MSE News: Government to appeal High Court solar ruling

Former_MSE_Guy

This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

Read the full story:
Government to appeal High Court solar ruling

HalloweenJack

i sincerely hope that friends of the earth will start supplimenting the payments then , since the money will run out in 3 weeks time at 43p rate.... if he isnt then im sure a class action to make FoE pay would be in order , since theres no damn way my bills will go up 500% to pay the 43p rate.

Cardew

The real issue is not if the appeal succeeds, but what will happen if it fails!

There is a finite amount of money 'allocated'(that all customers pay in higher bills) to FIT. If they resume FIT at the old level that will be gone(which was the reason for reducing FIT on DEc 12 not April)

Don't forget that it was only on a procedural point where the Government was found to be at fault - they imposed a change during a consultation period. In any case the consultation period finished on 23 Dec and they then could have legally cut FIT to whatever level they wanted. Bear in mind it was a consultation not a negotiation.

One can understand solar companies trying to stop the cuts and thus be able to feed off the crazy subsidsies - that we all pay - for a little longer. However the Friends of the Earth's position is just a nonsense. It seems they just don't think but will oppose on principle any Government initiative on 'Green' issues. They apparently accept that FIT must be cut, but don't give a figure. Some Rent a Roof companies have announced they will continue installing systems even though the subsidy to them is cut to 16.8p/kWh(as opposed to 21p/kWh for individuals) so that indicates that the reduced subsidy level is correct - if not too high!

Their concern for the solar industry is also misplaced. Two years ago that industry largely didn't exist and mushroomed with companies jumping in to exploit the over-generous FIT subsidy. The scores of thousands of installations by Rent a Roof companies being a prime example.

So a sensible Government decision opposed by vested interests of the solar industry and an environmental organisation devoid of common sense.

HalloweenJack

equipment prices have fallen 30%+ over the last 12 months , an invertor is around £800 for a 1700w `sma` one , and panels are 95p per watt (for german panels) - meaning wholesale a 2kw install is around £2500 for the equipment!

*Rae*

Could someone explain WHY the government is doing this? I'm not clear about their motive. What's in it for them? Surely the money comes from the energy companies that the solar panels are feeding. If not, why not?

HalloweenJack

the money is coming from you and me , those who PAY the bills - everyone bills was increased to subsidise the scheme - and the subsidy has nearly run out - with predicted install over the 200,000 a month for jan alone , the government had to step in and stop the run away in the scheme - the money would have been gone completely by feb , and if the scheme had been allowed to run as it was , then everyone`s bills would have rocketd by 500% or more within 6 months, so the likes of homesun can make massive proffits.

you dont think the energy companies are paying this themselves are you?

so the subsidy had to be cut , and quickly - something the likes of homesun dont want to tell you - equipment cost have come down at least 30% since this time last year , so the proffits they are making are even bigger.

jamesd

*Rae*, the money comes from a fixed budget funded by energy companies that is funded by our electricity bills. Paying more out to solar companies cuts the money that is available for subsidies to other types of renewable energy, so this is a beggar thy neighbour approach by the solar companies to try to keep making money at the expense of the other providers.

Given the fixed budget it's presumably going to be a case of the subsidies for all of the others being cut and for solar to be cut even more to fund the profligacy happening at the old rates. That's not something that results in a sustainable situation.

Personally I'd like to see the feed in tariff subsidies for solar eliminated and it left to the markets to provide them whenever they are competitive. The Green Deal plans due later this year could provide financing for people who want to install them, at lower cost for the rest of us.

HalloweenJack

as mentioned in the green forum - even a subsidy of 16p per kw/h would still mean profits (as of today) - and thats below the current proposed new rate!

spiro

Even if the government wins there is still a good chance that the EU will take up the baton because there is some rule that basically says "Governments should not do anything to reduce the update in renewable energy" and the FIT prices are deemed to be something that if reduced would reduce the uptake.

money-go-round

Court suggests anyway that there is very little chance that the court would overturn their ruling, so it likely follows that the 43.3p current rate would remain in effect. -

government should have just shut down 'rent a roof' on the 11Dec.

Many other countries have definately woken up to just how they've become almost 100% reliant to foreign oil and gas bought for power stations. - and they don't like it. - hence renewables growth.

nuclear is great , UNTIL IT GOES WRONG, then nobody knows how to safely clean up the mess properly or quickly.

There has to be a major change in the way we generate and insulate in the uk. - that is the job of our government, which we elect, to carry this out.

grahamc2003

money-go-round wrote: »

Court suggests anyway that there is very little chance that the court would overturn their ruling, so it likely follows that the 43.3p current rate would remain in effect. -

.

The application for the 43p fit to remain in place until April was rejected in the ruling. As I read it, an unsuccessful appeal would mean the fit rate stayed at 43p just up to the end of the consultaion period.

Whatever happens, several in the industry are stating that any extension of the 43p will make the situation worse for them, not better, simply by delaying an even more brutal subsidy cut off later on.

Of course, I expect those bringing the court case would, if eventually successful (and the leave to appeal hearing is today), bring further cases saying that the fixed funding of the fit was somehow illegal, and more money should be added to the fit budget. I'm betting on the government winning the appeal, if there is one.