Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

kevin6666 wrote: »

Note there were recent press claims that we could be having blackouts early as next year..I wonder how 50p a unit PV electric would help with that.

So you're commenting on here without even understanding why the FIT system was set up and the mechanism of regressing subsidy rates based on the success of the scheme?

You're not aware that blackouts are less likely because there are now more than a million and a half of us with domestic installations, who are largely aware users and will be contributing little to the sort of peak demand that will cause blackouts?

You're not aware of the time it will take to get a producing nuclear plant on-line, particularly with the recent internal issues at EDF and current delays to existing projects in other countries? During this time we have easily scaleable tehnologies that will reduce the likelihood of blackouts

renewable industry appears to be going down the pan and seems to be a trend that happens world wide.

That's just bizarre, as others have pointed out. In Nevada there are demands for legislation to make certain large consumers pay to be free of the monopoly state grid, as the alternative renewable energy sources are so much cheaper. So where is the unfairness there? As soon as renewables get competitive the old suppliers have to be protected. Spain is another example of this.

On this point I suggest you look up the term 'stranded assets' to appreciate why existing producers and grids are fighting to protect their historical supremacy.

In Australia communities are planning to go onto local small grids, in a few cases with the help of the local power utilities, who recognise that the far flung nature of their territories makes the model a viable and cheaper solution.

I'm not even an enthusiast like Martyn with figures at his fingertips, but inaccurate stuff such as yours just demands a response.

kevin6666 wrote: »

My reference to renewable going down the pan was a UK based statement although applicable to most/ALL? country's that have fixed Tariffs for certain renewables. Worldwide...yea it's going up because renewables are really good if implemented and funded correctly....and emerging tech in countries...

Is this not because the various renewable technologies are getting much cheaper to manufacture, especially solar, and so the subsidies are being withdrawn due to that, rather than because they're seen as a failed enterprise?

kevin6666 wrote: »

So PV is cheap and should be REALLY cheap...not 50p a unit.

PV is cheap because of demand driving the market. This was not the case when the 50p a unit FITs were brought in. The technology was expensive and so the feed in tariff payments were sized accordingly. Its a tiny amount of money when compared with other energy subsidies and it helped push forward the renewables revolution that we are now enjoying. A small price to pay for clean air.

kevin6666 wrote: »

My reference to renewable going down the pan was a UK based statement although applicable to most/ALL? country's that have fixed Tariffs for certain renewables. Worldwide...yea it's going up because renewables are really good if implemented and funded correctly....and emerging tech in countries...

Cost of PV Electric compared to Nuclear or any other traditional power source (forgetting hydro/ad) is worth thinking about. Domestic PV should be massively cheaper than traditional power as it's not the backbone of a sustainable grid. IF ALL UK PV fails tomorrow..nobody cares. The same can't be said for traditional power hence it should demand a far better market rate.

Quite a few UK PPA agreements are defaulting back to standard FIT Export rates as the PV/Wind electric is of so little value to the grid.

So PV is cheap and should be REALLY cheap...not 50p a unit.

I'll get round to looking at Martys stuff at the wend.

Hi

With reference to ... "My reference to renewable going down the pan was a UK based statement ..." - if this is the case why, in context, was the actual wording "I also am at a loss how you say FIT has been a success while renewable industry appears to be going down the pan and seems to be a trend that happens world wide. Just because FIT has made PV cheaper than X matters little if no one is installing it." ?. Evidence, both on a UK and wordwide basis, suggests that there has been a rapid acceleration in the manufacture and installation of renewables technologies, particularly on a microgeneration basis and particularly solar, resulting in a massive reduction in prices - this cannot possibly be as a result of anything other than the catalyst of targetted initial support, therefore the converse to your position must logically be true.

Regarding "Cost of PV Electric ...", firstly a pedant point - it's 'electricity', not 'electric': eg - 'an electric cooker is powered by electricity'. Having said that the effect of various forms of storage seems to be completely overlooked in the totally illogical analysis - anyway, seeing that a number of people would rightly be confused as to why anerobic digestion has been associated with hydro as there is a vast difference between the administration of the two forms of generation, one being almost totally 'hands-off' and the other being almost an industrialised process perhaps you could expand on the perceived synergy between the two (?) ... as for the illogical comment 'IF ALL UK PV fails tomorrow..nobody cares.' ... well many would obviously disagree, including many overseas, offgriders, and many currently providing all (or part of) of their own domestic or commercial demand even under cloudy skies .... now logically, if all UK PV were to fail to generate tomorrow then the reason would be pretty serious, probably globally catastrophic seeing that the most likely cause would be directly related to the power of the Sun failing (the star not the newspaper!).

Now, getting to the "UK PPA agreements", I simply can't follow the drift of the argument .... what exactly has a Power Purchase Agreement got to do with FiTs and what is the mechanism for a PPA to 'default' 'back' to a FiT ... surely the initial contract would have needed to be registered under the FiT scheme and then transferred to a PPA and then be accepted back (by default) into the MCS FiT scheme ? .... or is it simply a misunderstanding of the difference between PPA and metered/deemed export ?

As for "PV is cheap and should be REALLY cheap...not 50p a unit." ... the issue here is that the average payment per unit for PV is well below 50p/unit and still falling rapidly. It may be the case that early adopters of <4kWp retro-fit domestic PV systems will be receiving around the 50p/unit mentioned, however, the recipients of such a tariff likely paid up to around £5000/kWp for their systems, which brings us back to ensuring that "emerging tech in countries" are "funded correctly" which is exactly what FiTs on an international scale have delivered - seed funding, take-up, market development, economies of scale, cost reductions, lower prices, higher volumes and gradual reduction of seed funding until eventual scheme withdrawal becomes possible .... the concept of rapidly developing new technologies to a high degree of price-point maturity through the provision of initial support (seed funding) has proved to be successful in the case of solar pv which after a mere 5 years, has achieved (in terms of support dependance) more than nuclear seems to have been able to do in over half a century ....

.... 'going down the pan'? - it seems to be the opposite, but it must be recognised that when the car was first introduced the roads were in poor condition and the supporting infrastructure (petrol stations/mechanics/car parks etc) was almost non-existant - we can now generate the power locally, now all we we need to do is concentrate on how we better manage the resultant energy locally ...

HTH
Z