Feed in Tariff details released

Pommy bastard said :

So, excuse my ignorance, but isn’t this just the taxpayer susbsidising the electricity bill for those who can afford to install these systems?

You know all those people that have signed on to “Green Power” at the higher rate? Well, you would assume that the extra money they pay for their power gets used to pay for the feed-in tariff.

But I would be interested to know exactly where the money comes from to pay the tariff.

Kramer said :

Time to get an exercise bike that feeds power back into the grid… I should be able to crank out a continual 150W, so a few hours training a week would probably pay off the bike in a few years.

http://www.econvergence.net/electro.htm

I feel all warm and cozy wrapped in my smug.
My little sunny boy 1.3kw system produces about 8.5kwh per day which is around half my daily usage.

I’d just like to thank See Change Jamison for getting me into this great idea.

How about we forget about what sounds like an expensive, inefficient scheme to allow people rich enough to have solar installed to get all smug. Here is what the ACT should be doing:

Take the 950 bucks a huge percentage of our population will recieve soon from each and every person.

Spend it on a renewable energy plant near by. Then take whatever it earns and use that as a refund on each and every ACT’s households power bill. While we are at it give small locally owned businesses the same treatment.

The we will be doing something!

Creating heaps of jobs,
Doing something meaningful for the enviornment,
And most importantly saving people some serious cash.

>>Answer me this – will these systems assist the grid when peak
>>power is required ie during last week when everyone had their
>>electric air conditioners on all day…?

Actually, No. Peak power demand is early morning, and (especially during the heat) late afternoon – basically when people are getting ready for work, and when they get home. Solar voltaic systems generate most power when the light angle is near perpendicular, and drops significantly as they get hot. Hence, for a typically north facing system they develop most power mid morning to just after midday (solar time). Unless the system is set up to face west, very little power would be generated when it is most needed for airconditioning.

Paying people to convert to solar hot water would have a far greater effect on greenhouse gas emissions, apparently.

Yes.

Answer me this – will these systems assist the grid when peak power is required ie during last week when everyone had their electric air conditioners on all day…?

So, excuse my ignorance, but isn’t this just the taxpayer susbsidising the electricity bill for those who can afford to install these systems?

While this is true, the other side is that it is expanding the market place by making it more attractive, at the same time increasing production at peak times (albeit negligibly) and making the power grid less focused on singular large corporations.

Exactly P.B.

The rest of us are being asked to pay for the green posturing of those that can afford this folly.

So, excuse my ignorance, but isn’t this just the taxpayer susbsidising the electricity bill for those who can afford to install these systems?

while the sun is shining most people are at work, and we are going to pay these people 3.88 its value ( higher rates coming for the rest of us to subsidise)it may even increase energy use
to actually reduce consumption dont we need the bigger systems on shopping centers, schools and other high use consumers, direct use while the sun is shining will reduce the risk of overloading the grid and reduce peak periods.
my understanding is the 1.5kw systems will only provide the average house with a fifth of its daily use, hardly worth the effort or cost compared to a 30-50kw system at a shopping center.

Wanon said :

So call me crazy, but what’s stopping people feeding their own grid power back into the grid for a tidy profit?

…the system is only for Solar and wind generation at the moment… so grid-to-grid just might be out 😛

The guy that installed our PV system in January was telling us they (installers) had been told (by ACT Govt.) that the contracts would lock people in for 20 years at the rate offered at the time the contract was signed (without adjustment over those 20 years)! that would kinda take the shine out of it. From what I read in the Factsheet:

The Premium Price is set each year. However, when you enter into an arrangement with your electricity supplier you are guaranteed payment of the Premium Price prevailing at that time for the full 20 years of your agreement…

…that may just be the case too… although it might mean that they guarantee you get that much, minimum?

Wanon said :

So call me crazy, but what’s stopping people feeding their own grid power back into the grid for a tidy profit?

Ah that would be the very bureaucratic process one must go through to have ACTEW recognise your energy producing capabilities!

So call me crazy, but what’s stopping people feeding their own grid power back into the grid for a tidy profit?

enrique said :

3) if you end up producing more electricity then you consume, your account balance ends up in credit overall.

3.1) if you end up producing less electricity then you consume, your account balance is reduced overall.

Just to clarify according to my calculations you can still get a credit (or ‘negative’ bill) producing less electricity then you consume due to the fact you are being paid 4 times as much for what you produce compared to what you are charged for your electricity consumption. Of course my calculations / understanding of it could be wrong and I am happy to be educated to this fact BEFORE I spend the money on a system!

3) if you end up producing more electricity then you consume,

That should of said…

if the value of your credit is greater than the cost of the electricity you consume…

and also if you end up producing less electricity then you consume, should have said

if the value of your credit is less than the cost of the electricity you consume…

From 1 Mar the ACT govt are paying 3.88 times of the gross power you produce, not the net, so you pay for your normal consumption and get paid 3.88 times whatever you feed in.

The Federal govt is also getting rid of the $8000 rebate (means tested or not) and bringing in a new scheme from 1 Jul 09. You can see some more about it here.

At first viewing it looks like it will benefit those who already have renewable energy systems as well as those first buying them.

So if you’re lucky, you got your $8000 from the feds, will soon be getting your 3.88 times rebate from the ACT govt, and maybe more from the Renewal Energy Certificates (RECs) scheme.

johnboy said :

You’ve still got to make more than you consume.

Sort of, but not quite.

This will be a Gross Feed-in Tariff. My understanding is that it works as such…

1) for every unit of electricity you produce you get credit to the value of 3.88 x the retail price of electricity at the time you signed up.

2) the credit amount then gets applied to your account.

3) if you end up producing more electricity then you consume, your account balance ends up in credit overall.

3.1) if you end up producing less electricity then you consume, your account balance is reduced overall.

This tariff is fantastic news for Canberra. It is the first Gross tariff in the country – all the other previous tariffs were Net (they only credited you for each unit you produced in excess of what you consumed).

If all goes well it will really encourage people to produce their own power. The economic benefits will make a big difference to the high up-front capital costs that home systems require.

johnboy said :

The real value of these schemes is the way they encourage conservation.

Large scale power generation is massively more efficient than anything you can put on your roof.

But I too would love to plug in an exercise bike and feel I’m making money while I sweat off the excess baggage.

Very good point.

caf said :

In regards to the diesel generator concern, I calculate that your return would be about 121 cents per Litre of diesel (9.7 kWh / L energy density, 25% efficiency for a typical 5kW diesel generator at full load). Fuel would have to get pretty cheap to cover your maintenance costs – I can’t see this becoming a problem.

Interesting caf, looks like they might have set the price with this in mind?

The real value of these schemes is the way they encourage conservation.

Large scale power generation is massively more efficient than anything you can put on your roof.

But I too would love to plug in an exercise bike and feel I’m making money while I sweat off the excess baggage.

In regards to the diesel generator concern, I calculate that your return would be about 121 cents per Litre of diesel (9.7 kWh / L energy density, 25% efficiency for a typical 5kW diesel generator at full load). Fuel would have to get pretty cheap to cover your maintenance costs – I can’t see this becoming a problem.

Kramer: At 7.5 cents per hour, I wouldn’t give up your day job.

Sounds very intriguing. I won’t have the capacity to act on any of this myself for a number of years but I can vicariously through my mum and step Dad. I’ve been suggesting they look into this.

Jakez you get a special meter box once you are hooked up that keeps track of everything. We looked into it a while ago before the C’wealth means tested the $8000 rebate. We then put the plans on hold however the new C’wealth subsidies combined with the ACT scheme now have me reaching for my trusty spreadsheet again!

Check out the FAQs here http://www.solartec.com.au/FAQs.html

jakez – I believe it works through a doohicky called an inverter. For example, when no-one is home consuming electricity during the day the solar panels are at their most productive – the inverter allows the solar electricity to feed into the grid. When the house is occupied and using more electricity than the solar can provide, the inverter allows the grid to make up the shortfall.

Time to get an exercise bike that feeds power back into the grid… I should be able to crank out a continual 150W, so a few hours training a week would probably pay off the bike in a few years.

I am shockingly ignorant of this. How do you feed the produced energy back into the system? Is it part of the technical hook in with solar panels etc?

Technically how does this actually work?

Actually I think Simon is saying the opposite in the press release –

“Unlike other schemes in Australia, the scheme will pay people for each unit of renewable electricity produced, rather than the excess remaining after the producer’s own consumption has been deducted.”

My understanding was it was always going to be based on what you produce unlike some of the other states. The ACT scheme is a lot more generous as it is rare for households to produce more power then they consume. In the ‘net’ schemes (ie production minus consumption) you basically just end up with a reduced electricity bill whereas the ‘gross’ schemes (ie Canberra’s) you may end up with a credit bill!

Ahhh, of course.

In the past many people growing large amounts of indoor non-fruiting ornamental hydroponic plants have been identified to the police by their excessive use of elec-trickery. I wonder if PV systems will take off in that market?

You’ve still got to make more than you consume.

Or even worse to tap the neighbour’s power.

At 3.88 times the cost, wouldn’t it be economical to tap your own power?