Plans to change what households make from solar Feed-in Tariffs 'feels a breach of pro

Scot_39

gefnew said:

How about the 8 Billion pounds of curtailment payments that the poor people have to pay from their bills.

That's total balancing not just curtailment pricing forecast afaik.

And two wrongs doesn't mean a right.

But like fit excess -  balancing and curtailment are an inherent part of uks poorest approach to renewables, to renewables generation tech choices and to contract terms and planning in isolation - licensing, often years of guaranteed curtailment and then network upgrades following - hence the £3bnin that £8bn afaik for grid thermal constraints.

Seegreen being a perfect example - lrpt straight to the top ov Scotlands curtailment league in £s and % z- paid curtailment 71% after coming on stream in 2024 - with no local demand or capacity to transmit.

And balancing - payments for gas generation and gas plants on standby etc - exists because we cannot rely on renewables without TWh of expensive storage  - solar doesn't generate at night - doesn't generate much during winter days and wind doesn't generate regularly anywhere near theoretical or for that matter average output for days on end - as calm periods across the whole of NW Europe can last 7-10 days.

And when we have stupidly cut fossil generation like coal - we have not increased our energy security - but made ourselves dangerously reliant at times on near max interconnect capacity.  Remember the price spikes ehen one of the French hvdc stations went on fire.

When checked earlier today c1030 am -  renewables delivering 25% of demand interconnects net 20% of demand after exporting 20% of total imported from others to Ireland.

And solar with over 12gw of grid solar installed in uk - just 0.28 GW.  Sub 0.8% of demand.

A completely useless power source choice on days like today - yet we have the equivalent of 4 Sizewell C or 6 Ratcliffe on Soar coal plants (when all 4 500MW  boiler plants were in use) installed and adding more.  All too often using valuable farmland, in a country desperately reliant on food imports.

Fossil - coal a resource we still have plenty of in uk if greens allowed us to mine and use it -  rather than importing lpg or wood for even dirtier Drax pellet generation -  power we used to be able to rely on when needed.

A perfect example of poor choices based on greenwashed mindsets and why renewables more of a risk to uk energy security - to keeping our homes lit and increasingly het - and our businesses operational - as that is determined by the lows - not the average or highs - of uk based generstion.


And yet just for FIT generation solar - the median duel fuel tdcv user has to pay £19+vat+overheads.

And those reliant on pc2 multirate heating at the higher median  tdcv of 3900kWh - £27.69+vat+overheads.

Bad choices of unreliable  generation or as the greenwashed would prefer us to use "intermittent" generation sources.

And that unreliable power generation - well certainly todays figure shows --not just in theory but practice - includes solar panels.

And on a sunny day, solar generating peak often when minimal domestic demand - dumping energy onto the grid - which is why dynamic seg rates for many hoursof the day where offered have been falling.

And yet those on FIT expect their already generous payments to rise.  Despite often no real operational costs and many having long since recovered their initial investments.


Renewables planning in uk has been a farce for many years - the curent govts acceleration and its 95% by 2030 policy mantra - just accelerates many of the negative cost consequences.

The focus on wholesale rates and not whole system delivery costs for often ludicrously  remote wind the classic.

But whilst many support saving tge planet, they are no longer willing to do so at any price.

Reform - scrap "net zero madness" - Cons "scrap 2050 timelines" - now have majority support in some recent polls.

As now the pricing is becoming very apparent - on an almost cap by cap basis - that rejection will grow.

And yes the frankly obscene profits for early FIT as those figures above - should be in the govts firing line. 

Not to tinker but to scrap completely.

Like say replace with SEG metered rates for actial exported output of iirc tge best flat rate around 15p - not 77p as  above plus 3.1p on export plus a saving on used energy that adds even more.

gefnew

Like say SEG metered rates for actual exported output of iirc the best flat rate around 15p - not 77p as  above plus 3.1p on export plus a saving on used energy that adds even more.

But the early adopters now on deemed export rate of 5.2pence for fifty percent of there generation they was not the meters back then and it was cheaper to administrate divide by 2. of total gen in a year from date of install.

Scot_39

But there are now - and so contract terms can be for old installs - just as are different for new.

gefnew

They can move from deemed export to seg and get paid even more 15p instead of 5.2p making returns now even better.

Scot_39

I meant pay 15p total - certainly once past payments had passed the difference in initial install costs compared to todays costs the SEG rates are based on.

So on the red/yellow spreadsheet example - that would be like say after first 3 years - not the after five colour change. 

Those wanting to treat FIT as investment - show their true motivation for fitting - and it isn't anything remotely putting green energy or the struggles of millions to fund it - which might ultimately in 3.5 years time lead to net zero being abondoned completely by the party in poll lead - in part thanks to their demands for overly generous returns and overly generous contracts for wholsale - especially curtailment payment and timing issues.

Not instead of the 3.1/5.2 - on top of the FIT - on top of import savings for 50% assumed retained

Scot_39

gefnew said:

Why do you think they give £7500 for heat pumps to incentive people to adopt a different technology.
then slowly take it away.

Again not a scheme I agree with at all - as their is no means testing to qualify.  Available to millionaires and energy poor alike.

I'd be far more sympathetic if restricted to say those on 2x median income or houses worth 2x UK average - say over £500k.

Its symptomatic of what some political "leaders" in Reform now call "net zero madness" - where the ends are used to justify the means - despite the harms and significant costs to those who do not benefit.

FIT was widely pushed by many as an investment vehicle by many - not giving a hoot about the green impacts - just the generous investment returns - in the past - at least before long overdue reforms in the early 2010s.

gefnew

Why do you think so many people are fitting solar still,
 because the early adopters took a large risk but has come with a reward and the cost has come down greatly to there benefit no different than investing in heat pumps 7500 grant to do the same as fit did in the beginning to push an idea to joe public when enough take up the offer they will stop it.
Do you then expect them to return the 7500 pounds.

Scot_39

Unless they are fitting purely for their own consumption - as they are now forced to in some locations in some  overseas countries - and not for export / or at least not at excessive profit like early FIT - I'd rather they werent fitting them at all in many locations in the UK.

As to BUS £7500 - some argue that such schemes do not achieve much - in pushing the idea - or lowering the costs - but on flip side set a minimum price ceiling - that people can hide behind for profits - rather than push technology cheaper.

Similarly where is the incentive for a BEV car maker to cut prices - when the govt cuts them by upto 10% - and would like withdraw the grant if prices were lowered ?

Remember these sort of EV grants existed before and were scrapped for most.

gefnew

I think you should have had this argument in 2010 when this was implemented bit late now to say your not on the green crusade.

Qyburn

gefnew said:

Why do you think so many people are fitting solar still,
 because the early adopters took a large risk but has come with a reward and the cost has come down greatly to there benefit ...

I don't suppose the UK market for solar panels was ever enough to influence worldwide supply or pricing. I don't know if panels were ever made in the UK, but wasn't offered any when we installed.