BaudouinLabrique wrote:b) is consumed then at full price, which therefore offers producers an additional benefit compared to the situation where this neighbor would have consumed 1 kWh produced conventionally; indeed, " 1 kWh supplied by the sun? It is 2,5 kWh [Primary] saved by a conventional power plant », In particular because of transport losses (source Apere); the photovoltaic kWh consumed by the neighbor is tainted with practically no loss;
And you answer:
sicetaitsimple wrote: b). It is also false: what matters is the price, going on primary energy considerations makes no sense for this specific case. ;
This is not correct, because the saving on primary energy and the losses due to transport made by the conventional producer of electricity, it pockets when the neighbor consumes photovoltaic electricity but paid at full price.
sicetaitsimple wrote: And the neighbor in question (and all the others) I think he will be charged on his invoice by the financing of green certificates (but I do not know in detail the mechanism in Belgium)
In French-speaking Belgium it is 50 € per year knowing that in addition the neighbor pays his electricity much cheaper than if there had been no photovoltaic production:
- Gradual and inevitable drop in the selling price of electricity: it is in fact thanks to green production which also benefits non-prosumers. Moreover, “The new year [2018] started with NEGATIVE electricity prices!”, But we will not pass it on to your bill! Moreover, currently, producing fossil fuel is more expensive than producing green; it is an incompressible incentive to abandon everything that is not green production, including nuclear production which is not green contrary to popular belief: "" Nuclear, carbon-free energy ", it is is FALSE: serious studies show that nuclear power produces on average 66 g of CO2 per kWh produced [...] ”. (According to the relevant observation of the very serious Médiapart site).
As a bonus, here are the advantages for non-prosumers:
- Pollution and greenhouse effect: each time the sun shines, there is automatically a brake on the production of fine particles and the progression of the greenhouse effect, THANKS to prosumers, which therefore contribute to the health of all and by going there in addition to their money! It has been shown that since 2005, "the increase in the production of non-hydraulic renewable electricity (mainly wind and photovoltaic) has led to a reduction of almost 25% in the use of fossil fuels in electricity production". (Source).
- Prosumers allow Belgium to meet its commitments to reach the quota of green energies in electricity production, as the EEC dictated. Heavy financial sanctions are foreseen in case of non-compliance and this is what makes it possible to avoid prosumers, which also benefits non-prosumers.
(For internal links see this page)
- “Opponents of the Belgian Energy Pact [among others the N-VA] are demanding figures on the costs of a 100% renewable transition by 2050. However, the current price dynamics demonstrate that renewable productions are - or will be within 2 years - more competitive than conventional productions. "(Renewal)
In fact, the phenomenon has accelerated lately: not only the price of electricity production (Belgium) has dropped thanks to wind and photovoltaic, but in addition, “2017 was marked by a fall spectacular production costs of photovoltaic and wind electricity. Competitiveness which now exceeds traditional energy production ”. (Quantified analysis: 2017 or the economic victory of solar and wind).
All these advantages are only very little offset by the famous € 50 annual surcharge for the non-prosumer. Remember, when we introduced nuclear electricity, the TOTALITY of the investment was paid for by consumers and who did not complain about it, whereas here they bear only a tiny part of the cost of the energy transition
