News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 More would install solar if power paid for: report 

More would install solar if power paid for: report

02 Mar, 2010 06:21 AM
THE cost of installing rooftop solar panels could be dramatically lowered by abolishing rebates and paying households a premium for all electricity generated at home, an economic analysis has found.

The analysis by consultants Access Economics, on behalf of the Electrical Trades Union, found a national gross feed-in-tariff would be a far cheaper way to boost uptake of rooftop solar panels than existing policies.

The union's Victorian secretary Dean Mighell said twice as many solar units would have been installed if the $1 billion spent on rebates was funnelled into a premium subsidy.

A national tariff has been backed by retailer Woolworths and the Property Council of Australia.

The states have already introduced tariff schemes, although they vary in design. In Victoria, for example, the government opted for a net tariff that pays households for electricity fed into the grid only. A gross scheme pays a premium for energy whether it is fed into the grid or used at home.

The analysis found a national gross tariff could push rooftop solar power to a capacity of 1000 megawatts - roughly equivalent to the Latrobe Valley's Loy Yang B coal-fired power station - within 20 years. It would cost $4.47 billion and put solar photovoltaic units on 650,000 homes. The $1 billion spent on rebates over the 18-month period to June installed 67,452 rooftop solar units.

Climate Change Minister Penny Wong backed the government's rebate scheme over a national tariff.

A ministerial spokeswoman said: ''It takes longer for households to recoup the cost of their solar panels and other technologies through a feed-in tariff.''

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size



RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
I would be happy to even pay a small amount each month, ie, an average of my bills over the last 5 years for a period of 5 years. The governments are stupid, putting in pipelines for water and using coal for our power, when it can be sold and every single household can have a water tank and solar system. Just a bit of initiative on the part of one clever politician is it all it needs, but don't give the job to Peter Garrett.
Posted by mjm, 3/03/2010 7:47:16 AM
Always a relief to see a report that aligns with common sense. Short term rebate deals cause artificial imbalances in the solar equipment supply/demand equation and make longer term decision making more difficult for producers, installers and households. Gross feed in tariffs are the way to go. Because decentralised solar power generation reduces the need for infrastructure upgrades, provides peak supply at times of peak demand and minimises transmission losses, it deserves to earn a premium price. Let us factor that price into decision making so that households and farmers can go to their banks with a sound business plan that has the added benefit of reducing our carbon footprint.
Posted by Mick, 3/03/2010 7:50:58 AM
Going solar is a feel good con. We have recently installed a 6 panel, $10,000 home solar power system, $8,000 of which was paid for by the State's taxpayers. I have noticed that the peak power production of the entire system is not much more than 1 Kw/hour. The panels are fixed, so the day time average is much lower than that. The energy company buys all surplus power over our consumption at 50c/kw which is double our peak buying rate. A wasted national investment, $10,000 to produce electricity with a retail value of less than $2/day that the power industry has to buy back at double the retail price. To make matters worse if there is a blackout on the power grid the home system shuts down automatically to protect electricity repair workers, so as a backup system for a household, the solar panels are useless. A smarter national alternative would be to phase out our coal fired furnaces and retrofit the latest pebble bed reactor furnaces, which are safer and cleaner than coal, would pay for them selves in a few years because they're much cheaper to run and produce no green house gas. The spent "pebbles" are safe; so benign they could probably be used for 10 pin bowling.
Posted by Disillusioned, 3/03/2010 8:16:51 AM
For once I agree with Penny Wong! The average Joe Blow just doesn't have the money to spend on the capital outlay. We would not have ours now except for the rebate plus the "economic stimulus" handout. The only way it might work is to have special loans with cheaper interest rates available to consumers.
Posted by maybalene, 3/03/2010 8:20:23 AM
Most people, who have installed PV Solar Systems are confused about the feed-in- tariffs. There needs to be a national approach as each State is different. Some are gross & some are net and feed-in rates range from .44kW up to .60kW. With the costs of PV Solar going down, as competition increases, now would be a good time to introduce a national system.
Posted by RobB, 3/03/2010 8:53:44 AM
I own a solar grid connect company and would love to see a national gross feed in tariff without an upfront rebate. The upfront rebate is a political carrot and brings into the industry greedy people with non sustainable business principles. It is unfortunate that good intentions by the government to buy quick votes continues to backfie on them.
Posted by Briza, 3/03/2010 10:06:59 AM
Headline "More would install solar if power paid for". Well, yeah - even I would. What's not to like about a gravy train subsidised by others. Cool. Just pointless, that's all.
Posted by DMS, 3/03/2010 11:15:51 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
01 March, 2010
POLL
Q: What do you think the outlook for your commodity will be this year?

Highly positive
(6.1%)

Positive
(24%)

Neutral
(34.5%)

Negative
(23.3%)

Highly negative
(12.1%)

Total Votes: 429
Poll Date: 28 February, 2010

Most popular articles

1) Apple iPhone 4 32GB43 plans 5%
2) Apple iPhone 4 16GB44 plans 5%
3) HTC Desire4 plans 2%
4) Apple iPhone 3GS 8GB33 plans 1%
5) Samsung Galaxy S14 plans 6%

Mobile Phones | Broadband Plans

Get the best deal at Fairfax Digital - Rural Press

FOL EMAIL SUBS
 
NQR Twitter


North Queensland Register







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Navigate

Classifieds

More Ways to Read

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2010. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...