To boost renewables in the economy....

cells

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

The title says it all really. Should people with solar panels, who are in receipt of feed in tariff subsidies (paid for by all electricity bill payers), be encouraged onto electricity plans that have 100% generation from renewables or lose their tariff subsidies?

not sure what that is meant to achieve, what should happen is that the energy companies should offer very low marginal unit high standing charge tariffs

so something like £250 fixed fee per year and 5p a unit on top.

That is needed to electrify heating and transport and it would be more representative of the value of PV at 5p/unit or less

Generali

chris_m wrote: »

I suspect that most people who install solar panels do it to save on their electricity bills

I think that you will be able to split the installers of solar into two distinct groups: those that do it because it's a moral choice and those that make an economic choice.

Offhand, I can think of two people with solar PV and they each fit into the two categories.

In the UK, solar is highly unlikely to be a viable way to produce electricity IMHO. The main impact solar will have is reducing the price of fossil fuels so that energy costs are reduced.

cells

Generali wrote: »

I think that you will be able to split the installers of solar into two distinct groups: those that do it because it's a moral choice and those that make an economic choice.

Offhand, I can think of two people with solar PV and they each fit into the two categories.

In the UK, solar is highly unlikely to be a viable way to produce electricity IMHO. The main impact solar will have is reducing the price of fossil fuels so that energy costs are reduced.

the energy cost (coal/gas) of electricity is ~15% of the retail price so even if coal or gas was free retail prices would fall at most 15%*

This is one bit the lay green folk do not get. They think its just a once off PV farm or PV on the roof and its endless free electricity forever when the reality is the upto 15% fuel saving the PV and Wind farms are trying to save

Generali

cells wrote: »

the energy cost (coal/gas) of electricity is ~15% of the retail price so even if coal or gas was free retail prices would fall at most 15%*

This is one bit the lay green folk do not get. They think its just a once off PV farm or PV on the roof and its endless free electricity forever when the reality is the upto 15% fuel saving the PV and Wind farms are trying to save

Perhaps the bit that 'brown'(?) folk don't get is that people don't just use renewables for financial reasons.

cells

Generali wrote: »

Perhaps the bit that 'brown'(?) folk don't get is that people don't just use renewables for financial reasons.

problem is generali that a lot of people and the state is at a financial limit and they need to decide where to allocate finite resources*. If a person or family has the disposable income to do it and want to do it for any reason then best wishes from me to them

*its best to be honest on the true costs and benefits and drawbacks so the state and public can make an informed decision for themselves as to where to allocate finite resources.

the fuel bill for the UK to run its power stations is ~5 billion a year. Homes are about 1/3rd of that. Works out to ~£60 per home as the saving if the UK went from the current fuel to the new 'fuel' of PV panels and wind farms. And that saving is after the household/nation spends in the region of ~£4k per household

Generali

cells wrote: »

problem is generali that a lot of people and the state is at a financial limit and they need to decide where to allocate finite resources*. If a person or family has the disposable income to do it and want to do it for any reason then best wishes from me to them

Most people aren't at a financial limit at all in the UK, they just decide to allocate their income in a particular way. Pretty much nobody is facing absolute poverty in the UK these days thankfully.

Some people gain utility (unkindly we could call that 'smug satisfaction') from using solar panels on their roof. For them, that is just as good a way of spending their finite income as on cigarettes or on studying for a Masters degree.

cells

Generali wrote: »

Most people aren't at a financial limit at all in the UK, they just decide to allocate their income in a particular way. Pretty much nobody is facing absolute poverty in the UK these days thankfully.

Some people gain utility (unkindly we could call that 'smug satisfaction') from using solar panels on their roof. For them, that is just as good a way of spending their finite income as on cigarettes or on studying for a Masters degree.

yes thats fine and yes a lot of people can decide to do less of x and allocate more of their resources to solar panels or wind farms but that is a decision they need to make and make that decision in an informed way rather than a highly or fully distorted way.

the government also needs to take the cost benifit analysis onto its own books. its far to easy for them to say x amount from wind/pv and put it onto the electricity bill. Let it be centrally funded and then they can have the honest debate X billion to PV farms or the NHS or Education or tax credits or lower borrowing.


I do agree with you the UK could afford to do it.
~0.75 of GDP over 15 years would do it.
The question would be if that 0.75% of our resources is best spent on installing wind mills and PV panels or on other things (education pensions heathcare whatever)


PS once the nation has all the PV and wind mills it needs its probably going to need to dedicate ~£5B a year to replace wind mills and PV panels as they come to the end of their lives. So we swap importing coal from Australia and gas from Qatar at £5B a year to importing and installing £5B a year of Chinese solar panels and German wind turbines. The sun and wind might be free but the upkeep/replacement is not

Generali

cells wrote: »

I do agree with you the UK could afford to do it.
~0.75 of GDP over 15 years would do it.
The question would be if that 0.75% of our resources is best spent on installing wind mills and PV panels or on other things (education pensions heathcare whatever)

I've not done the sums but I suspect that the UK would be better off subsidising warmer climes to put in solar and reaping the benefit of cheaper LNG that results.

There is a vast amount of LNG about to come onstream from Aus and the East Coast of the US. Most of the Aussie output is sold contractually but the US output will mostly just hit the spot market.

cells

Generali wrote: »

I've not done the sums but I suspect that the UK would be better off subsidising warmer climes to put in solar and reaping the benefit of cheaper LNG that results.

There is a vast amount of LNG about to come onstream from Aus and the East Coast of the US. Most of the Aussie output is sold contractually but the US output will mostly just hit the spot market.

It is on a scale equivalent to all of Russia gas exports to Europe so quite significant.

Would have been so much better if the world had developed their own shales rather than build plants and ships for billions and compress and cool to liquid ship it half way across the world and then vaporize it for use.

North America can not be the only continent with productive shale gas when every continent has coal, gas, and oil so every continent is bound to have productive shales.

chris_m

cells wrote: »

North America can not be the only continent with productive shale gas when every continent has coal, gas, and oil so every continent is bound to have productive shales.

Maybe North America has fewer NIMBYs?