making up way more than what they are losing by using a tiered fee for the facility charge.” – prove it? Where’s your supporting calculations to back up this statement?
Contrary to my previous post, the increase is much more than I estimated:
First calculate the original ($33) charge and the new charge per 1% of the customer base for each tier (i.e. tier 1: Orig Chg $33 / 26 = $1.27 per 1% – Revised Chg $15 / 26 = $0.58 per 1%)
Next calculate the variance as a percentage (e.g. tier 1: [[$0.58 - $1.27] / $1.27] * 100 = -55%)
Doing this for tiers 1-5 should give you apx. -55%, -24%, 0%, +50%, +127%, respectively.
Totalled they should show an increase of apx. +59% increase on the original charge.
How can a 60% increase be considered “slighlty” more or even a 127% increase for that matter. How about Belco absorb the savings they plan to give. I am sure they made it up over the years with their “fuel adjustment” that remained in place even when oil fell in price. I guess I have to buy shares in Belco to make up for it or buy a solar panel and sell back to them.
Are the cuts for those with low energy usage or for persons who can substantiate their income is below a certain level?
A lower facilities charge is being proposed for those with a 15kWh daily average use or less according to the BELCO proposal. Those on financial assistance already have their BELCO bill paid for by Government as far as I am aware. So no it is not means tested – but based on usage – so there are some assumptions being made here about how much electricity low income earners may actually use. You could have very inefficient (old) appliances (particularly a water heater/air conditioner) which use a lot of electricity because you can’t afford to upgrade them(or you don’t own them and the land lord won’t upgrade them)and therefore may not be able to take advantage of the reduction in your bill – in fact you may be negatively affected (have to pay more) and you don’t have the power to change your situation because of your economic situation.
Rubbish! They will get their money by any means necessary. Lets get rid of the monopoly.
And do what replace it with another monopoly when either BELCO or the new competitor fails due to limited size of the market?! Easy to make general sweeping statements such as this but coming up with practical/realistic solutions to help reduce the exorbitant cost of energy on the Island is a little more difficult!
You must be a shareholder!!
Nice Try OBA… Guess they are making sure they protect their dividends!
The OBA have done more in 14 months to reign in food and electricity costs than the PLP did in 14 years. Only once in 14 years did the PLP reject a rate increase request from Belco and that was simply due to the election being right around the corner.
Remind who ran a former Belco CEO (who was CEO during the PLP’s reign) as a candidate in the last election? So who is protecting whose dividend interests again?
But I imagine facts don’t mean much to you.
@ Liar Liar,
The gentleman you are speaking about did speak out against Belco and the coporate sector in Bermuda last year if I remember correctly, and he was chastised for speaking about this?
With regard to the food prices, you can believe that report if you want, I prefer to believe people who shop their almost every week. They Grocery stores changes the prices, on certain days. Whether you believe that, it’s totally up to you.
With regard to Belco, our MP Mr. Richards is a shareholder, and has been a shareholder in Belco for some time now. Belco just didn’t become expesive, it has been this way. I find it odd that Mr. Richards waits until he is in the Gov to make mention of this, after collecting healthy dividends from Belco for some time now.
And then they pass this bit of information on, and expect everyone to jump up in arms for this little, sorry to say next too nothing (and for some their rate will go up). lol
I don’t know if people have been paying attention, but this company does very well, and has done very well for many years. Look at all the businesses, land, and everything else they have been busy buying up of late.
Sad truth is that when there are monoply’s like this one (with no real competition), the only real losers are the customers.
Great response.
Except the part where you evidenced the pro-active nature on part on the PLP, while in power, in terms of helping to stabilize or reduce the cost of food and electricity. I remember the PLP putting on quite a show in 2011 regarding their price control commission and then…nothing. Guess it was all just a song and dance to portray the PLP as actually doing something about the cost of basic living expenses in this island. If I am wring please provide evidence of the PLP’s price control commission actually achieving anything of the sort.
Also, why did the former Belco CEO/PLP candidate stay absolutely silent while he received a fat paycheck via the numerous rate increases approved during his term as CEO? Strange huh?
What does MP Richards being a Belco shareholder (assuming you are telling the truth) have to do with anything? As the Finance Minister he is proactively seeking to do something about the ever increasing electricity costs now that he has the power of being in Government.
What I find odd is that a so called labour party, that purportedly abhors big business, did nothing of the sort (i.e. seek to reduce costs) while in power for 14 years and supporters like you said nothing during that whole time. Yes, they created an energy commission which subsequently approved every rate increase request received except the very last one before being voted out of power. And what is even ‘odder’ is that their supporters stayed absolutely silent during that whole time and all of a sudden are now acting like the costs of Belco just recently out of hand.
@ Liar Liar,
To be honest, it would seem that whenever Gov speaks out against business, it is 90% of the time deemed in a bad light. This does not make excuses for the plp, as we all know, they have their issues.
With regard to Mr. Richards, I mentioned that (you can check if you don’t believe me) because I don’t feel he really cared about helping the average Bermudian belco bill for all these years, and I questions if he really cares now.
However I do take press releases like these as somewhat of an insult. This new scheme, or whatever they call it does not do much to help the average Bermudian.
With regard to Belco, and the Grocery stores, we were told that Gov have been negotiating with them, and that this is what they have come up with. I mean, maybe Gov need some better negotiators, because it doesn’t seem like they are very effective with regard to helping the masses. lol
I will end with this, Yes, the PLP were in power, and could have done more. But I also believe that when it comes to power, power and money go hand and hand. In saying that, the money in this island has not really changed hands as far as I can see.
But the PLP had the power not to make Bermuda more expensive by:
- not permitting persistent Belco rate increases during tehir tenure
- not raising payroll tax in the middle of our worst recession
- not increasing the foreign currency purchase tax (you do realize that we import/buy everything in foreign currencies?) in the middle of our worst recession
- not ‘harmonize’ (as phrased by Paula and Co.) duty taxes across the board
Also, if the PLP was and still is unable to enact any meaningful change in terms of the cost of living then what is the point of them as a political party? They will simply be a lame duck Government. But I do see where you were going with your last paragraph (i.e. shirk all PLP responsibility and blame it all on others). Par for the course really.
Tell us what your definition of a “healthy dividend” is then Independent? Can you tell us what the dividend was from BELCO over the last few years or are you, like a majority of other posters on BERNEWS, making things up to support your argument?
While you are at it explain how you would introduce competition to a limited market such as the electricity market? I would be very interested to hear how you would introduce another major power producer into a market of 35,000 households to provide ‘firm’ electrical power to the Island considering the limitations of current alternative power production technologies? The fact is that to even get a renewable energy market up and running there are going to have to be some subsidies for it, and more than likely those subsidies are going to come from you and I as the consumers – so be careful what you wish for!
@ George Somers,
I’m not on here asking for a break or a hand out mate. I can afford to pay my bills, so I don’t have to be careful of anything.
I say the dividends must be healthy because they have no competition, and it is something that people cannot live without.
When I see the mother company buying up all the land and businesses, I mean, am I to assume this company is opperating in the red?
Let’s not forgot, like you said, they are the only supplier of power in the country. So am I to assume that Belco is struggling? Like HSBC and Catlin right? lol
BELCO could start by buying back surplus power generated by private homes with alternative energy systems… that, in turn, would stimulate the AE market.
Gov’t should also look at giving homeowners who install AE systems a grant like many other countries do….
@Streetwise,
with regards to both of your points, fyi, they already do.
Govt gives rebates when you install a Solar panel system of up to 20%.
and Belco buy the excess power.
You need to do your homework street wise! BELCO already buy back power produced by residential PV systems through an interconnection agreement. Government also already provide a cash incentive to those residents installing PV and solar thermal systems on their homes. Now if you are talking about commercial interconnection agreements those don’t exist yet. However any incentive provided to a commercial provider of power is going to have to be subsidized to make it economically viable and guess ultimately where those monies are going to have to come from? Yes you guessed it us the general electricity consuming public! So again be careful what you wish for!
How much did they pay a consultant to come up with this.
We need a whistle blower.
People who are unemployed will more than likely spend more time at home, then someone working, hence will use more electricity. People with families will also use more electricity for utilities such as hot water, and laundry. I am also speculating that people with families especially those who are not employed are feeling the downturn in the economy the worst. If a family is supposed to be under 15kWh an hour per day they better have lots of money saved up for some solar panels, or be good at camping. The whole idea is backwards.
So true. This is not a savings. Why can’t Belco just reduce bills by 5% across the board? On tv the CEO of Belco said savings will be seen by those using less than $100 or so a month. Who would that be? So families who use more pay more? What a rip off and Belco is offering nothing.
Why should people who use less energy have to pay to subsidize families and unemployed people? We should all pay for what we use.
This is bull****…I do my damndest to switch off all the lights in my home when not in use and TV off when not watching it and have hell to get my killowatts under 17 kWH during the winter. During the summer with ac it will never be below 25 kWh per day. Belco…STOP B*********!!
Your first mistake is you are focusing your conservation efforts on the wrong appliances in your house. TV and lights are a minimal draw, try putting a timer ($50-70 cost)on your hot water heater (if its electric) and stop using your AC – use fans! If that doesn’t drop your usage considerably then check your neighbour/landlord isn’t connected into your electrical system.
Tier 3 should start with Tier 1 savings for this to be an honest attempt at cutting the averager homeowner’s bill!!!!BELCO STOP PULLING WOOL OVER PEOPLE’S EYES…BERMUDIANS AREN’T STUPID!!!!!!!!
When you hit the switch the light comes on.NOT like the Caribbean where they have brown outs and black outs all the time.
The reason “ELECTRIC IS SO EXSPENSIVE” we have a “HUGE GOVERMENT” and Belco has to pay a lot of TAXES and we the consumer have to pay the “BILL”.
Don’t blame the costs on someone else as the Huge Government needs $750Million per year for the 8,000 on the Government payroll.
That is 8,000 out of a 25,000 working Bermudians of working age.
There is no cure for “STUPID” if you do not understand this.
We cannot have 8,000 bloodsuckers sucking so much money and NO ONE wants anyone to loose there JOBS.
So my adice is to suck it up and shut up as your electric bill carries a lot of TAXES for all the Government workers and there benefits including all the unions.
In the mean time check all the Caribean countries that are going “BNKRUPT”
@ Bluebird,
I was gonna be rude, but it’s not worth it.
So lets get this straight, all of Bermuda’s electricity bill is high because of the civil servants?
Just making sure we are on the same page. smh
@ BELCO, –
Smoke & Mirrors………..
-FWB Jr
so in the summer time my bill will actually go up even more once I run my A/C, why can’t GOV reduce/stop the duty on the oil. Why can’t BELCO reduce rates across the board???? If this is approved I guess I’m going to unplug everything but the fridge while I’m at work.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t, it seems.
Tier 1 0-10 kWh = (highest cost saving)…you must be living in a shack with one light bulb!!GRANT COME BETTER THAN THIS MATE!!!!!!
I like my shack thank you very much n will take my discount
Good for you
My shack comes with all modern conveniences – four walls and a proper Bermuda roof believe it or not?! I’ll be using my $18 discount to buy a few more spare bulbs – thank YOU very much!
Or have your water heater on a timer, a gas oven and CFL bulbs throughout the house.
6kWh/day last month. Like a boss.
What if your water heater is hard wired per the instructions of the Dept. of Planning? Can you still put a timer on?
What a load of b******t. Belco will try anything! I guess when you always get away with it why wouldn’t you.
People just love to complain about BELCO, but if you compare their rates with the rest of the Caribbean, it works out to about the same.
http://blogs.iadb.org/caribbean-dev-trends/2013/11/14/the-caribbean-has-some-of-the-worlds-highest-energy-costs-now-is-the-time-to-transform-the-regions-energy-market/
You are right. Im telling you, those Bermudians who are not doing as good as they once were, are making some unhappy poor people!
Robbing Peter to pay Paul! Definitely a marketing strategy from a monopoly.
I was about ready to complain about BELCO and criticise about how useless a $15 reduction to someone would be, but then I read the rest of the article and understand a bit more about the different rates they charge and why, such as the fuel adjustment (which is based on the external cost of oil and nothing to be with BELCO).
Get real everyone, you live on an island in the middle of the ocean, everything is going to cost more because everything is shipped in. There are no ‘economies of scale’ to rely on and this not a large enough place to have ‘successful’ competition. It is going to cost more money for you to have the luxury of electricity.
It isn’t the washer/dryer/stove that has resulted in our bills increasing, it is our TVs (which sit on standby all day), our coffee makers, our cell phones (which are left on charge all night), our computers and gadgets and internet modems (which again run all day when we are out).
I know people who have been able to reduce their bills by up to 30-40% simply by using less and turning off appliances and breakers when they are out of the house. Seems as though everyone is willing to blame someone else for their high bills before looking in their own back yard!
You want to save money, use less. Plenty of people used to manage just fine on less than we have. If you want the luxury of having power at the click of a switch then be prepared to pay for it.
Sure, Use less I totally agree and move towards LED lighting and high efficiency products, Solar Thermal Water Heaters etc.
But in reality in 2013 we are still shipping and burning heavy fuel to create electricity. We have some of the highest per KWH costs in the world! And that has a lot to do with the method of electricity production, the cost of fuel, economies of scale as you mention but more importantly BELCO’s aging infrastructure and it’s ability to operate as a Monopoly. They pass every cost onto the consumer rather than squeezing their margins like any other business would need to. It is a flawed business model that was and has not been updated to adapt and change with the times. We the people of Bermuda suffer as a result.
In 5 years of recession BELCO has raised it’s rates more than 20% and the only way they are going is UP! They need to spend $100′s of millions in infrastructure during the coming years and they will pass that cost onto the consumer.
Who else would they pass that cost on to? The article above mentions lots of cost saving measures that Belco have undertaken (which I was not even aware of until reading this), such as changing the pension scheme for employees and reducing their headcount. What else could they do?
I’d like to see their Financial Statements actually to see how much money they actually make.
Sadly electricity companies all over the World are increasingly raising their prices for consumers, and the reason is….it cost more for oil and is becoming more scarce, and they need to invest in renewable energy (whether that’s what they use their profits for or not is another question!)
So what does this mean for all businesses that will reach the higher electricity tier automatically? Or is this only for residential.
residential
We have free water, why not (almost) free solar power? O I know, government and Belco have a vested interest in keeping cost VERY high. Shameful. Make it cheap to import solar systems and manpower to install. And insist on landlords providing energy certificates (bit like the UK).
We live in the sub-tropics, of course we are likely to have access to free water and free (ish) solar power. How exactly can you compare these to electricity? If you have a way to make it free for everyone then please do share!
Cardine Alice – explain how Govt. and BELCO have a vested interest in keeping costs very high? FYI – Renewable Energy technologies (as a system) are duty free to import and for residences are being subsidized by the Government through their solar rebate initiatives – so what is so shameful about that? As there are no building energy rating systems at all on any buildings in Bermuda what would insisting landlords provide energy certificates do for anyone?
if Belco wants to help the consumer leave the facility charge as is and increase the amount of kWh from 250 which is what we are charged for now to 350 this would make the billing amount less.And if the fuel charge could also be adjusted on a higher kWh fee this also would help the consumer.
Belco have always stated that the average domestic household uses an average of 650 kWhs per month. That works out as an average of just under 25 kWhs per day. In effect, the Facilities Charge will increase for anyone using more than an average amount of electricity, and will stay the same for customers who use anything from the average and 40% below the average amount of electricity.
BELCO say the proposal before the Energy Commission provides no profit to them…. but the math would suggest otherwise.
WAKE UP ENERGY COMMISSION!
The Current Energy act of 2009 requires that the Energy commission ensure BELCO has adequate working capital, reasonable revenues and the need to afford reasonable rate of return to it’s investors.
Therefore BELCO’s profits are protected by law and if they want to make a change to their rate structure then all they have to do is reference the need to make $$$ for their investors.
A Monopoly at it’s best, protected by law.
Some of BELCO’s Key concerns as per their presentation to CARILEC:
Sales and competition – Sales can be dramatically, negatively, impacted by IPP or Renewables
Failure to find funding – BELCO anticipates having to spend over $250m by 2020 to replace aging plant and infrastructure. (This is excluding any investment in Large Scale renewables) BELCO has never attempted to fund to these levels before. Financial performance is impacted dramatically by these investment requirements which will make it more difficult to attract potential investments or lenders as the risk increases.
Failure to receive Energy Commission support – There must be some level of price increase which may not be palatable to the Energy Commission. This is in fact the case. In 2011 our request for rate increases in 2012-2014 to support the new $70 million North Power station, required to replace old, aging plant was denied.
Oil Prices – Should commodity prices continue to rise this will continue to put pressure on our overall rates which are already some of the highest in the world
Our plant is aging and unless we put in more efficient plant we will run afoul of our Emissions standards which will require us to shut down plant , as we will not be able to meet the new standards being imposed by the Government
http://www.carilec.com/members2/uploads/CEO2012_Presentations/2b_AParsons_DefiningandDesigningRegulationBestPractice.pdf
In other words get you some wind and/or solar, quick.
Makes sense to me. Let’s make the people that pay us a bunch of money, pay us even more money! Thanks Belco!
/s
anyone with a brain can see the Maths work in favour of BELCO.
but for those that never listened at school,you’ll not see it.
BELCO are going to make much more this way.
And I thought gambling was still not quite legal yet……this is a shell game, spot the savings, where’s the pea? We’ll there are 2 P s in RIPPED off if BELCO want to do something meaningful (and they don’t) they would reduce the costs for the highest users, these savings should then be passed on to hotel guests, shop customers, less financial loss for medium companies who pay millions a year to the monopoly and who knows that may mean they can save a job or two, stop these stupid “demand charges” that cripple companies for months and months if they peak over their “demand” for a few minutes, and look at the questionable ” fuel surcharge” that only benefits BELCO and makes their total kW price the highest in the world, I know the Finance minister will see through this bunk, again stop the parent company buying up local companies at the electrical consumers expense.
Turn off all the street lights and may be people will slow down.and save some gas in the bargain.
Creative bean counters.
well i jus checked my kWh/day…i guess my bill will rise…time to get rid of my fridge and light bulb…that tier 3 is the kicker, highest percentage of users remain struggling to pay…tier 1&2 10-15kWh/day consumers must use lights twice a week, damn…Belcos motto should be “Get Rid of ALL your Electric Devices an We’ll Give You a Break”…one minute they tell you to conserve on your consumption…then they’re crying about how they took a loss in profits so we gotta charge you more to maintain their upward momentum to keep some people smiling while reading their annual report. i’m with the first commentor on this one.
Yes like i said before OLD MONEY ask yourself who is running Bermuda think about it follow the money
then ask yourself will they ever let go have they ever let go of the greed n power
Ruthless across the board , and make no apologies . Hellco ..in for the penny , in for the pound !
This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Belco *** off, you idiots.
Right in time for summer. And you know all of you who have old homes run up more electricity. The rich stay rich and the poor get poorer. Welcome to Bermuda! Another world.
My concern is for those who are confined to their homes daily (elderly & shut-ins), who have only their televisions or radios for company and/or entertainment. If they use an excess amount of electricity will our cash-strapped infermed and seniors suffer and have to pay the increase? Or do you have alternatives in place for these groups of people?
I know Belco is spinning this story as high electricity users are ‘rich’ and therefore should subsidize the ‘poor’ users who use little electricity but is that really the case?
I might propose that, especially in Bermuda in the current situation, many households have actually grown as children have moved back in with parents after losing a job. Large households tend to be the large electricity users. Large households may well be large simply because they are struggling with only one earner for a household of five or six.
Low electricity users are very likely to be single people living on their own. Think single professionals, lawyers, accountants, underwriters. They work late, using less airconditioning and lights, eat out more often, not using the electric range etc.
Is Belco asking large, struggling Bermudian families to subsidize the electricity usage of single, affluent, professionals?
Belco is asking the people who use electricity to pay for it. Those who use it more will pay more, just the same as those who eat more food pay more, and those who drive more pay for more gas. Sadly that’s just the way things work.
Those children who have moved back in with their families would have had to pay for electricity somewhere, it’s just a question of under which household. In theory one child moving back home wouldn’t result in a doulbing of electricity useage, as most things remain the same (e.g. fridge).
Hoping there aren’t too many large families out there with only one wage supporting them. If there are then that’s a much bigger issue for society than the rising cost of fuel.