Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Public Consultation on a Micro-generation Support Scheme (MSS) in Ireland

Options
1…468910

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    the_amazing_raisin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,882 ✭✭✭✭the_amazing_raisin


    I guess to expand my point regarding a high consumption house, if you're in a house with 2 EVs, heat pump and electric cooking your annual consumption is going to be around 10,000kWh, much higher than average

    Now in that sutuation, the more you can offset the better, so it's tempting to go for as big an array as possible, possibly even over 6kWp if your house supports it

    There are going to be times with a big array that you'll be unable to self consume so you could end up exporting a lot. However, if the scheme wants to discourage this type of situation, then it shouldn't be financially beneficial. This is why a diminishing financial return is the best approach IMO, it creates a situation where you can manage short bursts of exporting a lot of power, but doing it long term will be of no financial gain

    I feel like the 6kW limit is a bit arbitrary. I get the argument regarding grid stability, but I'm not understanding how it's okay for my house to import up to 16kW, but can only export 6kW. What's so different between import and export that results in a 10kW gap?

    I agree there should be additional checks for bigger producers, but I feel like the jump from being a small producer to a big one should be higher. 6kW just seems very low, especially considering other countries seem to manage bigger generators without any trouble

    "The internet never fails to misremember" - Sebastian Ruiz, aka Frost



  • Options
    #153
    slave1
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,718 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    We have 2 EV's, no heat pump but storage heater in Winter, electric cooking, immersion etc.
    With normal work commute the annual consumption is above 20,000kWh, no way we could do it for 10,000kWh

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    My Active Ads (adverts.ie)



  • Options
    #154
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,772 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    KCross wrote: »
    The idea is self consume and size your array accordingly and obviously you have to oversize the array to cover more of the autumn/winter months so the FiT will then take the resultant excess in the summer but the idea is that it would be relatively speaking small amounts of excess (<30%).

    where's the benefit to the grid of having domestic users feeding in at times when there is already ample capacity?

    I suppose it might drive prices down if there is time-based flexibility in tariffs, but there's a limit to how much people can switch their usage to the daytime and people with PV arrays have an incentive to do this already anyway.

    If every PV install included a battery, it would effectively take those users mostly off-grid, which would reduce the requirement for peak-time capacity on the grid (peaker plants, grid-attached batteries etc).


  • Options
    #155
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    loyatemu wrote: »
    where's the benefit to the grid of having domestic users feeding in at times when there is already ample capacity?

    There isnt much benefit, which is why they are not encouraging it. Size the array to maximise self consumption.


  • Options
    #156
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    cruisey1987 wrote: »
    I feel like the 6kW limit is a bit arbitrary. I get the argument regarding grid stability, but I'm not understanding how it's okay for my house to import up to 16kW, but can only export 6kW. What's so different between import and export that results in a 10kW gap?

    My guess.... your import capacity is based on you not drawing that 16kW for hours on end. Its a house so your usage is continuously up/down and things like heat pumps and ovens come on/off. They dont consume their max rating continuously. Its called diversity.

    With SolarPV you could have, lets say, 5 houses connected to a transformer and if they all had 11kWp connected to the grid and its a fine summers day you could have hours on end of every house dumping 11kW to the grid at the same time and for hours on end.... it wouldnt be able to handle that, as is, without some upgrades.

    Some cutoff has to be picked. Anything above that cutoff requires investigation of the infrastructure around your house.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    the_amazing_raisin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,882 ✭✭✭✭the_amazing_raisin


    slave1 wrote: »
    We have 2 EV's, no heat pump but storage heater in Winter, electric cooking, immersion etc.
    With normal work commute the annual consumption is above 20,000kWh, no way we could do it for 10,000kWh


    You really need to look at a heat pump :)

    "The internet never fails to misremember" - Sebastian Ruiz, aka Frost



  • Options
    #158
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    I got some important clarifications from the department.

    The references in the docs to Jun 2020 were wrong. They were meant to say Jun 2021 and have now been corrected if you download the paper again!

    That means that the CEP is NOT available to anyone that already has a SolarPV system deployed. It would only apply to new installs done via the SEAI after Jun 2021.

    Existing installs prior to that date would only be able to draw the CEG.

    The better news, as I understand it, is that the 30% export limit only applies to the CEP and that explains how they are going to manage that since you will have to register/prove your array size with the SEAI and they will only give you CEP payments upto the 30% of the size you have registered (upto 4kWp). You can still install 6kWp if you wish but you will only get the CEP payment for 30% of 4kWp.

    If you have an existing 6kWp system you would get paid for all your export at the CEG rate.

    There is also a committment that 80% of those that have registered an NC6 form with Eirgrid will get a smart meter before the scheme starts in July 2021. There will be a plan B initially for the other 20% but not sure exactly what that is.


    Health warning on all that.... it is still a consultation so anything/everything could change when they actually go live with it, so dont make any decisions based on my post! ;)


  • Options
    #159
    the_amazing_raisin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,882 ✭✭✭✭the_amazing_raisin


    I think that's good news regarding the CEP, it'll keep costs under control and stop it turning into another cash for ash scheme

    At the same time I think it's good that someone with a larger array gets the market rate for export, it seems like a fairer system in that the electricity provider is paying, and not the taxpayer

    "The internet never fails to misremember" - Sebastian Ruiz, aka Frost



  • Options
    #160
    phester28
    Registered Users Posts: 453 ✭✭phester28


    Am I reading the above wrong. So anyone with solar currently installed is not able apply for FIT, only those after june this year will be illegible. Well done the greens.


  • Options
    #161
    idc
    Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭idc


    phester28 wrote: »
    Am I reading the above wrong. So anyone with solar currently installed is not able apply for FIT, only those after june this year will be illegible. Well done the greens.

    There are two schemes CEG and CEP. Existing installs can get the CEG scheme.

    If I understand correctly new installs after June can also get a CEP payment based on max 4 kWp but there is a 30% export limit. I guess this to replace existing grant system and thus only seai registered installs can get this


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    the_amazing_raisin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,882 ✭✭✭✭the_amazing_raisin


    idc wrote: »
    There are two schemes CEG and CEP. Existing installs can get the CEG scheme.

    If I understand correctly new installs after June can also get a CEP payment based on max 4 kWp but there is a 30% export limit. I guess this to replace existing grant system and thus only seai registered installs can get this

    That's my understanding of what KC said too

    I believe the CEP is intended to replace the current grants. I hope they remove the requirement for houses to be built before 2011 as well

    "The internet never fails to misremember" - Sebastian Ruiz, aka Frost



  • Options
    #163
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    phester28 wrote: »
    Am I reading the above wrong. So anyone with solar currently installed is not able apply for FIT, only those after june this year will be illegible. Well done the greens.

    No, as I said...
    “Existing installs prior to that date would only be able to draw the CEG.”


  • Options
    #164
    air
    Registered Users Posts: 2,822 ✭✭✭air


    The 30% cap on exports has to go, that would just cause us to repeat the mistakes of the UK where people install diverters etc. out of spite to avoid exporting energy they are not going to get paid for.

    This means this zero carbon energy is lost to the grid and generally squandered instead.

    If the rate paid is commercially viable, it should be viable whether 30% or 100% of the energy generated is exported.

    Self consumption is already encouraged by paying an export rate less than retail cost as stated elsewhere in the paper, so this misguided limit is not required to encourage self consumption - which is the only justification offered.


  • Options
    #165
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    air wrote: »
    The 30% cap on exports has to go, that would just cause us to repeat the mistakes of the UK where people install diverters etc. out of spite to avoid exporting energy they are not going to get paid for.

    This means this zero carbon energy is lost to the grid and generally squandered instead.

    If the rate paid is commercially viable, it should be viable whether 30% or 100% of the energy generated is exported.

    Self consumption is already encouraged by paying an export rate less than retail cost as stated elsewhere in the paper, so this misguided limit is not required to encourage self consumption - which is the only justification offered.

    It only limits CEP, not CEG so you will get paid.

    Another reason for the limit, which I think you missed, is to protect the taxpayer as the CEP is being paid for by other taxpayers via a PSO levy increase.

    It can be argued it’s reasonable on the basis that leaving it wide open for “rich” people to install large arrays while poor people are left behind because they can’t afford an array but still have to pay the increased levy!


  • Options
    #166
    air
    Registered Users Posts: 2,822 ✭✭✭air


    Thanks, I had only skimmed it and missed the distinction between the two.

    I would argue that it should be CEG only, we have existing (and very generous) mechanisms in place to distribute social welfare to those who need it.

    I think that's the issue with all these schemes, they try to achieve too many things at once - BER improvements, social harmony, world peace etc. and end up not achieving anything very well.

    Why not just provide a scaled export tariff structure with various prices per kWh guaranteed, tiered at various annual export levels - 6c up to 3000kWh, 5c from 3000-10000kWh type thing.
    Dispense with all the bureaucrats and jobs for the administrators.

    We already have extensive standards in place to ensure the safety of electrical installations, the SEAI inspectors are adding no value in that regard.

    This worked fine for the original Electric Ireland micro generation scheme, no grants were provided for hardware installation, just a guaranteed export rate, a single form and a RECI cert for the installation.


  • Options
    #167
    graememk
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 5,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭graememk


    KCross wrote: »
    It only limits CEP, not CEG so you will get paid.

    Another reason for the limit, which I think you missed, is to protect the taxpayer as the CEP is being paid for by other taxpayers via a PSO levy increase.

    It can be argued it’s reasonable on the basis that leaving it wide open for “rich” people to install large arrays while poor people are left behind because they can’t afford an array but still have to pay the increased levy!

    So My mis reading ended up being right all along!

    Makes much more sense.

    Id be happy with the standard export, with no limits average is €60/ MWh which is 6c/kWh

    So, Im going to try to work through how much do you need to pay per kwp, to break even on export alone. just for fun.

    Where I am with optimal angle, (https://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/#PVP) and direction I would get 835kWh from 1kWp of panels, if exported 100%
    would earn you 50 euro/ year.(huh didn't expect it to be so round)

    Assume a 10 year payback , that's 500 euro. which then you would have to pay €500/kwp. A 10kwp array would need to only cost €5000, Even self builds would struggle to hit that!

    Ive got the space to be able to stick another 7.2 kwp on a roof, but its flat and not due south... SW/NE, Total estimate for the year is 5035kWh.
    If I exported everything in a year, would "make" €302.
    Cost solely for export it would need to come in at €420/kwp.
    Just an interesting thought experiment.

    But a 6c rate would completely negate any real savings by using a Zappi*, Or HW Diverts*. and will get more people on board, also reducing the payback of the whole system.



    *Can have other reasons to get them, maybe smug mode by running your car on solar, or not having to light a fire to have hot water in the summer!

    Batteries If they don't cost too much, walk the line.

    But good news on the clarification. - they need to get the Smart meters and Day night sorted too. I'm not giving up my day night rate to be able to export! would cost me more money than id ever make back exporting.


  • Options
    #168
    citizen6
    Registered Users Posts: 96 ✭✭citizen6


    Are we assuming that the existing SEAI grants will be removed after FIT comes in? I'm not seeing any end date for the grant on SEAI website.


  • Options
    #169
    graememk
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 5,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭graememk


    citizen6 wrote: »
    Are we assuming that the existing SEAI grants will be removed after FIT comes in? I'm not seeing any end date for the grant on SEAI website.

    More or less yes. Maybe there will be a bit of an overlap.

    Not going to hear anything until the consultation is over.

    Seai can stop the grant at any time. There might be some notice, anyone's who's already accepted still gets to finish etc


  • Options
    #170
    minnow
    Registered Users Posts: 202 ✭✭minnow


    The Green Party have a Facebook Live event on making submissions for the micro generation scheme tonight at 7pm. Might be of interest to some:
    https://fb.me/e/LY75ICRj


  • Options
    #171
    Niceday20
    Registered Users Posts: 67 ✭✭Niceday20


    Interesting article on RTE this morning, quote:

    A scheme allowing people sell home generated electricity to the national grid will require a "huge investment" in Ireland's electricity network, Minister for the Environment Eamon Ryan has said.

    Under the plan individuals, community groups, business owners and farmers - or micro-generators - will be able sell electricity to the national grid if they generate it from solar panels, wind turbines and other sustainable energy technologies.

    The plan is part of the Government's 'Microgeneration Support Scheme', which is set to begin in July and is in public consultation until mid-February.

    Speaking on RTE's Morning Ireland, Minister Ryan said: "I think it will require huge investment. It will require real engineering expertise from ESB Networks. I am confident that they can and will do that."

    Under the proposed scheme, micro-generators can sell 30% of the excess electricity they produce and export it back to the grid. The price that electricity will be sold at is being formulated during the consultation process.

    "It’s a scheme to get people generating power at home, and in their own business, and on the farm," Mr Ryan said, adding that the consultation would help deliver a "fair price".

    "The real benefit in having your own power is not having to pay for the electricity you are using. I think that for most householders and most businesses the real saving will be in their own electricity bills," he said.

    The CEO of 3CEA - the three County Energy Agency for Kilkenny, Carlow and Wexford – welcomed the 'Micro Generation Support Scheme' but said initial projections showed homeowners could spend 14 years recouping the cost of their solar panels.

    Paddy Phelan said price incentives needed to be good enough to attract people to invest in renewable energy technologies for their homes and businesses.

    "I would see that the incentive would need to be greater to get people to change their behaviour," said Mr Phelan.

    "Limiting export on a household or a business or a farm to 30% is a missed opportunity," Mr Phelan said.

    He raised questions about the capacity of the electricity network to take electricity from many microgenerators.

    "I think that it is borne out by the difficulties that we might see in terms of the age of our electricity network.

    "The Government really needs to consider bolstering the supports to the network to allow it to be upgraded and to facilitate expanding the scheme to allow for more export from all the community buildings, farmer roof buildings and homes right across the country," he said.

    Farmer Tommy O'Shea, of O'Shea Farms in Pilltown, Co Kilkenny runs part of his farm business on solar panels.

    He said the 30% limit on the amount of electricity that can be sold by individuals, farmers, individuals and business owners is too small and he has the scope to generate more electricity.

    Minister Ryan said there is a "real challenge in our network – in our distribution network and transmission network to really scale it up to make it capable of availing of this really competitive fuel supply, this renewable supply we have.

    "Having significant microgeneration, in my mind, supports the grid and stabilises it, he said, adding that ESB Networks, as the distribution company, is already introducing a range of smart technologies to the electricity network.

    Micro-generation is defined as micro-generation technologies, including micro-solar PV, micro-hydro, micro-wind and micro-renewable CHP with a maximum electrical output of 50kW, designed to primarily service the self-consumption needs of the property where it is installed.

    The scheme is part of Ireland’s transition to a net-zero carbon economy, and is part of trying to achieve
    Ireland’s 2030 targets for renewable energy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    phester28
    Registered Users Posts: 453 ✭✭phester28


    What I really dont get here is. I currently am exporting ALL my excess to the grid just I am not getting paid for it. Nothing will change overnight. I understand the ESB will have to put some local caps to prevent overloading a sub station or something like that. What am I missing?


  • Options
    #173
    the_amazing_raisin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,882 ✭✭✭✭the_amazing_raisin


    I'm still not following this 30% of the elctricity generated rule

    Is it on a cumulative (kWh) basis or instant (kW) one?
    Is 30% the size of the array, or the kWp capcapity, or the kWh generated per year or what?

    I don't see how not having a fixed figure will discourage large systems, if anything a percentage would seem to incentivise installing a larger PV array to maximiuse the export and reduce your bills to 0

    "The internet never fails to misremember" - Sebastian Ruiz, aka Frost



  • Options
    #174
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    phester28 wrote: »
    What I really dont get here is. I currently am exporting ALL my excess to the grid just I am not getting paid for it. Nothing will change overnight. I understand the ESB will have to put some local caps to prevent overloading a sub station or something like that. What am I missing?

    Thats it. You arent missing anything.
    cruisey1987 wrote: »
    I'm still not following this 30% of the elctricity generated rule

    Is it on a cumulative (kWh) basis or instant (kW) one?
    Is 30% the size of the array, or the kWp capcapity, or the kWh generated per year or what?

    I don't see how not having a fixed figure will discourage large systems, if anything a percentage would seem to incentivise installing a larger PV array to maximiuse the export and reduce your bills to 0

    The 30% is on kWh, not kW.
    It will be determined by the size of the array that you register/prove with the SEAI. YOu can install a larger system if you wish but you wont get the premium payment for anyting beyond the 30%. You'll still get the standard payment though.

    See my earlier post about the 30% limit... its for CEP only, not CEG.
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116144653&postcount=158


  • Options
    #175
    slave1
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,718 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    I'll be fine so as with my Shading I'm probably at 40%-50% of potential but I am not....

    letting ESB know if/when I add to my PV arrays
    losing my night rate - given Winter heating of water and 365 charging of two EVs

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    My Active Ads (adverts.ie)



  • Options
    #176
    the_amazing_raisin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,882 ✭✭✭✭the_amazing_raisin


    KCross wrote: »
    Thats it. You arent missing anything.



    The 30% is on kWh, not kW.
    It will be determined by the size of the array that you register/prove with the SEAI. YOu can install a larger system if you wish but you wont get the premium payment for anyting beyond the 30%. You'll still get the standard payment though.

    See my earlier post about the 30% limit... its for CEP only, not CEG.
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116144653&postcount=158


    Thanks, I still don't see how that incentivises smaller systems


    Say for example a 3kWp system exports 1500kWh to the grid per year. I'll get the CEP bonus on 500kWh and the basic CEG rate on the remaining 1000kWh, based on the 30% rule


    However, if I treble the system to 9kWp and export 4500kWh, then I get 1500kWh at the higher CEP rate


    So it's not in my interest to install a larger system, which they seem to be trying to discourage


    That's why I feel that if they fixed the CEP at something like 1000kWh per year instead of a percentage then it'd be better at encouraging smaller systems


    Personally, I'm fine with a higher CEP, but it seems to go against what they want to accomplish

    "The internet never fails to misremember" - Sebastian Ruiz, aka Frost



  • Options
    #177
    slave1
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,718 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    To put proper incentives in place to move us away from fossil fuel there should be initial get paid for what you export, end of.
    Later they can taper the incentives after penetration/learnings.

    To tick a box and effectively kill FIT off just carry on with what they have proposed, end of.
    ESB gets their way, fat cats

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    My Active Ads (adverts.ie)



  • Options
    #178
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    cruisey1987 wrote: »
    Thanks, I still don't see how that incentivises smaller systems


    Say for example a 3kWp system exports 1500kWh to the grid per year. I'll get the CEP bonus on 500kWh and the basic CEG rate on the remaining 1000kWh, based on the 30% rule


    However, if I treble the system to 9kWp and export 4500kWh, then I get 1500kWh at the higher CEP rate


    So it's not in my interest to install a larger system, which they seem to be trying to discourage


    That's why I feel that if they fixed the CEP at something like 1000kWh per year instead of a percentage then it'd be better at encouraging smaller systems


    Personally, I'm fine with a higher CEP, but it seems to go against what they want to accomplish

    I dont really get your logic.

    The CEP is proposed to be capped at 30% export upto a max of 4kWp... maybe you missed that bit? Anything you install above 4kWp wont get any CEP.

    You'll get CEG on all of your install though which everyone should be happy with. If we get anything close to night rate electricity prices for CEG I think thats a decent price to get and it will be a known price in advance.

    You can install 9kWp if you wish and you'll get CEG for all of that but only CEP for 30% of 4kWp. Does that make any more sense?

    The 30% export limit is to put a cap on that incentive since its taxpayer funded and not have the taxpayer on the hook for people installing massive systems. Its not alot different to the current grant system in that regard in that you only get grant aid upto 4kWp... nothing stopping you going to 6kWp but you pay for the extra 2kWp yourself.... the CEP is being organised in the same way.

    If there was no cap, the result would be a northern ireland cash-for-ash system where people went wild and starting burning pellets for free money for no benefit to the country... and the taxpayer out of pocket for huge sums. I'm sure there would be uproar here if that happened!

    Note: The CEG is not taxpayer funded. Only the CEP. The CEG is funded internally by the electricity providers. They need to manage the costs themselves by market supply/demand, which is a good thing. Its not SEAI or the dept administering it.


  • Options
    #179
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    slave1 wrote: »
    To tick a box and effectively kill FIT off just carry on with what they have proposed, end of.

    What issues do you see with the current proposal? Why does it kill FiT off?
    slave1 wrote: »
    To put proper incentives in place to move us away from fossil fuel there should be initial get paid for what you export, end of.

    Thats all there. You export, you get paid. What issue do you see?


  • Options
    #180
    slave1
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,718 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    Well the ESB continue their blanket 6kW limitation, if someone has the space and means they should be allowed go above without red tape.

    Re second point, there will not be payment for all exported and I disagree with that, the ESB will take it all but won't pay for it all, that's just not a forward thinking perspective.
    Look at Germany where there was 100% payment (above Market rate too) and a guaranteed 20 year plan from the onset.

    More energy export can only be a good thing, up to ESB how they manage it and therein lies the limitation

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    My Active Ads (adverts.ie)



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    slave1 wrote: »
    Well the ESB continue their blanket 6kW limitation, if someone has the space and means they should be allowed go above without red tape.

    Re second point, there will not be payment for all exported and I disagree with that, the ESB will take it all but won't pay for it all, that's just not a forward thinking perspective.
    Look at Germany where there was 100% payment (above Market rate too) and a guaranteed 20 year plan from the onset.

    More energy export can only be a good thing, up to ESB how they manage it and therein lies the limitation

    You need to read it again. You will get paid for all your export. I’ve stated that on nearly every post now.

    Your other point about the 6kW limit is not within the remit of this consultation or FiT in general. You can go above 6kWp if you wish but let’s be honest, it’s not critical since most houses wouldn’t be able to take that volumes of panels anyway.

    I don’t see anything in your reply that kills FiT.

    Plaster your house with as many panels as you like up to 50kWp and you’ll get paid for the export at the CEG rate. What’s the issue?


Advertisement