Home Solar & Subsidized Feed In Tariff Qld

[cruiser 91]

Same as everyone else I guess, increase in costs to supply the service. The hikes just had to become bigger to cover the 44c FIT

Actually that is in correct. Electricity suppliers only contribute a maximum of 0.06c to FIT's per KWH and that is purely up to them, they dont have to pay jack shyte if they dont want to but the Tax Payer makes up the the overall .44c plus, its just like any other handout previously mentioned in this thread. You must get your facts right b4 stating ill fuel comments.

I must also mention that my 2.65 solar system cost twice as much if not more than the cost of a same sized system today.
Would you agree I was ripped off in 2010 

Electricity suppliers hike up prices because they can, pure and simple.

[tryagain]

Actually that is in correct. Electricity suppliers only contribute a maximum of 0.06c to FIT's per KWH and that is purely up to them, they dont have to pay jack shyte if they dont want to but the Tax Payer makes up the the overall .44c plus, its just like any other handout previously mentioned in this thread. You must get your facts right b4 stating ill fuel comments.

I must also mention that my 2.65 solar system cost twice as much if not more than the cost of a same sized system today.
Would you agree I was ripped off in 2010 

Electricity suppliers hike up prices because they can, pure and simple.

Pretty sure I have got my facts straight and have posted a link to back it up, Can you please post proof to the Taxpayer footing this bill through general revenue? I remember reading something similar to what you have written except I think you will find that it is the not the tax payers but the other electricity consumers like I have said all along.

[BaseCamp]

I recall an interview on ABC radio last year with Bob Katter....

From what I recall (and my recall is a bit hazy here),  Katter said that in the Jo era - Jo demanded that Gladstone Aliminum smelter supply power to the grid for practically free...   and that is why electricity was so cheap back in those days....

Tba?



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

[gronk]

I recall an interview on ABC radio last year with Bob Katter....

From what I recall (and my recall is a bit hazy here),  Katter said that in the Jo era - Jo demanded that Gladstone Aliminum smelter supply power to the grid for practically free...   and that is why electricity was so cheap back in those days....

Tba?



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Aluminium smelters are one of the most power hungry industries on the planet......they consume vast amounts, so they wouldn't be in a position to supply any power to the grid.

Maybe Jo was charging them heaps, so subsidising the rest of the state ??

[prodigyrf]

The State's solar FIT would be a similar setup to South Australia's here-
http://www.sa.gov.au/topics/water-energy-and-environment/energy/energy-supply-and-sources/renewable-energy-sources/solar-energy/solar-photovoltaic-systems/solar-feed-in-scheme
Notice for early adopters like me we get 44c ex GST and that's via SA Power Networks (the old ETSA) who own the poles and wires billing each retailer and effectively passing it on to me via the reatiler and guess who they have to get it off? Not the broke State Gummint that's for sure and why it was too easy for them to legislate that into being because it had no effect on State coffers. Then notice the extra retailer commitment (6.8c from Jan 1) estimated by escosa to be fair wholesale value for the excess power generated (was 5.3c on my last bill in 2015) The 44c is the real kicker that's simply fed into everyone's bills via SA Power Networks charges and as that link points out that's way above what the wholesale price is really worth.

Hence the beggar thy neighbour power policy and why when power prices were rapidly rising due to other forces at work (mainly other RECs schemes, wind power subsidies and particularly States having milked their power utilitiesfor years and not providing for adequate depreciation and hence the selloff to let private enterprise be the messenger), the legislators had to pull back on the FIT scheme largesse for the sake of struggletown.

Edit: The other factor to add to the perfect storm for power prices was the rapid takeup of aircons while all this was going on and the need to gold plate the network for a few weeks of summer stinker days particularly between an interconnected SA and Vic. It's estimated the network and generation capacity is 25% larger in order to cope with a few weeks worth of summer days and we all have to pay for that, particularly the plethora of gas peaking plants that lay idle for most of the year. A bit like our idle desal plants all consumers have to pay for that backup with no rolling brownouts.

[BaseCamp]

That could have been it?   

Apologies, I don't recall all the details about the interview.

Like I think Katter also said that the Gladstone Smelter closed down because of environmental issues and the pollution was exported to China...  (smelting galore) ..... (Wasn't gaim to post this last time in case I was all wrong. ...?    A bit embarrassing if that smelter is still going in happy rock??     lol...

Kteer then said the power distribution was later privatized, in Qld?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

[gronk]

Mad hatter Katter and Flo and Jo......you poor queenslanders have had your share eh ?? 

[Moggy]

Mad hatter Katter and Flo and Jo......you poor queenslanders have had your share eh ?? 

We've still got them.....
Clive palmer
Rudd
Can do campbell
State of Origin (winning) team :-)

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[rags]

We've still got them.....
Clive palmer
Rudd
Can do campbell
State of Origin (winning) team :-)

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

And curtains that don't fade

[tryagain]

Jetcrew, I agree with most of what you have said but a few bits I am not so sure about but as you look to be in the solarish industry you could well know more than I do.

I haven't sat down and done the sums but I cant really conceive of a more expensive way to introduce solar, with most people here talking about break even after about 4 years but continuing to get the inflated FIT for the remainder of a couple decades it would have even been cheaper for everyone else if the government borrowed the money to purchase and then gave away solar systems without a FIT as then people without the ability to get solar would only have to pay for others solar set ups once plus interest not multiple times.

I have also read that due to the design of the 44cFIT and participants switching consumption form daytime to night time to maximise their return it has placed additional load into peak periods and has therefore actually resulted in the network requiring additional generation capacity to meet the increased peak as opposed to reducing it.

The scheme was exceptionally successful in getting solar onto rooftops but I think it would be hard to find much of a worse way of achieving it.

EDIT - yes that article puts a $$$ figure on it $276P/A to cover the early investors and owners of the infrastructure, imagine the cost PA to each household  if you were paying back a billion $$$ loan for the power company  each year..... you keep missing the point ..one way or another you and me were always going to pay more , your just upset it goes to other normal people I am happy it does.. and the environment benefits too.

As I stated earlier even giving away the panels would surely have been cheaper, I am interested to know though what likely scenario you can envisage there being a more expensive outcome. Yes electricity prices were always going to go up in a move to cleaner supply that doesn't we shouldn't want the best value for money or desire a fair and equitable distribution of those costs.

[jetcrew]

Hey try again ,

I can't claim any more knowledge than anyone else mate..

But nothing the gov ever does is equitable ...power company executives and gov ministers sit down to work out a solar scheme ...hmmm wonder who the smart ones were ...

It's not equitable , it's not fair , it's just how it is and it was imho needed .., people who have it can't be blamed for the system ...do you blame the player ..or do you blame the game ....

Giving away panels not sure if the costs on that mate ..they only wanted a certain amount of power so how would they choose who gets it ..even less unfair .

The scheme was announced ..people chose to buy in or not ..if people could not afford to then obv they chose not.. Can't blame those who could and did ...

Jet

[grafy82]

.
A very quick google reveals this old article that seems to confirm it as well place a $$$ figure on what everyone else is having to contribute with (a predicted) $276pa for non solar households this year, I hadn't read this article before but seems to confirm everything that I have said here.

Wow, a huge 76c a day. Here's a tip, try turning your Aircon off for a couple of hours a day and you'll offset the cost of having to pay for my FIT. I hardly ever run my Aircon to save power, I'm sure you could get used to it too.

[prodigyrf]

Well in that regard struggletown that can't afford to install aircons, let alone run them even if their landlord can, is also subsidizing that additional 25% of the power network that needs to be there to satisfy those of us that can afford airconditioning for summer extreme days. The way to avoid all this cross subsidy is of course to meter time of use, peak demand pricing as well as leave the power generators free reign to pay for any excess rooftop solar as they see fit given overall supply and demand. Either that or solar fans cough up to leave the grid altogether if they don't want to contribute their fair share.

[grafy82]

Either that or solar fans cough up to leave the grid altogether if they don't want to contribute their fair share.

Believe me, most people with solar would love to go off grid, but then the have nots will still complain and moan because they have will have to pay higher prices again as power companies won't be making as much money. People just need to get over it. Complain to the government about it, not the ones who took up the opportunity when they saw it.
    I don't smoke and I don't drink, but I still have to pay to cover the cost of health effects for those who do. See, we could start this sooky argument about any number of things we don't like to have to pay for. Get over it.

[Symon]

I recall an interview on ABC radio last year with Bob Katter....

From what I recall (and my recall is a bit hazy here),  Katter said that in the Jo era - Jo demanded that Gladstone Aliminum smelter supply power to the grid for practically free...   and that is why electricity was so cheap back in those days....

Tba?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

That could have been it?   

Apologies, I don't recall all the details about the interview.

Like I think Katter also said that the Gladstone Smelter closed down because of environmental issues and the pollution was exported to China...  (smelting galore) ..... (Wasn't gaim to post this last time in case I was all wrong. ...?    A bit embarrassing if that smelter is still going in happy rock??     lol...

Kteer then said the power distribution was later privatized, in Qld?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

OK, a few things here.

1. Aluminium smelters consume electricity, not produce it.  Power is unsurprisingly produced in a power station.
2. The aluminium smelter you refer to is in Boyne Island, not Gladstone
3. The power station you are referring to is in Gladstone
4. The aluminium smelting industry in Australia has been under substantial pressure in recent years due to a combination of factors, namely the rapidly rising costs of energy in Australia, the high labour costs in Australia, and the global oversupply of aluminium mostly due to China building new smelters at a rate of about one per month.
5. The Boyne Island smelter is still running, and is pumping out heaps of metal.  It is however at risk of closing due to the factors I mentioned above.
6. The Gladstone power station (the thing that makes power) was originally state owned.  For this reason it was an environmental problem, those who lived in Gladstone in the 90's would remember the smoke haze that was always over the city.  When the station was privatised, management could no longer hide behind public service bureaucracy and had to fix the stack emissions.  Bag houses were installed and the smoke haze is now gone.
7. In Queensland the electricity generation (that's the power stations) have been privatised
8. In Queensland the transmission (Powerlink), and distribution (Ergon, Energex) are still state owned.  The retailers (AGL, Origin, etc) have been privatised.  Other states differ in the amount of privatisation.

Hope that clears things up.

[Symon]

I have also read that due to the design of the 44cFIT and participants switching consumption form daytime to night time to maximise their return it has placed additional load into peak periods and has therefore actually resulted in the network requiring additional generation capacity to meet the increased peak as opposed to reducing it.

Well, not really.

The price of electricity has increased due to a number of factors -

1. Ageing of the power stations.  There has not been any capital investment in new, more efficient power stations for some time.  As the stations age it costs more to keep the old clunkers going.  There has been an increase in the amount of renewable generation being constructed, but with the exception of hyrdo, renewable energy costs more to operate and maintain on a $/kWh basis.

2. Fall in consumption.  Thanks to education campaigns and schemes such as rolling out energy saving lighting, people are more energy efficient and demand has actually been in decline.  Less consumption equates to less revenue for the generators, and since there are income guarantees set for them (a condition of privatisation) the regulator increases the energy charge to compensate.

3. Over capitalisation of the distribution network.  Planned upgrades of the network are set against forecast consumption, however these projects are planned years in advance and cannot allow for government schemes like aggressive solar targets.  Hence you have the so-called 'gold plating' of the network where upgrade costs are not recouped by consumption charges.  The money has to come from somewhere, and this is seen in higher network charges.

4. Increase in renewable energy generation.  The network is designed for power to only flow in one direction, from generator to consumer.  Now that you have power flowing in the opposite direction this causes all sorts of issues for network stability.  This requires costly changes to the network, and those costs get passed on.

My $0.02

[oldmate]

My $0.02

Is that before or after your 44cFIT?? 

[BaseCamp]

Thanks Symon, that's a wealth of information there...

Curious - does anyone know how many megawatts are coming off roofs in Qld; and how many power stations that represents?     Eg:   0.4  or   1.6 etc  etc

Cheers
BaseCamp

.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

[richee]

A couple of figures here.

http://pv-map.apvi.org.au

Richard

[plusnq]

Is that before or after your 44cFIT?? 

Lol. 

[gronk]

The price of electricity has increased due to a number of factors -

1. Ageing of the power stations.  There has not been any capital investment in new, more efficient power stations for some time.  As the stations age it costs more to keep the old clunkers going.  There has been an increase in the amount of renewable generation being constructed, but with the exception of hyrdo, renewable energy costs more to operate and maintain on a $/kWh basis.

And this in itself has become a double edged sword. Due to the "new" green agenda, as well as the above mentioned increase in renewables, getting a new "dirty" power station built probably won't happen.
The greenies would applaud that, but without a reliable base load, we leave ourselves open for future blackouts , especially if industry picks back up and a few big consumers ( like an aluminium smelter ) come back on stream.

[tryagain]

Well, not really.

The price of electricity has increased due to a number of factors -

1. Ageing of the power stations.  There has not been any capital investment in new, more efficient power stations for some time.  As the stations age it costs more to keep the old clunkers going.  There has been an increase in the amount of renewable generation being constructed, but with the exception of hyrdo, renewable energy costs more to operate and maintain on a $/kWh basis.

2. Fall in consumption.  Thanks to education campaigns and schemes such as rolling out energy saving lighting, people are more energy efficient and demand has actually been in decline.  Less consumption equates to less revenue for the generators, and since there are income guarantees set for them (a condition of privatisation) the regulator increases the energy charge to compensate.

3. Over capitalisation of the distribution network.  Planned upgrades of the network are set against forecast consumption, however these projects are planned years in advance and cannot allow for government schemes like aggressive solar targets.  Hence you have the so-called 'gold plating' of the network where upgrade costs are not recouped by consumption charges.  The money has to come from somewhere, and this is seen in higher network charges.

4. Increase in renewable energy generation.  The network is designed for power to only flow in one direction, from generator to consumer.  Now that you have power flowing in the opposite direction this causes all sorts of issues for network stability.  This requires costly changes to the network, and those costs get passed on.

My $0.02

Think that's all spot on, my comment though was in regards to how badly the 44cFIT scheme was conceived in that its design actually increases (probably only marginally) peak demand as opposed to reducing it.

The other big increase to network costs from what I have read is the widespread take up of air conditioners, They quoted the figure of $7000 in grid costs per air conditioner installed to be able meet the peak demand.

I never have said the 44cFIT is responsible for all the price increases in power bills but just that it was funded out of power bill increases, I hadn't commented on all the other causes of increases due to this predominately being about the 44cFIT not the cause of power bill increases but what you say is correct.

[tryagain]

Wow, a huge 76c a day. Here's a tip, try turning your Aircon off for a couple of hours a day and you'll offset the cost of having to pay for my FIT. I hardly ever run my Aircon to save power, I'm sure you could get used to it too.

My air-con hardly gets turned on, after working out in the QLD sun most days just getting in the shade and not doing physical work is cool in comparison, but sometimes happy wife equals happy life.
So are you volunteering to cut back your little aircon use so to be able to pay me 76c/day? I can PM you my address and you can send me a cheque for $69 each quarter if you like. 

[Symon]

I never have said the 44cFIT is responsible for all the price increases in power bills but just that it was funded out of power bill increases, I hadn't commented on all the other causes of increases due to this predominately being about the 44cFIT not the cause of power bill increases but what you say is correct.

Yes true, but I find it helps to take the heat out of a discussion to give a wider view.  Energy costs have gone up due to a combination of factors, and the FIT and renewable energy are only part of the mix, not the sole reasons.

It also varies from state to state due to the different political landscapes and the configuration of their energy industry.

[Spada]

All in all, you gotta thank the various governments for lending a hand 

I got a $1500 subsidy to install solar hot water so I dont have to use all that expensive electricity to have a warm bath, and then they gave me $1400 worth of free insulation for my roof so I use even less electricity to cool the house with the aircon  . I did have to pay out of my own pocket to put in solar panels though , but at least now I'm making a motza by generating 30 odd kilowatts a day at 50cents (44c from the government and an additional 6c from the suplier), so fair's fair I suppose 

With all the money I'm saving on electricity, I've been able to run my aircon non stop for months, and I think we can now afford to put in a pool. It was a borderline decision untill I discovered Energex will pay me $200 to connect it to the cheap tarrif 33 suply. That means I can sell the power to energex at 50c, and then buy it back for 21c 

But there's no point having these luxuries if you cant enjoy them, so I have a cunning plan. The wife is about to be made redundant, so I reacon she should go onto the dole, and I'll cut back to part time hours. That way we can reduce our family income so that we're eligable for free health, child care, and family tax benefits.

  to everyone for working hard and helping me out                  .










Sorry, the above isn't true, but I just couldnt help myself. This thread needs to be lightend up a bit.