Energy offers: Here's what's going on in the pot

Want to know everything about energy offers in Italy and what’s cooking? You are probably interested in finding out how you can save money on your bills or simply understand the juiciest behind-the-scenes behind this market.

As you probably know if you follow this blog it is since 2007 that users can choose their electricity offers on the free market and even since 2003 for gas. The transition from monopoly to free market obviously had the aim of putting more companies in competition and being able to have more energy offers available at the same time to allow the final user to choose according to their own convenience.

The result?





As an investigation conducted by the magazine Altro Consumo (in the number 315 of June 2017) points out, over 33 million meters of electricity and gas meters have never passed to the free market. This is because since then it continues to coexist together with the “new” free market, even the “old” one defined as protected.

The reason for the coexistence of the two markets wanted to be a way to allow users to adapt to the news in a soft way. The problem is that the protected market had to be abolished for years even under the pressure of the European Union, which is why it is inflicting expensive fines every year on Italy. Now the date has slipped for the umpteenth time ahead, and will be extended to 2019.

And in which situation do you fall? Are you currently served by the free market or is yours one of those 33 million meters that are still in the old protected market?


The lack of adherence to the free market today is mainly due to the unfair and obscure commercial practices adopted by many free market suppliers, which later discouraged other users from making the switch. The difficulty of trusting the new brands that arose following liberalization also made the flow of supplier changes stagnating. Precisely as a consequence of the unfair commercial practices, several fines have been fixed to different suppliers, among which Iren, Estra and Enegan, sanctioned for a total amount of 1.6 million euros, while in 2015 it touched Green Network which appeared on the phone as Enel, Acea Energia or the Electricity Authority.

It should also be noted that many operators in the protected market have opened other companies in the free market. Thus, for example, the historic Enel is present today together with its sister Enel Energia, which however operates in the free market. The data that is recorded is that most of the steps from the market to the free market took place between the historic companies and those practically the same name created for the free market.

Will it be a case? Or maybe many users not knowing the difference between Enel and Enel Energia when they received the call from one of the many call centers have given their membership thinking however to talk with their old supplier?

In this situation, those who put us, besides the correct emerging suppliers, are you. Because you are rightly afraid to make a change by leaving the known for the unknown, but losing the opportunity to benefit from the savings you could have by trusting serious operators with more competitive rates.

In this way, unfortunately, continue to throw money every month from the window , in some cases even 20-25% of your total costs. And the blame lies in a market clouded by unscrupulous suppliers and incomprehensible offers, which make it difficult for the end user to trust.

We at Colosso Group, together with other serious professionals in this market, struggle every day to make it clearer and simpler. For us , freedom is a fundamental value on which we have based our work from the beginning, and so is the freedom to choose. Evidently, given the data available today, the free market has created only a semblance of freedom of choice, limited by the possibility of people to be able to fully understand, and without surprises, the details of this choice. Nobody wants to jump and jump into the darkness.

Take advantage of your freedom with us

Our job is precisely to study the market and the offers of the various energy suppliers to allow our customers to exploit the best opportunities for savings in absolute safety and without surprises. We only evaluate suppliers who prove to be serious by proposing clean offers without hidden traps. If you want to assert your right to freedom to choose what is best for you, guided by a team of experts then simply click the yellow button below and fill out the form you will find on the page.





LED lamps a calculation on savings

You often hear that with LED lamps you save a lot : but   how much is this saving, concretely?


LED is a lighting technology that is spreading more and more, thanks to features such as greater durability over time and lower consumption , especially when compared to traditional light bulbs or even common energy-saving light bulbs.
In this article we try to investigate, with a concrete and empirical analysis, the difference in costs and consumption of the two technologies – traditional light bulbs and LED bulbs – to arrive at calculating this difference in quantitative terms.
A brief analysis

To really understand how much you save with the lamps and LEDs, let’s start with a specific example: suppose to calculate the expenditure needed to light up a medium-sized environment, taking as reference a hypothetical period of 5 years and a half: this period usually represents life average of an LED light bulb. The objective of this analysis is to compare the performance of an LED lamp with an energy-saving lamp , over the indicated period.

Let’s start from the analysis of costs : LED bulbs cost more than normal energy-saving lamps. If the latter cost around € 4 per bulb, LED lamps are at least expensive   22 €. However, the classic light bulbs last much less: if for 5 and a half years only one LED light bulb will be needed, the energy saving ones will need 6, which brings the total cost to 24 €. From a cost standpoint, therefore, compared to a higher initial investment, LED lamps over the long run cost less than traditional energy saving lamps.

Let’s now analyze the consumption : in a medium-sized environment like the one taken into consideration, an LED light bulb will use approximately   500 kW   to illuminate it during the 5 and a half years considered; on the other hand, the energy saving lamp will consume at least 1,150 kW . In other words, the total bill costs are € 100 for LED lighting versus € 230 for traditional lighting .

Finally, if we make the sum of the costs and consumption, we get that, to illuminate a room for 5 and a half years, we will spend € 122 with a LED light bulb against € 254 with an energy-saving one.
At the end of the analysis, we have come to demonstrate in concrete terms what is the difference in costs incurred for the two types of lighting, with a distinct advantage in the use of LED lighting. If we add to this also that LED lights have a much lower environmental impact than energy-saving lights, we understand why this technology is spreading so quickly in the market.

Present and future of mobility: the challenges to be overcome for an efficient and sustainable system

The transport sector is responsible for around 25% of Europe’s greenhouse gas emissions and is the main cause of urban pollution

Present and future of mobility: the challenges to be overcome for an efficient and sustainable system. For this reason, decarbonisation has been one of the main objectives of the European Union for some years now: in most Member States incentives have been introduced for those who buy vehicles with alternative fuels and increasingly restrictions on the circulation of the most polluting vehicles.
In the first nine months of the year , in the EU and Efta area, around 917,000 cars were sold as alternative fuels , with an increase of 31% compared to the same period of the previous year.

Despite this data represents an important signal of the transition underway, the figures in absolute values show us how traditional fuel vehicles are still today the protagonists of this market: petrol and diesel cars, in fact, account for about 94% total sales.

The path to take, therefore, is still very long and the political decision makers, in the programmatic choices, will have to keep in mind that the fossil fuel vehicles will be the most numerous on our roads for many years.

If electric mobility is the main answer, it is also necessary to focus on other types of technologies able to provide answers in the short term

If electric mobility is the main answer, it is also necessary to focus on other types of technologies able to provide answers in the short term

A solution that would seem to be at hand is represented by biofuels, fuels produced from organic substances such as biomass, waste from farming or dedicated crops. Biofuels , besides being able to be used in most of the new generation petrol and diesel vehicles currently in circulation, can exploit the network of existing infrastructures to be distributed. And so overcome one of the most important problems afflicting alternative fuels: precisely, the distribution.
The lack of electric charging stations, for example, can be considered, together with the high cost of the vehicles and the lack of autonomy, one of the main brakes for the diffusion of electric cars.

In our country, at the end of 2017 there were about 2.741 public charging stations of which only 16% High Power (new generation stations that allow a much faster recharge of vehicles). The problem of distribution is even more important if we consider another type of alternative mobility, the hydrogen one.
Fuel cell vehicles are driven by an electric motor powered by the energy produced by reacting hydrogen with oxygen.

As a result of this process no harmful substances are emitted – therefore it can be defined as having zero impact – but only water that can be released without risk in the environment.

The diffusion of this type of vehicle has, to date, been held back by limits concerning the gas storage phase. Hydrogen has a low energy density on a volumetric basis, therefore to be useful in the field of transport it must be compressed: a process that involves a huge expenditure of energy, which could make the system unsustainable.
In 2017, 6,475 hydrogen vehicles were sold globally, most of them in the United States and Japan.

Europe is heavily back on this type of technology, just think that at the continental level there are only 78 petrol stations active, of which 58% in only three countries (Germany, United Kingdom and Denmark).

Finally, natural gas vehicles deserve an important mention: although it can not be considered a renewable energy source, this power is considered an alternative given the lower environmental impact compared to diesel and petrol. But also a greater volume that requires for its use in transport the compression (Cng) or liquefaction (Gnl).

Compressed gas is mostly used for small vehicles such as cars and small industrial vans, while liquefied gas is used in the supply of trucks, trains and ships. According to the forecasts contained in the study – edited by the president I-Com Stefano da Empoli – in the next 12 years the number of means of transport of this type is destined to increase considerably. By 2030, 12% of cars, 25% of trucks and 33% of buses powered by natural gas should circulate on European roads. Moreover, Italy is in fact the European country with more natural gas vehicles (more than one million) and the seventh at global level.

porsche closes with the diesel and points on the electric