navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
UK's most popular Renewable Energy Forum May 24, 2012, 07:00:37 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: UPDATE ON DECC APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT | Yingli Green Energy's PV Module Ranks No.2 in TUV Rheinland Energy Yield Test | Navitron Solar Showers at Glastonbury for Year 5!
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Standalone PV systems  (Read 822 times)
splyn
Jr. Member
**
Online Online

Posts: 61


« on: May 26, 2011, 02:33:25 PM »

The Feed in tariff review states:
 
https://econsultation.decc.gov.uk/decc-policy/fits_fast-track_review/supporting_documents/Consultation%20on%20fasttrack%20review%20of%20FITs.pdf

9. Specifically, this consultation (see Chapter 1) seeks views on proposed reductions to the tariffs for solar PV above 50 kW. This is in line with changes being made to FITs for PV elsewhere in Europe. As well as addressing the concerns described above, the proposed reductions are also intended to ensure that the tariffs for non-microgen solar better reflect evidence of significant reductions in the costs of PV since the FITs modelling was undertaken. The proposed new tariffs for solar PV installations are:
>50kW – ≤ 150kW TIC: 19.0p/kWh
>150kW – ≤ 250kW TIC: 15.0p/kWh
>250kW - ≤ 5MW TIC and stand-alone installations: 8.5p/kWh


This seems to state that the 8.5p rate applies to standalone installations of all sizes, including those of < 50kW; is this really the intent? I wouldn't have expected it to, but the proposed rate changes don't seem to make much sense either. Why differentiate between standalone and non-standalone systems in the first place? The electricity is going to get used in either case, and probably relatively locally so transmission losses are going to be largely irrelevant.

It is also confusing as the emboldened bit implies the review is addressing reductions for systems > 50kW.

Thanks, Splyn
Logged
Ted
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2673



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2011, 03:14:14 PM »

Stand-alone systems are those not connected to any building - they feed straight into the grid - so are not considered either domestic or commercial but really apply to 'solar-farm' installations.

This is the specific target for the review rather than the tweaking for the rate paid to a 100kW system on a school or factory roof.
Logged

Volunteer moderator
6kW Proven turbine, 20 Navitron tube solar, GSHP, WBS, Rayburn wood central heating
splyn
Jr. Member
**
Online Online

Posts: 61


« Reply #2 on: May 26, 2011, 08:37:54 PM »

Thanks Ted - having read the document a bit more, as I should have done before asking here, it does make clear their intent. They make it quite clear that they aren't prepared to pay a bigger incentive than that for offshore wind (ie. 8.5p/kWh) for businesses making money just from PV subsidies, especially from stand-alone (any size) or large (>250kW) roof mounted systems:

26. There is a need to make a distinction between the potential impact on the scheme of large community roof-mounted installations just over 50kW, and that of large solar developments of anything from 250kW up to 5MW, (a 1MW installation would cover a similar area to a football pitch), whether ground-mounted or on factory or warehouse roofs. Indeed, it was the unanticipated developer interest in large solar farms that prompted Ministers to express concerns last autumn about the risks that such unforeseen developments could pose to the FITs scheme:-

“We are absolutely committed to solar PV and to the widest range of domestic and community-scale renewables, but the fact is that we inherited a system that simply failed to anticipate industrial-scale, stand-alone, greenfield solar, and, although we will not act retrospectively, large field-based developments should not be allowed to distort the available funding for roof-based PV, other PV and other types of renewables.”
Greg Barker MP, Oral Parliamentary Questions, 11 November 2010.


I find it impossible to understand how they failed to anticipate large scale installations having explicitly offered FIT rates for systems up to 5MW with the express purpose of encouraging people to install such systems. I can believe they didn't expect the speed and scale of the response by developers, but given they no way of forseeing how quickly PV panel prices would drop (crystalline panels can now be bought for around 80p/W in quantity) why on earth didn't the FIT scheme specifically include any statements about the limits to the total FIT payments that we are now being told apply?

Para 8 states:

Because of these concerns and industry developments, last month’s announcement confirmed that the review would include fast-track consideration of FITs for solar PV above the microgeneration threshold of 50kW. Solar PV microgeneration of up to and including 50kW is not within the scope of the fast track review and is therefore not being considered by this consultation.

Except that stand-alone systems below 50kW clearly have been affected but I have no problem believing they weren't considered Wink

Splyn
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!