Proposed FiT Cuts...

[markdgg]

DECC proposing to cut solar feed-in tariff rates by 87% | Solar Power Portal

 

[whinmoor]

Pretty extreme cuts. The Impact Assessment is certainly accurate:

"There are likely to be some negative impacts on employment across the renewables sector as a result of these changes"

 

[TedM]

The threat from DECC is that if the swingeing changes are not implemented the FiT scheme will be axed in January anyway.

 

[CBR600]

Have to say I thought everyone would have a bit more to say on this. If this goes through unaltered the industry is going to knocked on its @rse yet again and I'm not sure how much fight is left.....

 

[infinity]

There's another thread in sun lounge

 

[SibertSolar]

Oh, there's plenty being said/done.....how to present the correct messages in a public forum is yet to be fine-tuned though I expect. There is a 38_Degrees petition doing the rounds, the actual consultation itself is available for reply and the trade bodies are busy putting their thoughts/responses together. FoE and Greenpeace are in the loop and the situation is receiving international attention in the Renewables sector.

 

[saint]

Where is the sun lounge?

 

[Gavin A]

Have to say I thought everyone would have a bit more to say on this. If this goes through unaltered the industry is going to knocked on its @rse yet again and I'm not sure how much fight is left.....

the impacts are still being digested, analised and strategies worked out, but the response is starting.

 

[Gavin A]

Last week the government announced an 86% cut to the Feed In Tariff support for solar PV, which would take the funding down to just 1.63p / kWh from 1st January - this is much less than the support agreed for new nuclear power.

Could anyone who cares about climate change and supports the development of renewable energy in the UK please sign & share this petition, and if you fancy doing a bit more please write to your MP.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-uk-government-killing-off-the-uk-solar-industry
www.writetothem.com/

Including the export payments this means the electricity companies would be paying just 6.3p per kWh for the solar generated electricity supplied to the grid, but charging 12-15p / kWh when they sell it to the neighbours.

Nuclear has been promised a guaranteed price of 9.2p / kWh for the planned new plant, so this proposal would mean that owners of solar PV systems would be getting paid 1/3 less for the electricity they supply than the French and Chinese state owned companies who would own the nuclear plant would be getting paid.

If this is implemented it's likely to result in tens of thousands of job losses in the solar industry, and be a massive set back to this country's efforts to reduce our carbon emissions just at a point where the solar PV industry has ramped up to the point where we're making a serious difference.

A framework was already in place to reduce costs, with support already having reduced by 50% since the last massive cuts in 2012, or 73% from when the scheme started in 2010, and reducing further every quarter, so this measure now is completely unnecessary and counter productive.

It risks undoing everything that's been achieved thanks to the funding that's already been committed to. With a phased reduction in support the industry aims to be able to exist without subsidies by 2018 anyway, but this sort of overnight cut risks destroying most of the industry and increasing costs because we'd lose the economies of scale that we need to keep reducing costs.

Thanks for you support,

Gavin Andrews, Leeds Solar

This is my first shot at it on facebook, (please like and share it) key initial target has to be getting people to email MPs and get behind the 38 degrees / FOE petition, while a more detailed response is formulated.

This time I don't see the industry taking this lying down, hopefully we can present more of a united front this time now that all the trade bodies have come out against it.

 

[whlphil]

The one you need to sign is this one as this is the one they will have to acknowledge, its the UK gov petition site.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106791/signatures/new

 

[infinity]

If that's the case, it only had 767 signatures! A long way off!

 

[Gavin A]

The one you need to sign is this one as this is the one they will have to acknowledge, its the UK gov petition site.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106791/signatures/new

the problem is, that's a rubbish petition.

What answer would that possibly get that would help the situation?

The question posed by the petition is the question that could potentially end up being discussed, so it needs to be thought about properly, this one's counterproductive IMO. I think they won't accept another petition on the same issue either, so it's effectively blocking a better thought out and better supported petition from being added to the site.

 

[whlphil]

If that's the case, it only had 767 signatures! A long way off!

It only got launched on Saturday and consequently not much publicity yet

 

[infinity]

Who launched the .gov one?
Gavin is right, it needs replacing.

 

[whlphil]

the problem is, that's a rubbish petition.

What answer would that possibly get that would help the situation?

The question posed by the petition is the question that could potentially end up being discussed, so it needs to be thought about properly, this one's counterproductive IMO. I think they won't accept another petition on the same issue either, so it's effectively blocking a better thought out and better supported petition from being added to the site.

Might be missing the point but what good is any other petition going to make?

Any other petition doesn't have the ability to force coverage in parliament does it?

Surely if it gets coverage in parliament no matter what the question is it will get debated and at that point its a matter of how much pressure has been put on local MP's

I'm sure this is only the start and that there will be a bigger response than there was last time round in 2011 and hopefully another march on parliament.