Feed In Tariffs(FIT) Announced.

Cardew

Well if anyone was watching Parliament today, Chris Huhne(Secretary of State for Energy an Climate Change) was questioned about retrospective payment FITs and firmly quashed any hope that they might be introduced. He and the Green Party MP, who asked the question, were both early pioneers and he said we will have to be satisfied with a warm glow but no more money.

Incidentally he also indicated that this Government would not retrospectively reduce FIT payments for existing systems as other European countries had apparently done.

Mcfi5dhc

Cardew wrote: »

Well if anyone was watching Parliament today, Chris Huhne(Secretary of State for Energy an Climate Change) was questioned about retrospective payment FITs and firmly quashed any hope that they might be introduced. He and the Green Party MP, who asked the question, were both early pioneers and he said we will have to be satisfied with a warm glow but no more money.

Incidentally he also indicated that this Government would not retrospectively reduce FIT payments for existing systems as other European countries had apparently done.

Their exact words were:

Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green): Will the Government backdate the clean energy cashback scheme and any future renewable heat incentive to ensure that those who pioneer the technology are properly rewarded and supported?
Chris Huhne: The hon. Lady makes a point that is dear to my heart, not only in the context that she raises, but in that of, for example, the feed-in tariff for wind. Unfortunately, I do not benefit from that tariff as a pioneer. I considered the issue carefully on a value-for-money basis, and I am afraid that the advice from my officials was clearly that we cannot introduce retrospection in such cases because it does not represent value for money. We are trying to introduce new schemes in future, and therefore, sadly, the only incentive and payback that people such as the hon. Lady and I will get is the warm glow of being pioneers.

PS 1.44kwp Sharp system for sale...

mysterons

My Tesco 3.96kWp system is now installed and working so I'll update on events for anybody interested.
I eventually did get my panels fitted at the Tesco advertised price of £14,499 but Enact only dropped the £250 charge for the alleged 'return' of the 4.2kWp system after I complained to the office of the Tesco CEO Sir Terry Leahy.
So £14,499 less the £500 off voucher sent to early adopters meant a price paid for the system of £13.999. There were a couple of extraordinary charges that I'll discuss at the end of the post.
Scaffolding went up last Friday and the panel installers (2) began work around 10am Monday. Manufacturing & attaching the mounting rail frame took all of Monday whilst the electrician fitted the sma3300 inverter in the loft and ran the ac cabling in ducting down the rear of the house to the consumer distribution unit in my utility room.
When they left in the evening I took a quick gander up the scaffolding where I noticed around 3 of my roof tiles had been damaged. When the roof guys came back on Tuesday I asked if the damaged tiles were going to be replaced & was amazed to discover there appeared to be no contingency for this. It's inevitable that walking around on and lifting concrete pantiles to fit hangers will result in some damage. Pictures taken at the time of the survey would have told them what they would be working on and I'd have thought they'd arrive with a few spare tiles at the ready.
I had to ask them to swap out & replace the cracked tiles with some taken from the rear of my garage so as my house roof would be 100% ok when they finished. At least I'll be able to get at the garage roof myself easily to swap the cracked ones with new tiles.
The install was completed around 5pm Tuesday after a basic error came to light with the way the panels had been wired. The electrician had been instucted to connect the panels to the inverter in one string resulting in too much dc voltage going to the inverter. Even I know there should have been two strings from the outset, this was rectified quickly and the system produced a few watts before the daylight failed.
The guys who came to fit the system were courteous and tidy and I never saw any slacking at all. Scaffolding came down on Wednesday and I've been monitoring the system's output yesterday & today.
Weather has been unkind, dull and grey but I did see 1.7kW being produced for a minute or so when the sun fleetingly appeared but it's mainly been producing less than a kW.
With regards the additional costs there was £250 for out of spec scaffolding (huge house and also a conservatory in the way which meant a more complicated scaffold layout)
Then there was a charge of £100 for 'consumer unit upgrade' which I intend to dispute as the electrician simply fed into a spare way on the exising fusebox. I'll raise this with them next week as I've already paid the balance owing in order to generate my MCS certificate. I don't want to delay getting my FIT's application submitted just in case the upcoming spending review affects the levels of FIT's.
Feel free to ask about any aspect, as for whether I'd recommend buying a system from Tesco well you'll probably end up with the Mark Group doing the work whoever you decide to go with unless it's a small independant outfit quoting the job so 'you pays your money' etc.

Brian99_2

Thanks Mysterons for the interesting details. Does surplus power automatically go into the grid, turning the meter backwards; or is there a special electronic box to do it and count the units exported ? ?

mysterons

A professional PV installation would come with a 'total generation meter' from which you could submit the readings every 3 monthe to claim your FIT's (assuming you're signed up with your supplier).
It's possible if you have an old style meter with the spinning wheel it may go backwards when more power is being produced than used though some of those even had a ratchet system to prevent unscrupulous customers 'clocking' them

Cardew

Brian99 wrote: »

Thanks Mysterons for the interesting details. Does surplus power automatically go into the grid, turning the meter backwards; or is there a special electronic box to do it and count the units exported ? ?

You can have an export meter fitted to show what you have exported, or you are allowed to assume that 50% of generated output is exported and for which you are paid 3p for each kWh.

You are of course paid the full FIT of 41.3p/kWh for all generated power regardless where used.

As explained above - some old meters do 'wind backwards'(technically illegal) but most don't.

Brian99_2

Thanks guys. So we have a situation where neither the utilities nor the Govt will actually know the amount of benefit to the Grid from their generous payments... it will be a rough estimate !!! Seems unsatisfactory. Those without meters will have NO incentive to export, because they still get the 50% assumption. I guess before long they will insist on proper meters being installed. Even then, the 3p incentive for exporting is rather small to be effective. All rosy for the consumer; not so for the Utilities; it probably makes sense to go for it

zeupater

Brian99 wrote: »

Thanks guys. So we have a situation where neither the utilities nor the Govt will actually know the amount of benefit to the Grid from their generous payments... it will be a rough estimate !!! Seems unsatisfactory. Those without meters will have NO incentive to export, because they still get the 50% assumption. I guess before long they will insist on proper meters being installed. Even then, the 3p incentive for exporting is rather small to be effective. All rosy for the consumer; not so for the Utilities; it probably makes sense to go for it

Hi Brian99

It's really not quite as gloomy as that ......

Every unit which is generated by the pv system is a unit which doesn't need to be generated elsewhere, whether you use it yourself or export it. I agree that on a small (sub 4kWp) array there is no real incentive to export, which, in a way, could be a good thing as it provides an incentive for those with arrays to modify their usage patterns to minimise the need to import energy ..... I guess that this was a deliberate decision when the FiT scheme was being designed, but even if it wasn't I reckon that it would be claimed it was ....

zeupater

All

Well it looks like there is no change in the FiT banding in the spending review so it looks like the installers will now look at reducing their prices ........

Why would that be ? .... at the back of my mind has been the thought that a substantial proportion of the recent press on possible tariff cuts actually originated from inside the industry to drum up some late season trade, so why reduce prices when there is an alternative marketing strategy ?. If an announcement for FiT reductions had been made it is not likely that the change would become effective before April 2011, to coincide both with a new financial year and the anniversary of FiT introduction, thus affording a period where the installers would suddenly be very busy, so why drop prices if the business is being driven by government policy deadlines? - a typical supply & demand marketing policy.

Status quo maintained - a good opportunity for anyone considering an installation to negotiate a decent discount now, or wait for a minimum 10% price reduction (on best prices) early next year .......

keith_r59

This is the only paragraph in the spending review document which relates to Feed-In Tariffs.

"The efficiency of Feed-In Tariffs will be improved at the next formal review, rebalancing them in favour of more cost effective carbon abatement technologies. This will save £40 million in 2014-15. Support for lower value innovation and technology projects will also be reduced, saving £70 million a year on average over the Spending Review period."

But as with most things in the document the devil will be in the detail.