So, @Jeremy_Hunt now did a full and welcome u-turn on the #minibudget2022. And they are starting to tackle another policy that needs fixing, the #EnergyPriceguarantee #EPG. Why should this happen? This is a story that can ultimately be summarised in these two pictures.... 1/..
On the left, we have a classic end-terrace house. On the right, well, you have a mansion. The big difference: energy consumption. The left needs around 15,000 kWh per year, the right one, at least 70,000 kWh. How does this compare to the average UK household? Well: 2/..
The graph highlights one thing: energy consumption is strongly increasing in household income. But even in the highest income group there is huge variation. 50% of households even in top income group consume less than half as much energy than the top 5% in this group. 3/..
So what does this mean? Well, the EPG disproportionately benefits the better off. How can we quantify this? As economist this falls in the category: what is the counterfactual - what would energy bills have been with and without the EPG. 4/..
The Oct 2022 price cap seems a good anchor as this would have been the guide to energy prices coming from an independent industry regulator Ofgem. We can then simulate energy bills and compute the difference in bills at EPG prices and at Ofgem Oct 2022 market prices. 5/..
What we see is: the EPG (dashed blue) would reduce bills a lot relative to market prices (red solid). But you still see that bills would go up A LOT to last year (green). We are talking about at least GBP 1,300 for the average household. But again, this masks huge variation 6/..
We can compute this also to shed a light on the distribution within income bracket. The EPG energy subsidy is at least GBP 5,000 for the top 5% in the Income bracket > 150k or more than five times as large as the subsidy for 50% of all UK households at GBP 1,000. 7/..
Just remind yourself, we are comparing these two... and, the subsidy is not free of costs: in fact, recent market turmoil points to the question how this is paid for: it is either #taxation, #austerity or #debt. But cake-and-eat-it politics hits a hard ceiling. 8/..
Let me add some more perspective: the # of households in the top 5% energy/top income bracket is around 14,000. So these 14,000 households stand to benefit at least five times as much per household from the EPG than more than 12 million other households. 9/..
The EPG is regressive but also alienates many traditional Tory voters that are in the higher earning brackets. Many of whom do not have a lavish lifestyle but rather are similar in their consumption and lifestyle to a lot of middle income peers. 10/..
I have worked out a much more targeted alternative & there is much more. A paper and briefing should drop next week. Something bigger a week later. But: a stronger, healthier & more sustainable society can arise form this crisis but the answers are not found in the extremes. End.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thiemo Fetzer 🇪🇺🇺🇦 - same handle elsewhere

Thiemo Fetzer 🇪🇺🇺🇦 - same handle elsewhere Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @fetzert

Jun 3, 2023
I wish "the media", here @guardian would learn to properly cite. This would make it MUCH easier to actually detect when media outlets are referring to research output. The link to the "one study" is here: academic.oup.com/ej/article/132… Image
Why does this matter? It is just poor journalistic practice to not attribute sources. But it also makes it hard for researchers to showcase that their research is part of the public discourse, which is not irrelevant when it comes to attracting research funds. I understand...
We don't want to breed researchers that chase headlines by producing outrageous p-hacked results. But this is why the research process needs to become more transparent. Replication archives, research transparency, open data, etc. are all crucial here.
Read 4 tweets
Jun 3, 2023
So, yes this does NOT go away as expected. A proper COVID-19 inquiry will look at ALL cock-ups, not just the ones directly due to specific policy choices. I think I understand WHY there was a need to stabilize hospitality sector... but theguardian.com/business/2023/…
EOTHO was a stupid way of doing so. Here is the original thread from October 2020 where I explained what the paper is doing. Of course, I got attacked by lobbyists and special interest groups. It was not pleasant ...
Here is my reaction to the "lobby" group analysis. It was just crap analysis pushing a narrative that at the time was hoping for a second run of the program. The observation that there was not a second run of EOTHO was a good thing... and I understand
Read 5 tweets
May 4, 2023
Today, in England, millions of voters make a choice in their #LocalElections2023. It’s a good time to share some new research that is related to two policy issues that will have touched many people over the last year: the #energycrisis & #crime.
📰 buff.ly/3Vys0w7
🧵⬇️ Image
In a nutshell, the paper shows that much of the widely reported surge in burglaries & anti-social behaviour could have been avoided, had the government provided more targeted energy price subsidies or had UK invested more in making homes more energy efficient. Last summer, ... ImageImageImageImage
I modelled the impact of the energy price shock down to the property level for millions of homes. More #energyinefficient homes would see a bigger increase. Part of this work was reported in @FT as an interactive story ig.ft.com/uk-energy-effi…. This set up a framework to study... Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 4, 2023
Let me take you through the journey of writing this research paper that documents that #EatOutToHelpOut was causing more #COVID19 infections at a time when a vaccine was in sight.

I usually dont do this because as an academic, the politics should be
"irrelevant" to me. The timing of all of this #whatsappleak is dubious. My interpretation as a "citizen" (in quotes because of #Brexit I cant become British without giving up my German nationality), is that this is an attempt to attack PM Sunak who found a #Brexit compromise
on Northern Ireland with EU. My comments are much more around the process of how as a society we are handling data/evidence/research. And we need to develop a more healthy relationship with research and evidence and "empower the experts". After we had a decade of ...
Read 29 tweets
Mar 4, 2023
And yes... Eat-out-to-help-out was being defended. But on what grounds? What was the welfare analysis behind it? Who were the experts consulted? What was their incentive structure? I must admit, I did feel attacked for doing what I think I should as an academic: research. #EOTHO
@jdportes @peterjukes @BylineTimes @guardian In all of this we have to question why this stuff is coming out now. I am just observing but it does seem to me the WhatsApp messages are being used to dismantle the competition and the EOTHO story is being "buried" with Johnsons' party stories dominating. Its super interesting
@jdportes @peterjukes @BylineTimes @guardian as there could have been a "cooperative" equilibrium of "silence". But that was not enforceable. And so its a "free for all" that will damage the public trust even further. All of this is eroding state capacity. After it has been hollowed out by #austerity. I have a few thoughts
Read 7 tweets
Nov 16, 2022
After 5 months of intense work the @FT published this piece that involved a ton of hands-on work. Check it out ➡️ ig.ft.com/uk-energy-effi…. It looks sleek but I do want to raise a few further points that I think could be discussed differently
#EnergyCrisis #EnergyBills #energy ImageImageImage
Point 1: We provided bill estimates under multiple price scenarios. Treating the #EnergyPriceGuarantee as the "price" I find problematic. The EPG implies a #EnergySubsidy benefitting mostly the well off that we all need to fund through #austerity and/or higher #taxation. So this
does not represent the full economic cost. It also ignores carbon prices which we all need should be MUCH higher. Using estimates based on the Oct 2022 Ofgem price cap ~ £3500 per year which is inline with predictions for most of 2023 (see forecasts from @CornwallInsight). Image
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(