好色先生TV

Energy secretary Ed Davey has demanded greater transparency from energy companies over the cost of the Energy Companies Obligation retrofit scheme.

The government is reviewing the scheme and a consultation on its plans to cut back the Energy Companies Obligation (ECO) concluded last week.

The government鈥檚 cuts, which came after concerted pressure from energy companies, which blamed ECO for the rising cost of energy bills, are expected to wipe 拢900m off the value of the scheme and lead to 14,000 fewer energy efficiency jobs being created over the next three years.

By making the costs of eco clearer, we can make sure they work for the consumer

Spokesperson, Energy UK

Last week, the energy secretary wrote to the energy companies to say the information they had provided so far as part of the review of ECO was 鈥渉elpful鈥�, but it had 鈥渘ot been sufficient to provide the solid evidence base that is needed when reviewing the operation and effect of the ECO鈥�.

He said he wanted to see greater transparency and called for energy companies to publish large tracts of information on how the scheme was running, including 鈥渃ontracts for future delivery, including price and volumes鈥�.

The information he demanded also included the delivery costs incurred by the firms; administrative costs incurred; the proportion of consumer bills attributable to ECO; and how forecasted ECO costs have been and are factored into firms鈥� pricing.

Davey added: 鈥淚 am keen that there should be as much public transparency as possible on these issues, and I will continue to consider how this can best be achieved, particularly in the short term.鈥�

Davey asked the energy firms to set out what information they would 鈥渘ot be content to have published鈥�.

Richard Twinn, policy officer at UK Green 好色先生TV Council, said it was 鈥渋n the best interests鈥� of the industry that information on the cost of ECO was 鈥渁s open and transparent as possible鈥�.

He added: 鈥淭his is now more important than ever as the consultation on the future of the policy closes and the government decides where savings can be made from the scheme.鈥�

However, one construction industry source in the energy efficiency market said it was likely firms would be 鈥渦ncomfortable鈥� with the government publishing the details of how their contracts for energy efficiency work were priced.

A spokesperson for Energy UK, a trade association for the energy firms, said: 鈥淏y making the costs and logistics of ECO clearer, we can better inform future energy efficiency schemes and make sure that they work for the consumer.鈥�