3 Systems 3 Mpan, one Cleint

[Worcester]

We're in the middle of quoting for one client with two buildings

One can take 150KW (one MPAN)

The other (on the same site, but seperate) is two building joined together (they used to be two units) each with its own meter and separate MPAN, and each can take 25 kW

So, as my brain has gone to sleep..

So, I have 3 MPAN's, What is the response from Ofgem likely to be - will they treat it as one system (250kW), two systems 150 / 50(=25+25) or three systems 150 / 25 / 25. What can he legally do without bending any rules?

My hope is 2 MCS FiT systems each at 25kW, permitted development, paid as usual FiT (gen +deemed export) plus one 150kW under ROO-FiT

With all that's going on at the moment , this is being done at a running pace!

Discussions with planners and DNO already scheduled for tomorrow

 

[SibertSolar]

Wouldn't it all be classed as the same "site"?....especially if installed at the same time?

 

[Worcester]

Wouldn't it all be classed as the same "site"?....especially if installed at the same time?

That's what I had presumed in the first instance, though I just wondered if there was some opportunity here to legally, without twisting the rules to maximise income.

The obvious one for the client is to just try it on with three different FiT providers - I know one will be through Roo-Fit, still need a FiT provider and choose one that offers a ppa for the export.

p.s the site is in Fareham

 

[TedM]

This is the most recent OFGEM ROO-FIT guidance on the definition of "site". 2.9 would indicate that different MPANs alone is sufficient to mean they are treated as separate sites. But the guidance that OFGEM give to FiT suppliers for <50kW system applications is not quite so clear cut.

2.6. Before we can grant accreditation, we must assess the “Site” of all installations powered by the same low carbon energy source. The extent of the Site will determine the extent of the Eligible Installation that is eligible for FITs payments. The extent of the Eligible Installation will in turn determine its TIC and its generation tariff.

2.7. Where an installation is grid connected, the Site is usually determined by these criteria:
- the meter point administration number (MPAN) of the meter measuring the supply of electricity to the installation
- all electrical or mechanical interactions (eg shared inverters, generators, turbines, gas blowers or control systems)

2.8. Apart from the prescribed cases listed below, all installations powered by the same low carbon energy source that connect to the grid with the same import/export MPAN(s) will be considered on a single Site.

2.9. Where installations powered by the same low carbon energy source connect to the grid via separate MPANs and share no electrical, mechanical or civil works or structures, they will normally be considered on separate Sites.

2.10. For hydro generation stations, all turbines that are supplied with water by or from the same “civil works” will almost always be considered to be on the same Site, regardless of other factors.

2.11. Where an installation is not grid connected, the Site is usually determined by these criteria:
- all electrical or mechanical interactions (eg shared inverters, generators, turbines, gas blowers or control systems)
- the address
- the Ordnance Survey grid reference of the installation
- For hydro generating stations, shared civil works as described above

2.12. The Site assessment is completed as part of our review of an application for FIT accreditation (or preliminary accreditation). The assessment is completed on a case-by-case basis.


https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/defa...guidance_for_renewable_installations_v9_0.pdf
and
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/defa...e_for_licensed_electricity_suppliers_v7.0.pdf

 

[SibertSolar]

well, there you go, a LOT more succinct than <50kWp FiT guidance!

 

[Gavin A]

as I remember it, it works on if it has separate postal address, business rates, land registry and MPAN.

At least that's how we've previously worked it out, but looking at that guidance it looks like it's saying that one building split into multiple separate units with all of the above applying would still class as a single install as they'd share structural works. Which is a bit daft, as warehouses are often built with shared walls etc even if they're separate buildings owned by different companies.