Which electricity in Helsinki for young people?

[PredatoR]

Hello guys,

I will make an electricity contract tomorrow. I would like to ask you which company would be better for us? We are under 30 years old so maybe some company has some offers?

https://www4.helen.fi/Sahkokauppa/MakeContract.aspx

http://www.fortum.com/countries/fi/yksi ... fault.aspx

Also want to ask you what are the differences between these 2;

Perusmaksu 4,02 ​€/kk

Energian hinta 5,17 ​c/kWh

How to calculate electricty from that?

[network_engineer]

Perusmaksu 4,02 ​€/kk
Energian hinta 5,17 ​c/kWh

Perusmaksu: this is the basic contract cost, i.e. you will pay that sum every month, sort of a "processing fees" for the contract etc. even this varies, so perhaps, you need check around.

Electricity prices are usually structured around two separate headings:
- the transmission cost: this is usually standard, and does not vary irrespective of the actual energy provider.
- Energian hinta 5,17 ​c/kWh... : this is the actual cost of the electricity consumed, and this varies greatly. Check around. Some of the terms that come to mind are "Sähkön hintavertailu", or "sähkön hinta"

- then again, if your building is equipped with a digital meter that can measure consumption during days and nights separately, you get additional possibilities, night time electricity could be cheaper.

Kind regards.

[Rip]

this is the actual cost of the electricity consumed, and this varies greatly

Though if one lives in a smallish apartment (where you don't use electricity either to heat the building or water) the actual cost difference in euros/year is pretty small.

Was it by purpose, or accident, that the links above were mostly for wind power?

[PredatoR]

this is the actual cost of the electricity consumed, and this varies greatly

Though if one lives in a smallish apartment (where you don't use electricity either to heat the building or water) the actual cost difference in euros/year is pretty small.

Was it by purpose, or accident, that the links above were mostly for wind power?

It is totally accidentaly so which electricity type is cheaper in Finland unless it is a wind power?

[Upphew]

It is totally accidentaly so which electricity type is cheaper in Finland unless it is a wind power?

Probably anything else. Not a big difference, but producing wind power costs and it is deemed green, so hippies will pay more for it -> higher prices.

[Rip]

It is totally accidentaly so which electricity type is cheaper in Finland unless it is a wind power?

The kind where you don't specify how it produced.

[DMC]

The kind where you don't specify how it produced.

Which I suspect is the sort of contract most people go for. Though at one time we had a contract that specified hydro power and that was cheap.
We recently changed our contract for one that adds a fixed markup (X cents per kilowatt hour) onto the spot market price. For anyone in a "normal" household where the home is normally not occupied during the working day I think that could be a good deal; the price changes on an hourly basis and the most expensive times are office hours. Evenings and weekends are typically much cheaper.

[DMC]

I think that is true for most households. It isn't so clear for us but I think it is worth a trial. We'll see how it goes.

[Honest]

Atomic energy is the cheapest and the most efficient source of energy available.

[DMC]

Does a contract exist that lets you specify that you want electricity from an atomic power station? It would be interesting to see the price level for that and also to see how popular it is compared to, say, wind power.

[Rip]

Logically, the price of electricity from any fixed source can't be lower than price from source the seller can choose (all other terms being same). It seems also almost as clear that the as long as demand would be less than the production capacity of nuclear power, this nuclear electricity couldn't be more marginally more expensive than "normal" one, while were the demand actually match the production (seems extremely unlikely) then the price could go steeply up (provided that somebody would be willing to pay of course). If the nuclear power capacity can be only built in 1000 MW+ increments (with the process taking years) the supply and demand curve would look like a group of very large stairs with long nearly horizontal and vertical sections alternating.

[DMC]

Logically, the price of electricity from any fixed source can't be lower than price from source the seller can choose (all other terms being same).

Sorry Rip, I was with you up until "Logically" but after that I found it hard to follow
Can you re-phrase this?

[Rip]

Uhh. Let's try this way: There is no situation where it would make sense for a power company to sell nuclear electricity for a lower price than what it charges for electricity that it can produce by either nuclear power or by burning coal, because for the latter the production price is always the lesser of the two.

Nuclear might be cheaper than 'anything but nuclear', but not cheaper than 'anything including nuclear'.

[Upphew]

Does a contract exist that lets you specify that you want electricity from an atomic power station? It would be interesting to see the price level for that and also to see how popular it is compared to, say, wind power.

Sure: http://www.vattenfall.fi/fi/perussahko.htm

[AldenG]

Wind is the healthiest for young people.

Most young and healthy urban consumers feel increased vigor within 2-3 weeks after switching.

Just make sure you don't block your sockets with those anti-leakage dummy plugs.

That's because for the full benefits, your wind-generated electricity needs to breathe. Otherwise it can go a bit dank. Your coffee grinder may run a little slow, the lights may look a little yellowish... You'll know if it happens.