Electric Ireland Stops Feed In Tariff for Microgenerators

ted1

bluesteel wrote: »

well, using the electric car battery to store energy for your home would be another way of going too; I think there are systems to do so in place - Tesla talking about it - obviously if you don't want to run the battery down too much

The problem there is that most card are away during the day and you can't charge them off the PV at night.

bluesteel

ted1 wrote: »

The problem there is that most card are away during the day and you can't charge them off the PV at night.

eeh, sure- won't work for everyone. I was referring to the night shift example.

recedite

bluesteel wrote: »

Economic Value - Something that produces energy at random and hence needs an expensive backup that is redundant for a portion of time is clearly less economically valuable that something predictable and consistent.
If you are going to calculate the economic value of this supposedly free energy you must factor in the backup cost.

Of course, but 2 other factors need to be looked at;

a)Supply
To what extent would solar PV (when fed into the grid) "even out" the supply from wind turbines? Given that calm sunny days are associated with high pressure weather systems, and windy days are associated with low pressure, which is often cloudier. If that is the case, the economic value of solar pv could well be higher than the basic retail price of a kWhr unit, due to this synergy factor. I don't know if any studies have been done on this.

b)Demand
Consumers should have access to variable pricing (via smart meters)
Not just a simple "night rate" tariff with an extra standing charge slapped on. In the event that the aggregate of solar and wind was producing a spike in the supply, consumers would be able to increase consumption. It would be easy enough to have automatic switching of electric vehicle charging, heat pumps to underfloor heating, washing machines, even the basic immersion. Lots of uses for electricity are not time critical.

Coles

ted1 wrote: »

Technology should be able to stand in its own two feet. If they really wanted much generation they should remove the ridiculous duty in imported Chinese PV. That would require no subsidy and would make it cheaper

As far as I know there is no duty on importing domestic solar panels from China to Ireland. I stand to be corrected on that

ted1

Coles wrote: »

As far as I know there is no duty on importing domestic solar panels from China to Ireland. I stand to be corrected on that

Stand up, it's 47.7%
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1190_en.htm

murphaph

Coles wrote: »

Imagine energy as a hierarchical pyramid, with heat at the bottom, and electricity at the top. Heat is the most basic form of energy. It's cheap to create, it's inefficient to move, it's wasteful to store, and it has a limited number of uses. Electricity is at the top of this 'energy pyramid' because it is so refined and so useful and so valuable. To go to the trouble to produce electricity and then use it to create heat is just madness! I know it makes perfect sense in Ireland now, but this must change. It's completely insane.

Well, 1 in 3 new builds in Germany choose a heat pump as their primary heating system. Heat pumps "convert" electricity to heat at a roughly 1 to 3 or 4 rate. Of course they don't convert the electricity to heat, they use the electrical energy to move the heat from outside the house to inside. I see this as a perfectly acceptable usage of PV energy and indeed a perfect synergy of technologies.

Is heat really so wasteful to store? Super insulated buffer tanks are available on the market here at least that lose 1°C per 24 hours. If I run my heat pump during the afternoon and fill those tanks, it will easily hold its energy until the evening when I want to release it either for bathing or heating or both.

I definitely agree that electricity is intrinsically more valuable than heat as it is easy to transmit, which is why I wouldn't fit solar thermal to the roof alongside the PV because if on very hot summer days the house has taken all it can from the PV, at least I can sell the rest back to the grid, even if it is only for 9c, whereas the heat energy from the solar thermal will just be wasted completely.

bluesteel

recedite wrote: »

Of course, but 2 other factors need to be looked at;

a)Supply
To what extent would solar PV (when fed into the grid) "even out" the supply from wind turbines? Given that calm sunny days are associated with high pressure weather systems, and windy days are associated with low pressure, which is often cloudier. If that is the case, the economic value of solar pv could well be higher than the basic retail price of a kWhr unit, due to this synergy factor. I don't know if any studies have been done on this.

b)Demand
Consumers should have access to variable pricing (via smart meters)
Not just a simple "night rate" tariff with an extra standing charge slapped on. In the event that the aggregate of solar and wind was producing a spike in the supply, consumers would be able to increase consumption. It would be easy enough to have automatic switching of electric vehicle charging, heat pumps to underfloor heating, washing machines, even the basic immersion. Lots of uses for electricity are not time critical.

I think getting into predicting/assumng weather patterns is crazy - it's always windy somewhere - better to generate electricity there and move it even with transmission losses. Also worth remembering that higher tension loses less energy.

Variable pricing - fine in theory but we can't even convince people to pay for water in Ireland!

Coles

ted1 wrote: »

Stand up, it's 47.7%
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1190_en.htm

Interesting because the Duty Calculator says no duty on Solar Panels imported from China to Ireland for home use.

Link to the Duty Calculator.

bluesteel

ted1 wrote: »

Stand up, it's 47.7%
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1190_en.htm

https://www.google.ie/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1AFAB_enIE449IE456&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=+slaps+tariffs+on+chinese+solar+panels

I think technically sanctions/tarriffs not "duty"

freddyuk

Duty is not normally applicable but there is currently an anti dumping duty imposed by the EU on all China PV modules unless the manufacturer has signed up to a minimum price agreement which basically sets the selling price. 92 companies are on the approved list. All the others attract penalty duty (so they are not imported obviously) or are redirected via another "country of origin" which the customs are aware of.

hfallada

Coles wrote: »

Interesting because the Duty Calculator says no duty on Solar Panels imported from China to Ireland for home use.

Link to the Duty Calculator.

There definitely is a tariff on the importing from solar panels from China to the EU. There was almost a full on trade war between the EU and China over it. The EU believed China was dumping(below cost selling of goods in a foreign market) and it was going to destroy the EUs solar panel manufacturing industry

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10045150/Europe-on-verge-of-trade-war-with-China-over-cheap-solar-panels.html

quentingargan

hfallada wrote: »

There definitely is a tariff on the importing from solar panels from China to the EU. There was almost a full on trade war between the EU and China over it. The EU believed China was dumping(below cost selling of goods in a foreign market) and it was going to destroy the EUs solar panel manufacturing industry

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10045150/Europe-on-verge-of-trade-war-with-China-over-cheap-solar-panels.html

Yes - there is a minimum import price for solar PV from China. It is probably slightly above what Chinese companies could profitably sell panels for, so it is seen as a barrier to trade by some. But even with this minimum import price, systems are a fraction of the price they were a few years ago.

onepower

Hi All,

This is my first post so be kind with the replies.

I sent an email yesterday to the Minister asking for an explanation for the departments lack of support for the Microgeneration Industry considering the size of the industry in the UK and other countries.
Please email the Minister for Communications, Energy & Natural Resources, Alex White and ask him for answers. The more emails in his inbox the better.
Thanks

quentingargan

onepower wrote: »

Hi All,

This is my first post so be kind with the replies.

I sent an email yesterday to the Minister asking for an explanation for the departments lack of support for the Microgeneration Industry considering the size of the industry in the UK and other countries.
Please email the Minister for Communications, Energy & Natural Resources, Alex White and ask him for answers. The more emails in his inbox the better.
Thanks

It is always useful to contact politicians - after all, it is only political direction that will get this overturned. You can get their email addresses here.

galwaytt

fwiw, I sent an email to SEAI, and here's the (prompt) response I got:

" My email: I have a query on meeting Part L, and the use of PV panels. Currently, I believe it is possible to use the output of PV panels as part of your renewable contribution under Part L. However, in recent days Electric Ireland announced the cessation of feed-in tariff's for all new microgeneration plant, effective from next month (December 2014). I have two queries on this:

1. So, after December 31st, if I install PV on my proposed new build, will it's output qualify as part of my Part L renewable contribution ? RE: "Technically, a typical Solar PV array would not allow a new house to meet Part L unless the surplus power was being exported. This is because of the SEAI stipulation that the electricity being produced "displaces" incoming mains electricity, and is therefore counted at the 2.5 multiplier rate. If it is only heating water, it is only displacing energy from the central heating system. So the array would have to be 2.5 times bigger, and there would not be enough space on the roof. "

2. If I connect the output of my PV to a thermal store (e.g. buffer tank), I have been told that under DEAP that this will 'ruin' my BER, as DEAP makes no allowance for the fact that the electric energy I would use to drive the thermal is actually self-generated (i.e. renewable) - that DEAP assumes such a store uses mains-generated power (which is obviously a very poor method of so doing).

Could I get some guidance on this (which I would like to share as well).

SEAI response:

From the information that you have supplied,

In answer to Q(1) If the energy is being exported and can also contribute to the dwellings energy use it contributes towards a better BER and towards Part L renewable requirement. If the energy is being used on site and the remainder is being wasted, then how much is being used on site? How is this quantified?

On question (2) and variations thereof, we outline a number of scenarios below:

If there is no electricity storage on site then the electricity from the PV system must be used on site or exported to the grid at the time of generation. Otherwise the energy from the PV is wasted. There may be some form of device to ensure that the immersion receives suitably refined or smoothed power from the PV system.

Taking a simple example of PV connected to an immersion: if there does not appear to be spillage of any excess energy to the grid or storage of excess energy for use by other appliances in the house (at night time for example), it is reasonable to work on the following basis:
Call the maximum energy from the PV the energy calculated by DEAP equation M1
Consider this in the context of the solar water heating algorithm in DEAP appendix H, as a twin coil cylinder if there is a boiler backup. The immersion is effectively the lower coil and Vs (dedicated solar storage or parameter H11 in DEAP solar algorithm) is anything below the boiler coil. If there is only an immersion heating the cylinder (and it is backed up by grid electricity), then the dedicated solar storage, effective solar volume and full cylinder volume are the same thing.
Please verify the following against page 73 of the DEAP manual to ensure you understand how to use these equations and that they are followed correctly.
Parameter H1 to H6 are replaced by the calculation in equation M1 as it is a PV rather than solar thermal system.

H10: assume collector performance factor = 1 as we’re applying equation M1 to derive collector output
H7 is the solar energy available and is taken directly from equation M1 PV output (as the immersion is 100% efficient)
H8 is the solar to load ratio and is H7 / [hot water energy requirement at taps + Distribution loss from the water heating tab]
H9 is the Utilisation factor: if (H8) > 0, 1 – exp[-1/(H8)], otherwise H9=0
H12 is the total cylinder volume.
H13 is the effective solar volume and is H11 + 0.3*[H12-H11] for a combined cylinder
H13 is H11 for immersion heating the cylinder only.
H14 is daily hot water demand (from DEAP water heating tab)
H15 is volume ratio = H13/H14
H16 is the solar storage volume factor = 1 + 0.2 * ln(H15)
Qs is the kWh of thermal heat from the solar powered immersion is H7*H9*H10*H16
So, Qs is the renewable thermal output from the PV/immersion system and is used directly as the renewable thermal under “energy produced or saved” for the purposes of part L compliance checking.
The “energy produced or saved” delivered energy is (Qs / adjusted efficiency of main water heating) where “adjusted efficiency of main water heating” is from the DEAP energy requirements -> water heating tab. The associated primary energy factors and CO2 factors under energy produced or saved are that of the main water heating system.


Regarding the system that you have referred to, there are different ways to consider the priority of use for PV generated electricity:
1) Used on site for electrical loads (not including the immersion). If there is no or insufficient electrical load then
2) The immersion uses surplus PV output power. If there is no immersion or insufficient immersion load then
3) The final remainder is all spilled to the grid (or wasted if there is no grid connection).

Items (1) and (3) above would be considered "renewable electrical" and have the same primary energy and CO2 factors as the electricity fuel in DEAP. Item (2) is calculated as per the above based on Appendix H in DEAP.

The open question we have is how much energy is used by electrical loads at (1) above, and if there is no electrical storage, this must be an instantaneous load demand present at the time that the PV output is available. Otherwise it is spilled to the immersion in (2).

If it is the case that onsite electrical appliances [1] (other than immersion) get priority, then if the split of load between appliances / grid vs immersion can be determined from system design details, then this is how you could determine renewable electrical vs renewable thermal (immersion) load.
If (1) cannot be determined, then assume the first priority is the immersion (2) as calculated above - this represents a more conservative fall-back position in the absence of relevant design data identifying how the load is split. If there is a grid spillage mechanism for surplus, then the remainder not used at (2) can be considered to be spilt to the grid using the DEAP electricity factors and "renewable electrical" for Part L with associated 2.45 electricity factors.

If you have any further questions or queries then please don’t hesitate to contact us

recedite

So what they are saying there is...
The pv power going to the immersion is counted for the purposes of the energy rating (it will improve the EPC and Co2 figures, and the BER Cert) but for the puposes Part L (renewables contribution) it is treated as solar thermal.

All the H stuff listed refers to the solar cylinder, how much heat it can store etc.. so its basically treating the solar pv the same as a solar thermal source. That means the 2.5 multiplier is not applied.

If you export the surplus power for free however, the 2.5 multiplier can be applied.

The advice on measuring the power being used up within the house is not very practical in a new build situation. You could put a meter on the immersion and measure it for a year, then subtract that from total electricity consumption. But by their own rules, the BER has to be issued before first occupancy, which then confirms Part L requirement.

So the choice is; give away the power for free and pass Part L, or use it in the immersion and fail. Its a form of blackmail against the owner really.

Coles

Using Solar PV to heat water? I can't believe the SEAI are even entertaining that option.

What a mess. The SEAI should be speaking out against what is happening to microgeneration instead of just accepting it.

Edit. @recedite, Good post. That's precisely what the choice is. Outrageous.

MOTM

Coles wrote: »

Using Solar PV to heat water? I can't believe the SEAI are even entertaining that option.

..

So, what is your alternative suggestion as to how this should be handled in part L and BER, bearing in mind that BER/PART L are about energy and not about money paid for microgen?

Ignore the pv if supplying an immersion? Pretend its exported and give a 2.45 export factor?

The guidance above doesn't look like is encouraging pv & immersion. It's just reflecting it as it is.

quentingargan

In the UK, there is a daft scheme that pays for PRODUCTION. So you get paid for producing the power whether you use it or not. Then you get an extra 4p for exports, but often that isn't metered, and this is assumed to be 50/50 consumption/export.

This has resulted in a plethora of devices to divert surplus energy into heaters. How this is tolerated is beyond me. People getting paid 45p in some cases to produce electricity and then waste it by using it to heat water!

If the Minister doesn't introduce a feed in tariff, that is exactly what will happen in Ireland. You will get houses assessed for Part L on the basis that they are exporting the surplus energy (for free) then the owner will retrofit a gizmo to use the surplus power to heat water. An Irish solution to an Irish problem.

This is a reason why the feed in tariff should be re-introduced so that the energy produced can be used usefully. If you want to heat your immersion with electricity, do it at night with off-peak power for 8c and save yourself the cost of the gizmo.

Coles

MOTM wrote: »

So, what is your alternative suggestion as to how this should be handled in part L and BER, bearing in mind that BER/PART L are about energy and not about money paid for microgen?

Just allow export of surplus electricity to the Grid at a fair price. SEAI need to challenge the problem.

MOTM

Coles wrote: »

Just allow export of surplus electricity to the Grid at a fair price. SEAI need to challenge the problem.

Point taken....but the BER needs to reflect things as they are (in an asset rating) not how you or they would like them to be.

Not sure if you've asked the right people in SEAI about about challenging the price issue but that isn't really relevant for BER....and is it not a question more for the supplier or maybe the CER to actually do something about it or at least explain the reasoning.

Not sure what will happen re: the gizmo mentioned above by quentin, although if you have electric heating (direct electric ) it will be a very bad starting point in your BER and part L assessment. You'd need a lot of pv to counteract it.

galwaytt

MOTM wrote: »

....although if you have electric heating (direct electric ) it will be a very bad starting point in your BER and part L assessment. You'd need a lot of pv to counteract it.

..indeed. A friend of mine rang me last night - his daughter is looking at an apartment build in 2005, and had a BER of F. Only source of heating and DHW: electric. It's not even 10yrs old and, imho, unsaleable. Bananas.

MOTM

galwaytt wrote: »

..indeed. A friend of mine rang me last night - his daughter is looking at an apartment build in 2005, and had a BER of F. Only source of heating and DHW: electric. It's not even 10yrs old and, imho, unsaleable. Bananas.

Unless they drop the price. Just as well BER doesn't influence price

Sorry, off topic.

quentingargan

Did the usual thing of asking my local TD (Labour) to buttonhole the Minister. He opted to put a parliamentary question to Minister Alex White, which got the following response. I can't help getting a sense of a can being kicked down the road :mad:

REPLY

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Alex White)
While this is a matter in which I, as Minister, have no statutory function, I am aware that Electric Ireland has been offering a micro generation feed in tariff since February 2009. No other electricity supplier has chosen to provide such a tariff, to either domestic or commercial customers, though they have been invited to do so by the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER). Responsibility for the regulation of the electricity and gas markets is a matter for the CER, which is an independent statutory body.

I am aware of the need to give further policy consideration to the place of microgeneration in our energy mix. Analysis of the potential of microgeneration technologies such as small scale wind, solar and small scale hydro, has been carried out for my Department by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland.

The SEAI's findings, along with responses to the recent consultation on the Green Paper on Energy Policy in Ireland, will inform future policy on the provision of any market support for microgeneration.

galwaytt

quentingargan wrote: »

Did the usual thing of asking my local TD (Labour) to buttonhole the Minister. He opted to put a parliamentary question to Minister Alex White, which got the following response. I can't help getting a sense of a can being kicked down the road :mad:

REPLY

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Alex White)
While this is a matter in which I, as Minister, have no statutory function, I am aware that Electric Ireland has been offering a micro generation feed in tariff since February 2009. No other electricity supplier has chosen to provide such a tariff, to either domestic or commercial customers, though they have been invited to do so by the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER). Responsibility for the regulation of the electricity and gas markets is a matter for the CER, which is an independent statutory body.

I am aware of the need to give further policy consideration to the place of microgeneration in our energy mix. Analysis of the potential of microgeneration technologies such as small scale wind, solar and small scale hydro, has been carried out for my Department by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland.

The SEAI's findings, along with responses to the recent consultation on the Green Paper on Energy Policy in Ireland, will inform future policy on the provision of any market support for microgeneration.

Standard issue BS letter, like another I got today from another Dept. Anything to avoid a decision seems to be the norm.

If they are going to pull the plug on renewable technology, then they should do us all a favour and omit it from Part L as well and we can get on with things.

Coles

A reply received from ElectricIreland...

Hi, in February 2012 ESB Networks announced they would cease their support for this pilot but would honour its contracts until the 5th Anniversary. ESB Networks made this decision having consulted with appropriate authorities.

Electric Ireland is not in a position comment further on what ESB Networks have decided to do.

Electric Ireland is a commercial organisation who must ensure it operates in a commercial manner given the competitive landscape in which it operates. Having run the Microgen scheme for a number of years it was timely for Electric Ireland to have a full review of it to determine the appropriate course of action.

Perhaps it's best to focus on asking ESB Networks what their actual decision is?

quentingargan

Coles wrote: »

A reply received from ElectricIreland...



Perhaps it's best to focus on asking ESB Networks what their actual decision is?

Wow - I wonder who they mean by "appropriate authorities" with whom they consulted. Minister? CER? Civil servants?

Would love to know the source - PM me if you don't want to reveal here. I had always been told that ESB networks is providing the data from smart meters to any electricity provider who wants to join the scheme, but EI was the only participant. I had assumed that this decision was entirely made by EI, and not by ESB. That is what is also implied in the Ministers statement.

Coles

@guentingargan, PM sent.

Coles

quentingargan wrote: »

Wow - I wonder who they mean by "appropriate authorities" with whom they consulted. Minister? CER? Civil servants?

Here's a list of the different State/Semi State interested possible 'appropriate authorities'.

1. ESB Networks
2. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government (Minister Alan Kelly and Minister of State Paudie Coffey)
3. Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Minister Alex White and Minister of State Joe McHugh)
4. SEAI
5. Commission for Energy Regulation
6. ElectricIreland and other resellers.
7. Others?

recedite

"The State" is the appropriate authority, and its time the state stepped in and required all the operators in the Irish market to act responsibly.