Monbiot on FITs, etc.

[EccentricAnomaly]

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/03/01/a-great-green-rip-off/
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/03/05/treachery-or-common-sense/

I have to say I sort of agree with him though I think he's (probably deliberately) rather narrowly discussing just one aspect of the problem.

[martin]

- has wholeheartedly embraced nuclear, pv all a plot by the middle classes to  starve the poor (sic).......... the man's got a dose of the Lovelocks......... 

[Rhea View]

Agree with Martin. 
Arrogance and ignorance in equal measure - the defining mark of a self-styled 'expert' with deliberately narrow views to avoid having an open mind.
expert: e = an unknown quantity and 'spurt' is a drip under pressure.

[desperate]

Or maybe he's seen the light

Desp

[martin]

that'll be a nuclear powered one presumably!

[EccentricAnomaly]

Bit of a disappointment, really.  I thought this article might at least provoke some interesting discussion.

Edited to add: Mark Brinkley spells out neatly the more general point I was alluding to in the last paragraph of this blog post.

[Flamethrower_]

EccentricAnomaly,

"Power to the people" the future is FIT's much to the dismay of the energy suppliers!

 http://bit.ly/bipTsi     

[desperate]

Here we go then,

I think it all adds up to a damn good arguement for nulcear, power. Imagine the Govt looking at all the experts and all bickering and bitching that every damn scheme offered get pilloried from all quarters, and then having the responsibility to ensure the lights dont go out.....................Much easier to build a few massive nukes and have done with it

Not ideal I'll grant you but it will get the job done.
Desperate

[Ivan]

Having read both articles, it appears that Monbiot has set out to say something controversial about FITs, regardless. I guess that's what we'd expect from a journalist. It's hardly the argument of someone in favour of renewables. I agree that FITs distort the value of renewables, but that's exactly what they're designed to do - to encourage faster uptake. But that doesn't make them worthless. Ignoring the financial arguments, and working purely on energy, solar PV has approximately a 3year carbon payback period in the UK. So if they last 25years (and they'll probably last a lot longer), the 'carbon CoP' is more than 8 - which means that, in energy terms,  fitting PVs is eight times better than doing nothing.

[MR GUS]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/mar/11/solar-power-germany-feed-in-tariff

more from the mon"bot" with regards to pv / uk failure ....whose paying him these days? does he redress this with solar water heating or has this gone to hell in a handcart too? in his "humble" opinion.
cannot say i'm a great guardian follower but especially look to it when away like now.

[billi]

The majority of Germans are still fine to pay that small dose towards the Fit idea towards the renewable electricity Idea

The conservative Government in Germany tries to miss credit  that success  in the moment to allow old Nuclear power stations to run upto 60 years with huge profit , from that the end-user/payer  will not see a cent  after the Nuclear industry was subsidised  from their pocket

That is the unit price structure  from the last 9 years of FIT ( the green is the part that is added on the unit price for funding the renewable electricity ideas ) and increases cause more is installed  and that is the funding then ! And stands in opposition to  a higher funding per kwh for Nuclear power in Germany

Billi

[Ancient Brewer]

The finanical aspect is indellibly interwoven with the aims to reduce carbon emissions.

If the FIT is going to be worth £8bn one should ask how much solar PV does this buy / and thus what are the annual CO2 reductions?

Now take that £8bn and see how much cavity wall, loft insulation, solar thermal (for houses not on mains gas), high efficiency solid fuel stoves, boiler scrappage schemes, micro CHP, Heat pumps to replace resistive heating it would buy?

Sure PV is better than doing nothing but there are a 1001 more effective measures that can be taken in the UK before we go down the PV route.

[billi]

no roof .... you poor fellow 

[Paulh_Boats]

I think its best to quietly ignore people like Monbiot.

It's basic science that PV panels are good - the more we have the better the world. 

-Paul

[Ancient Brewer]

Start doing the real maths and you will see where Monbiot is coming from.

£3000 per KW installed (inc GT / miscellaneous costs) which is highly generous. You would need £144bn just to provide enough PV to supply 10% of the UK's current electrical needs.

Sure there might be some productivity gain by virtue of economies of scale in PV production. On the other hand these may well be absorbed in rising commodity prices and in the Uk's case the crumbling value of Sterling.

There simply isn't enough 'real' money for solar PV to be a significant player in the UK energy market. I don't think Monbiot is arguing against PV itself - its the use of highly regressive pricing mechanisms to fund it. By all means facilitate PV in other ways (removing red tape obstacles) and allow people to play (indeed I have 600w and a Soladin) but limited public funds should be directed to the most effective areas.

Anyway economic neccessity will see these punitive FIT's consigned to the scrap heap post election even if Liebour win