Solar PV - Green but not ethical?

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

5. 'Little difference in practice between a levy on electricity bills and funding from income tax?' I take it that is meant to be a joke?

Any chance you could explain the joke?

How many electricity customers aren't also taxpayers? VAT is a tax isn't it?

So just income tax then, well, don't forget that when calculating income tax, benefits, interest, pensions etc are also included, so just because you're not working doesn't necessarily mean you aren't paying income tax.

Next you'll also need to remember that any goods you buy include income tax, since you are contributing to the salaries of the salesperson, wholesalers, manufacturers etc.

In fact I think you'll find it's almost impossible to differentiate between taxpayers and non-taxpayers (assuming there are any!).

Cardew wrote: »

Martin1981,

Your posts are so lacking in logic that they do not merit a response!

Shall I take that as a no then as regards supplying any up to date information, reference, evidence, facts ......... just the usual out of date repetition!

Of course by now I'm well aware that it isn't really worth asking you to support your statements, but ever the optimist I live in hope.

Mart.

The_Green_Hornet

Looks like I was right, no one has anything new to add to the debate.

EricMears

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Looks like I was right, no one has anything new to add to the debate.

I think that's a fair summary.

The scheme was introduced for a particular reason with goals that seem to have been achieved (maybe even exceeded).

Why bother moralising about it ? If you don't approve of the scheme, don't join it. If you feel really strongly about it, write to your MP or MEP but there's no reason to assume that they'll be reading these columns.

Martyn1981

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Looks like I was right, no one has anything new to add to the debate.

True, but I would like to add, that whilst not exactly earth shattering news, I think it's fair to say that 2 years on from the launch of FITs in the UK a turning point has, in my opinion been reached.

The level of FITs has dropped considerably. Future levels are to be better managed, and reduced steadily, and PV (around the World) is now beginning to reach various levels of financial viability that will continue to expand globally in line with future price reductions.

Quite where we'll be in 2020 it's hard to guess, but the progress made in the last 2 years can only be taken as a positive. Expectations have been exceeded, none of the suggested negatives have borne fruit.

Mart.

grahamc2003

Martyn1981 wrote: »

True, but I would like to add, that whilst not exactly earth shattering news, I think it's fair to say that 2 years on from the launch of FITs in the UK a turning point has, in my opinion been reached.

The level of FITs has dropped considerably. Future levels are to be better managed, and reduced steadily, and PV (around the World) is now beginning to reach various levels of financial viability that will continue to expand globally in line with future price reductions.

Quite where we'll be in 2020 it's hard to guess, but the progress made in the last 2 years can only be taken as a positive. Expectations have been exceeded, none of the suggested negatives have borne fruit.

Mart.

What is this 'turning point' in FITs? Although the rate paid for each unit generated will, for some, drop over time, the total cost to electricity consumers will rise and rise every year for the next 24 years (if government guarantees are honoured for that time). So your statement 'the level of fits has dropped considerably' is simply incorrect - the price paid per kWh produced has dropped (a tiny amount if you look at the average price paid) but the total fit cost is rising rapidly. Perhaps you could do some of the number crunching you enjoy, and tell us the total value of fit obligations for today, and that for the 6th April last year.

One thing you can say in 2020 regarding fits - the obligation on electricity consumers will be far higher than it is today.

Back to the general point of this thread - there are two views of fits - one by those who get them, who say they're great, and another by those who pay them who, if they don't realise yet, are a financial burden. The sensible global view on solar in the Uk is the simple question 'Is solar generation a sensible method of electricity generation in the UK' to which the answer most with any experience of electricity generation who appreciate the implications will answer 'no, not by any stretch of the imagination', but many with no experience will answer 'yes'.

Cardew

EricMears wrote: »

Why bother moralising about it ? If you don't approve of the scheme, don't join it.

As one of the 99% who pay increased electricity charges for the benefit of the 1%, I don't approve of the scheme.

Please explain how we opt out? i.e. don't join! Are you suggesting paying the levy on our electricity bills is optional?

Cardew

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Of course by now I'm well aware that it isn't really worth asking you to support your statements, but ever the optimist I live in hope.

Mart.

You want statements? or your method of basing arguments on figures that are just a figment of your imagination.

Statements:

1. Approx 1% of the households benefit from the subsidy paid by all electricity customers; not from taxation.

2. That 1% don't even have to export any electricity for which they receive over 45p per kWh.

3. The poorest in the land, tenants, flat owners, people with unsuitable roofs cannot benefit from solar PV - they just pay.

4. Solar farms could produce and export electricity for a fraction of the subsidy paid to individual house owners.

5. The subsidies will be paid for the next 23 to 25 years at an ever increasing rate.

Much as you don't like facts being repeated, they are indeed facts.

The quote below is a perfect example of the meaningless jargon you spout.

Future levels are to be better managed, and reduced steadily, and PV (around the
World) is now beginning to reach various levels of financial viability that will
continue to expand globally in line with future price reductions.

EricMears

Cardew wrote: »

As one of the 99% who pay increased electricity charges for the benefit of the 1%, I don't approve of the scheme.

Please explain how we opt out? i.e. don't join! Are you suggesting paying the levy on our electricity bills is optional?

Certainly is. You don't actually need to buy electricity - the human race managed for millenia without it and wouldn't die out overnight if electricity supply suddenly became impossible.

If you choose to buy electricity rather than generating your own or managing without any, you'll have to accept the rules which have been imposed. You may or may not approve of them but you're wasting your time announcing that here - very few of your readers are members of the UK or EU governments and those that are probably pay more attention to the majority view that the country needs to facilitate methods of using renewable energy.

FWIW, I don't approve of income tax schemes which represent an unfair burden on the poor because the rich find it all too easy to avoid paying their fair share - but I shan't be wasting my time campaigning on the issue,

Martyn1981

grahamc2003 wrote: »

What is this 'turning point' in FITs? Although the rate paid for each unit generated will, for some, drop over time, the total cost to electricity consumers will rise and rise every year for the next 24 years (if government guarantees are honoured for that time). So your statement 'the level of fits has dropped considerably' is simply incorrect -

I'll try my best to explain it to you, but I doubt you will see reason.

The rate at which FITs for domestic PV is to be paid (since 3/3/12) has dropped considerably, more than 50% in fact. This drop is larger than that which was originally proposed and scheduled, as the price of PV panels and PV installs in the UK has fallen faster than was originally envisioned.

When you quote the annual payment of FITs, you are actually referring to the on-going delivery method of the subsidy, not current scheme rates.

Different schemes in the past (or in different countries) have tried various ways to support renewables, such as one-off grants. In the case of UK FITs, the decision was made to support it via payments linked directly to annual generation.

To compare delivery methods in your fashion, then a large single payment would have to be considered as only having a financial impact/burden in the year it is paid - rather than equating it over the period in which the subsidised item provides value.

To repeat, the FITs rates are coming down, faster than originally proposed - you are referring to the delivery method (and time period) of the subsidy.

PS When calculating cost benefits, don't forget to include the upcoming costs of emitting CO2. You can't keep your head in the sand for ever!

grahamc2003 wrote: »

'Is solar generation a sensible method of electricity generation in the UK' to which the answer most with any experience of electricity generation who appreciate the implications will answer 'no, not by any stretch of the imagination', but many with no experience will answer 'yes'.

There is no longer any need to stretch your imagination, instead simply look to other countries such as Germany to see the beneficial gains that PV and other renewables can bring, to all customers.

Mart.

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

You want statements? or your method of basing arguments on figures that are just a figment of your imagination.

Statements:

1. Approx 1% of the households benefit from the subsidy paid by all electricity customers; not from taxation.

2. That 1% don't even have to export any electricity for which they receive over 45p per kWh.

3. The poorest in the land, tenants, flat owners, people with unsuitable roofs cannot benefit from solar PV - they just pay.

4. Solar farms could produce and export electricity for a fraction of the subsidy paid to individual house owners.

5. The subsidies will be paid for the next 23 to 25 years at an ever increasing rate.

Much as you don't like facts being repeated, they are indeed facts.

The quote below is a perfect example of the meaningless jargon you spout.

No, I don't want statements. I want some facts, and new information, references etc.

By the way, your list is not facts, it is opinion, and mathematically flawed tricks and misrepresentations, that have all been extensively answered in great detail, and with great patience on all of the many PV threads that you have repeated them on, for years.

Those 'views' were weak when they were first posted, 2 years on they have proved to be groundless. So once again, I ask, any chance that you can provide something new, or something supportive, rather than just opinion? If not, then may I politely suggest you re-read the 'Good or Bad' thread to refresh your memory.

As to my spouting pointless jargon and figments of my imagination, well you do me great credit. But let me point out the truth, I do not have anywhere near the computing skills to fabricate all of the various national and international internet sites and links that I regularly post. So sadly, they remain genuine, up to date information, reports and news.

Regardless, thanks for the compliment.

Mart.