DECC publish Renewable Energy Strategy

[StBarnabas]

Ted
thanks for this (have another applaud). Will need to think what it means fort the StBC system: accredited grid tie inverter but non accredited panels no idea why the Navitron (Yingli Solar) 110Wp are not on the list. Anyway the PV system will be installed at the end of August assuming the stuff arrives from Navitron. Anyone who is in the Northumbria region on the weekend of the 22nd/23rd Aug is welcome to look at the "speccy bloke" hanging up panels.
Sean

[Paulh_Boats]

Ahh, OK then. I thought I remembered you posting that you had got ROC payments.  

Nope, being a small system (488Wp) and temporarily installed on the conservatory roof on a wooden frame I decided to wait until real FITs came in, then install it permanently on the house roof perhaps with extra panels. It needs to be on the house roof to get the best solar gain - to avoid shadows early morning and late afternoon.

I have also sent a few kWh into the National Grid for free, on very sunny days when the panels generate more than the background fridge/freezer load. If the Government are going to penalise creative engineers have have led the way to a lower carbon lifestyle they are once again showing their inability to manage the country. Am I going to have to complain to my MP yet again.....?

-Paul

[Ted]

If you've got a non-MCS accredited system that has never been OFGEM registered for ROCs then you will get no ROCs and no FITs either. And, I assume, that from next April suppliers will only be interested in paying for exports if you are in the FITs scheme.

Definitely time to write to your MP and respond to the consultation process.

[StBarnabas]

Ted/Paul
this may also apply to me. Shame to have my 3kWp system not elligible. Can see a long letter to my MP coming up.
Sean
 

[CeeBee]

As some of you probably know, I've had a 2.1 kWp PV system since April 2008. It's accredited with OFGEM for ROCs (and LECs, and REGOs - don't ask me what these are - certainly of little or no financial value). I received the maximum £2500 Low Carbon Buildings programme grant towards it, unlike people a year or two earlier who might have received a 50% grant with no upper limit (or at least a limit a lot higher than £2500).

The main proposal for FITs suggests that systems such as this will automatically be switched over to FITs, and will received a tariff for all generation vaguely equivalent to the ROC amount - 9p/kWh is mentioned. And also a standard rate for export, maybe 5p/kWh.

At face value, this doesn't look particularly good compared to 36.5p/kWh of generation for people installing a new system in the first year of FITs operation.

At present, I get 28p/kWh for everything I export (from SSE, who take the benefit of any ROCs). I manage to export a good proportion of what I generate, so this works out quite well. My system generates 1950kWh/year, of which I maybe export 1500kWh. Why do SSE offer this apparently generous tariff? Might they decide to continue with something similar even afters FITs?

So what should my comments on the proposals be? If the change results in my situation getting much _worse_, then it might lead to ideas of decommissioning the present system (I think repayment of grant would be required by the conditions from when the grant was given), and recommissioning it. Would they somehow attempt to prevent this? If so, then how?

If people are paid a generous sum for their total generation, but only a low rate for export, then will they have the incentive to save energy? The SSE scheme I'm on certainly encourages energy saving, but if I was only getting 5p/kWh for export, then would it be worth the bother, or might I just as well waste the energy on site - leave those computers and TVs on etc.? (OK - I wouldn't, but hopefully you know what I mean).

There are sections in the proposals discussing (with no real answers) "What should be treated as a single installation?" (to prevent people e.g. attempting to register a large wind farm as two smaller ones). I've still got another roof on which I could install another PV system. How would that be treated under the new scheme (I won't bother to guess, since the proposals don't make any comments on this)?

Can you imagine how much bureaucracy will be involved in this? Only a few months for them to come up with watertight answers to all these questions. OFGEM don't seem able to manage the ROC scheme for small generators (judging by my experience with them). Every time I log into the site, the front page shows an ever increasing list of features of the site which "aren't working at the present time", explanations of why it's sending out blank emails, etc. I suspect these are all IT issues with a new (one year old) web system. The staff, when you phone them up, have no idea at all why the site is doing what it does, but try to sort out problems manually. So what chance that they'll manage to cope with a surge in new installations wanting FITs. What do other countries with FITs do? I can't see how one can avoid lots of "What if...?" questions.

[Ted]

CeeBee, I calculate you will be a net loser if FITs come in as outlined in these DECC docs.

You're currently getting £420 a year for your 1500 x 28p.  To that you could add £100 a year over 25 year system life for the £2500 grant = £520/year.

When migrated to FITs (over which you'll have no choice) you'll be getting 1950 x 9p plus 1500 x 5p = £250.50 plus the £100 grant = £350/year.  So immediately £170/year worse off.

For a new system going straight into FITs from next April (or in fact from now, the start of the interim period) you would've got - 1950 x 36.5p plus 1500 x 5p = £786.75/year which is more than £436/year better off.

So 'decommissioning' the system, paying back the £2500 grant and re-entering under the full FITs tariff would take you just 5.7 years to break-even.


Para 3.135 of the consultation doc suggests that a 'single installation' should be defined as 'a single technology per single site.' Somewhere else in the docs (can't remember exactly where now) also said that for a site with multiple-technologies then they would have to be fitted with individual total generation meters to qualify for the individual tariffs. If only a single generation meter was fitted then all systems on the site would be paid at the lowest tariff level.

One of the major points about FITs is that it won't be administered by OFGEM.  They currently, according to one of the Poyry reports, spend 50% of the admin costs of running the ROC system on managing small generators that represent just 0.1% of the total ROC market value. They want to hand all this off to supply companies who have robust billing systems in place and save themselves a small fortune.

[Paulh_Boats]

If you've got a non-MCS accredited system that has never been OFGEM registered for ROCs then you will get no ROCs and no FITs either. And, I assume, that from next April suppliers will only be interested in paying for exports if you are in the FITs scheme.

Definitely time to write to your MP and respond to the consultation process.

It that really is true I'm getting batteries and an inverter and two fingers to the Government.  

Its fundamentally a moral and scientific outrage that I wont get any payments at all for the electricity I generate - I'm sure Barack Obama is on my side though.

Actually thinking about it a bit more.... I would have a great time dragging my case through the political and media channels. There is a moral case to be fought that people who have already tried to save the planet should not be penalised by Government.

-Paul

[Richard Owen]

.... I would have a great time dragging my case through the political and media channels. There is a moral case to be fought that people who have already tried to save the planet should not be penalised by Government.

-Paul

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/youandyours_contact.shtml

[Paulh_Boats]

.... I would have a great time dragging my case through the political and media channels. There is a moral case to be fought that people who have already tried to save the planet should not be penalised by Government.

-Paul

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/youandyours_contact.shtml

Thanks Richard - I'll wait and see how things pan out.

A key point Ted highlighted is that the energy companies will levy the "green" tax and make the FIT payments. So its up to the energy companies to decide who gets FIT payments and we know our good friends at Good Energy are very keen to support home PV.

-Paul

[CeeBee]

Like Paul, I'll wait and see what happens, but I reckon I'll still send in a response to the consultation saying that I don't agree with the proposed treatment of small-generators already registered for ROCs, or indeed those not registered at all. I will also make some comment that whatever they come up with to deal with people who add more PV incrementally at the same 'site' must not cause any 'daft' scenarios (e.g. new stuff not eligible because existing stuff isn't eligible...). Those of us who have installed already have had to jump through hoops to get here - inadequate on/off grants, fees for silly planning applications which are now now longer needed, the pain of trying to deal with OFGEM (who in turn have been using up all their money trying to deal with _us_)

Paul likes the Good Energy deals, and I like the SSE offering - they are both presently offering good-sounding deals which they aren't obliged to offer - why? - perhaps to grab us as customers, or to position themselves appropriately in the world of renewable energy. So it's possible that they will continue to offer us good deals. Not quite the same as something guaranteed for many years though. Perhaps I'll ask them, but I don't suppose they'll have a response ready yet. Incidentally, is there any mention of the effects of inflation on the FITs? Don't suppose that 36.5p/kWh or indeed 9p/kWh for a 'double ROC equivalent' will look much good in 20 years time.

[Ivan]

What a lot of fuss. Why can't the government make anything simple? Looks to me like a scheme full of complication in order to fund several large offices full of bureaucrats honing and adminstering the scheme. Also looks like a long-term contact for the BRE who are doing very nicely out of all this.

Politicians seem to be specifically excluding existing microgeneration schemes, and specifically excluding installations which have not in some way contributed towards BRE profits. Being part of the BRE's schemes doesn't dictate any particular level of quality. It just means installers/manufacturers have supplied the right paperwork, made the right noises, and most importantly paid the right money. Even if it did guarantee quality, surely a system which conforms to the current electrical and safety standards should be perfectly satisfactory. We only have to look at the 'chocolate teapots' which STILL qualify for government grant assistance (and therefore would be eligible for the FITs) despite independant trials showing that in most situations they'll consume more power than they'll produce.

Perhaps we should draft a standard response and get as many people to send it to their MPs as possible.

[Paulh_Boats]

Perhaps they are just trying to avoid paying FITs to those that already got a grant............that seems fair.

[daftlad]

The real ar5s is that you (Navitron and it's customers and forum members) are actually at the cutting edge of new renewable technology and you end up getting punished for developing these technologies and proving that they work.
I recon people should get double grants for doing it before the new grants are introduced, anyone can say "that will make me money so I will do it" but most of you lot did it for environmental reasons not money.
laters

[knighty]

I must be missing something here, I can's see why they don't just dump all these deifferent systems and pay a decent price for each kwh produced.. and nothing else ?

(seriously... there's must be something I'm missing?)

[Ted]

That's a very good question.

As I see it they figure that people in different circumstances require different levels of financial stimulus to get off their backsides and actually do something.

So they have produce a mechanism that will provide exactly that level of stimulus and not a penny more.

They are paranoid that they might offer too much money and allow people to make a profit.