Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
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 continuous spam/hack attempts on the forum, "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: Navitron Partners With Solax to Help Create A More Sustainable Future | Navitron Calls for Increased Carbon Footprint Reduction In Light of Earth Overshoot Day | A plea from The David School - Issue 18
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down
Author Topic: Who actually pays the FIT?  (Read 8922 times)
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 3221

« Reply #30 on: November 01, 2009, 01:05:45 AM »

Largely those in fuel poverty, who can't afford to invest in insulation or PV arrays and are therefore left burning Gas paying a premium for the privilege! Not least the large number of those over the last decade who qualified, by means testing, to have warmfront grant to improve heating/DHW ...... with ..... gas boilers ..... who now find the governments arranging for them to pay a premium on their gas to be passed on to those who ........ can afford a PV installation!

Just read a very interesting article on the economics of wind, showing that in fact the 'FIT supplement' that the populace pay to generators is in fact negative in Denmark and Germany. This is because wind power has tiny marginal costs (all the costs are up-front), which means that it gets used first when available, and that pushes down the spot price (quite significantly at high-demand times). This has two effects: 1) by pushing down daytime prices it brings down consumer electricity costs, 2) Installing more wind soon makes the prices drop below the price at which the farms pay for themselves (confusingly - the point being that the overall cost is _much_ higher than the marginal cost).

Introducing a FIT solves the problem of more wind making wind uneconomic, by guaranteeing a stable minimum price. But the overall price reduction still applies (more so, because now it's worth installing more capacity) so in fact consumers get cheaper power and don't end up paying extra via the FITs mechanism at all.

Neat eh? Full details here:
I learnt a lot reading that - very informative.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2009, 12:52:54 PM by wookey » Logged

Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221

St Barnabas Chapel (2009)

« Reply #31 on: November 01, 2009, 09:00:25 AM »

thanks a very interesting link.

Gestis Censere. 40x47mm DHW with TDC3. 3kW ASHP, 9kW GSHP, 3kW Navitron PV with Platinum 3100S GTI, 6.5kW WBS, 5 chickens. FMY 2009.
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 3940

« Reply #32 on: November 01, 2009, 11:11:40 AM »

Very good article.  But lower costs for the 'consumer' in this context means the electricity companies - who purchase the generated power in order to re-sell to their customers. Whether any of the savings actually get passed on to the end-consumer is another matter. And we should be able to rely on OFGEM to oversee that on our behalf. 


Volunteer moderator
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!