For more than a decade, the conversation around energy affordability has centred on one idea: if households use less energy, their bill will reduce. We have all seen the campaigns promoting efficiency measures, with many families investing in insulation, LED lighting, smart controls and more efficient appliances. 

Of course, there is no denying that those changes have delivered tangible benefits, but they have also exposed an uncomfortable truth: reducing energy consumption no longer guarantees affordable energy.  

Today, many households use less energy than they did a decade ago, yet their bills continue to be high and unpredictable. The reason for this is increasingly clear: energy affordability is no longer primarily a household behaviour problem; it is a system design problem. 

The Limits of Efficiency 

Energy efficiency remains one of the most important tools in the transition to net zero. Better insulated homes and more efficient technologies reduce waste, lower emissions and ease pressure on the grid. However, efficiency can only tackle the part of a bill linked directly to consumption. A growing proportion of what consumers pay reflects costs that are largely outside their control: standing charges, network costs, policy levies and the impact of volatile wholesale energy markets. 

When these structural factors increase, the relationship between "using less" and "paying less" becomes weaker. Households can do everything they have been asked to do and still struggle with affordability.  

That creates a disconnect between public expectations and the reality of the energy system. 

The narrative of personal responsibility has been useful in driving behaviour change, but it risks obscuring a more fundamental issue. We are increasingly asking individuals to solve problems that are embedded within the design of the system itself. No amount of turning down thermostats or running washing machines overnight can address pricing mechanisms that expose consumers to wholesale volatility or recover system costs through fixed charges. Likewise, households have limited influence over whether the benefits of local renewable generation are felt by the communities that host it. 

As the energy transition accelerates, these questions become even more important. Electrification will increase demand for electricity as people adopt electric vehicles and heat pumps. If the underlying system remains poorly aligned with affordability, we risk asking people to consume more clean electricity while making it harder for them to manage their bills. 

What would a fairer system look like? 

A more resilient and equitable energy system would shift the focus from placing the burden on individual households to creating incentives and structures that work for everyone. 

That could mean: 

Importantly, this is not about abandoning personal responsibility. Households should absolutely be encouraged and supported to improve efficiency. But the transition will only succeed if the system itself reinforces those efforts, rather than diluting their impact. 

Redesigning for the next phase of the energy transition 

The energy transition is entering a new stage. The challenge is no longer simply generating cleaner electricity; it is ensuring that the benefits of decarbonisation are shared fairly and visibly.