Friday 6/3/2009 Page: 42
RECEIVING credits, rather than bills, from their electricity provider is one of the rewards for those who install solar panels on their homes. In NSW, most households with solar energy systems are paid by their electricity provider for the surplus energy they release back into the grid. But, as most solar energy is produced in the middle of the clay, payment for this energy is usually calculated on the lower offpeak rates.Industry and environmental groups are now pushing the NSW Government to introduce a gross solar feed-in tariff (FIT) scheme, which would see households and businesses compensated for all the renewable energy they produce, rather than just what's surplus to their needs.
Campaigners say FIT rates should be higher than the market value of electricity by taking into account the savings represented by reducing electricity loss through transmission. Consumers would then buy back the electricity they require at market rates.
According to a recent Access Economics study commissioned by the Clean Energy Council, an average of 5.9% of electricity is lost during electricity generation within Australian networks. "A greater reliance on solar PV systems could reduce this lost capacity from having the source of production closer to the final point of use," the study reads.
"By siting a generator near a load, the amount of energy required to be imported from the network is reduced." If solar energy systems are more widely adopted by households and businesses, they would also reduce the need for costly system upgrades - something which would also be factored into gross FIT rates. It would also provide protection against power outages during times of high demand.
In a submission on the introduction of a solar FIT in NSW, released earlier this year, The Clean Energy Council argued that a gross FIT with a fair set price would avoid discriminating between those who use electricity during peak electricity production periods, such as small businesses and retirees, and workers who are away from the home when their system is producing the most electricity: "If a price is set for the buy back of energy at a point in network, it should be applicable to all energy produced at the site, regardless of whether it is used on site or exported, for small generation sites; the impact on energy flows in the grid is the same."
The ACT and Western Australia have saver already introduced a gross FIT scheme, while Queensland and Victoria have opted for a net version - the FIT rates apply to surplus, rather than all electricity produced. While the Federal Government's Solar Credits scheme, to be introduced in July, will make installing renewable energy systems a more affordable option for a wider proportion of the population, a gross FIT would ensure they're paid off sooner.
"If the scheme is long enough and the rate is high enough, it should be sufficient to provide a return on capital investment of less than 10 years," the submission states. "The scheme should be in place for no less than 15 years to provide investor confidence." The Clean Energy Council's general manager of policy, Rob Jackson, says a gross FIT would also make it easier for people to do a cost-benefit analysis when considering investing in solar technology.
It makes it much easier for those who are trying to value what they're getting, and how quickly they will be able to pay it off," he says. "It would help to attract a wider crowd, not just people with a keen environmental interest. It will move to a point where a solar PV system is seen as adding additional value to the house."
Case Study
Bills slashed - and the air is cleaner
BORROWING over $30,000 for a solar energy system was a big move, but every time their electricity bill arrives, Bill and Chrissie Holland are reassured that they did the right thing.
Before fitting their six-bedroom northern beaches home with solar panels two years ago, their quarterly electricity bill often reached over $700. Now, the family of seven receives credit from their electricity company for their surplus energy that's fed into the grid. Their last bill, for example, was $8o in their favour. The 3.64 kW system on their roof cost close to $38,000, minus a rebate and renewable energy certificates worth $5000 combined.
At current rates, the Holland family's electricity savings will outweigh the expenditure on the system in 10 to 12 years. But if energy prices rise as expected, and a gross feed-in tariff is introduced to increase the value of the surplus power they produce, this will come down to between five and eight years.
With a 25-year warranty, and similar systems lasting up to 40 years, Mr Holland believes he'll end up well ahead. "We're already saving the better part of $3000 a year in energy we're not having to pay for," he says. "Before we got the system, we were using up to 5o kW hours a day, and between 20 and 30 in summer.
"When I got my last $700 quarterly bill, I thought: 'I don't want to do this again.' " But it's not just about the money. Mr Holland says it's satisfying to know his family's electricity use isn't having an adverse environmental impact. Every year, they save around five tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, and in just over two years, have fed 1750 surplus kW hours back into the grid.
"Every day when I get home, I go and see what the production of power has been during the day," Mr Holland says. "It's such a good feeling knowing you are producing more power than you're using every day. "We have a north-facing roof, so I really couldn't justify not doing it.
"I'm so glad I did it that I'm always trying to convert others. My dad and sister have now done theirs and my brother wants to get solar panels too." Having the system has also made the family more aware of their energy consumption. Mr Holland now offers his younger children a pocket money bonus if they diligently turn off lights and electrical equipment when not in use, switch appliances off from the powerpoint rather than leaving them on standby and stick to three minute showers.
0 comments:
Post a Comment