Photovoltaic: 2010 redemption price in France?

Forum solar photovoltaic PV and solar electricity generation from direct radiation solar energy.
bernardd
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2278
Registration: 12/12/09, 10:10
x 1




by bernardd » 09/02/10, 17:50

It was run in advance.

With one caveat, it is that larger projects have an easier time taking up a lawyer: it was perhaps the desired creaming effect.

It is all the same surprising to note by the band that one of the big beneficiaries of the subsidies is EDF Renewable Energy, which plays against EDF ...
0 x
See you soon !
User avatar
bham
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1666
Registration: 20/12/04, 17:36
x 6




by bham » 09/02/10, 19:34

bernardd wrote:It was run in advance.

With one caveat, it is that larger projects have an easier time taking up a lawyer: it was perhaps the desired creaming effect.

It is all the same astonishing to note by the band that one of the big beneficiaries of the subsidies, EDF Renewable Energy plays against EDF..

EDF Renewable Energy does not play against EDF since it is EDF customers who pay for the purchase of PV electricity and not EDF.
It is you and I who pay that!
0 x
bernardd
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2278
Registration: 12/12/09, 10:10
x 1




by bernardd » 09/02/10, 20:21

bham wrote:It is you and I who pay that!


Maybe I was a little quick, sorry.

Obviously, in the end, it is you and I who pay.

But in this case and according to the article cited, it seems that it is EDF Energies Renouvelable which has submitted a large number of photovoltaic hangar projects.

So the profit we pay will go into the pockets of this subsidiary of EDF, which I do not know and of which I know neither the articles of association nor the shareholders.

But it is certainly not a public organization like EDF, therefore more opaque ... Is it for example subject to public tenders?

We know the limits of public tenders, but if this is not the case, everything is possible ...

Is it this business? Whose directors are natural persons only?
http://www.societe.com/cgi-bin/recherch ... 08574&vu=2
0 x
See you soon !
User avatar
bham
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1666
Registration: 20/12/04, 17:36
x 6




by bham » 09/02/10, 21:25

bernardd wrote:
But it is certainly not a public organization like EDF, therefore more opaque ... Is it for example subject to public tenders?

Is it this business? Whose directors are natural persons only?
http://www.societe.com/cgi-bin/recherch ... 08574&vu=2

I think so, EDF enr is in any case a listed company, a subsidiary of EDF created after the semi privatization.
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15755
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5072




by Remundo » 02/09/10, 23:40

Hello Econologists,

I wanted to tell you about what made my ears whistle this summer ...
Government release of August 23 wrote:The cumulative power of the photovoltaic park installed in France was 81 MW at the end of 2008 and will be 850 MW at the end of 2010, ie a multiplication by 10 in 2 years. The projects submitted to date also represent more than 3000 MW. France is therefore very far ahead of the implementation of the Grenelle Environment objectives (1100 MW installed at the end of 2012 and 5400 MW in 2020).

The spectacular boom in French photovoltaics shows that the start-up phase of the sector has been completed. Development is now entering a more mature phase and the cost of materials has been falling steadily and structurally. The Government has therefore decided to adapt the support system through purchase prices to this new phase of development.

For professional projects and large installations, the rates will be globally readjusted on September 1, 2010. This adjustment makes it possible to avoid the effects of speculative windfall and results from the reduction in the costs of photovoltaic equipment, which represents approximately half of the cost of projects.

The prices applicable to domestic installations with a power of less than 3 kWp (i.e. around 30 m2 of panels) will remain unchanged at € 58 c per kWh. This effort in favor of individual installations reflects the Government's desire to maintain the development of employment in this sector.

For the other projects, the adjustment will correspond to a decrease of 12%. The tariff revision will take effect on September 1,
after publication in the Official Journal of a decree sent today for an opinion to the Energy Regulatory Commission and the Higher Energy Council.

Even after this development, the feed-in tariffs for photovoltaics will remain among the most favorable in Europe.


Starting from a lower buyout level than in France, Germany and Spain, our most dynamic neighbors, have decided to lower their own rates by more than 15%.

The draft tariff decree ensures a fair transition with the previous regimes. Thus, any project that has already been the subject of a complete connection request to the network operator will benefit from the rate schedule of January 12, 2010. The old feed-in rate will be maintained in particular for projects on agricultural buildings, in course of examination in the prefectures under the decree of March 16, 2010, if they cannot obtain the required certificate granting them the benefit of the decree of July 10, 2006.

This tariff development is the first step in the necessary adaptation of the system for regulating feed-in tariffs, which must become more responsive to the development of the sector and be better articulated with the objective of expected growth of 500 MW per year. in the Grenelle Environment. This development, which must guarantee the sector solid and lasting prospects for development until 2020, will be prepared in the fall in consultation with all the players in the sector.

Annex: old and new price list



French purchase price

Price
The first figure corresponds to the tariff until August 31, 2010 (decree of January 12, 2010), the second to that in force from September 1, 2010. They are expressed in c € / kWh.

Integrated into residential buildings <3kW 58 58
Residential> 3kW 58 51
Education and health 58 51
Others 50 44
Simplified integration Any building 42 37
Central France North 37.68 33.12
South of France 31.4 27.6
DOM 40 35.2 "


source Energy 2007

Confirmed yesterday by AFP

These are the august beatings of government

When everyone rotates on the beach ... There are some who calculate and place their pawns ...
0 x
Image
bernardd
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2278
Registration: 12/12/09, 10:10
x 1




by bernardd » 03/09/10, 09:06

In the debate for the Penly EPR nuclear power plant, EDF's main argument against photovoltaics is its cost which obliges to pay heavy subsidies.

In addition, the organization of the current subsidies makes it possible to spread the idea that there is no photovoltaic without integration into the building with sealing, which artificially increases the cost.

Finally, it is a vast communication / disinformation information for EDF and the proponents of nuclear power, at a reasonable cost compared to a long-term advertising campaign.

The consequence, well known on this site, of these subsidies, is to increase the margins of installers while reducing self-installation: it is in fact a huge bribe for installers, already used to bribes from electric heating installations, including heat pumps.

And another indirect consequence is that this perpetuates EDF for 20 years, since subsidized owners would be afraid of losing their subsidy if EDF were not renewed in its management of municipal concessions for the management of the electricity distribution network.

So I find that the reduction in these subsidies is a good thing, it will finally make it possible to mount real projects on cost optimization and more effective new technical solutions.

What should be asked is not a subsidy on the sale price of the production, it is that everyone is entitled to the main advantage of EDF: access to huge long-term credits to low rates for nuclear.

By the way, we can see that it is once again the private capture of monetary creation by credit which makes it possible to maintain the monopolies / oligopolies at the expense of the initiatives of independent entrepreneurs.

As surprising as it may seem, the best help for photovoltaics is the universal dividend, presented now [urlhttp: //www.creationmonetaire.info/2010/09/rien-nest-plus-puissant-quune-idee-dont.html] here [/ url] by a German boss. We can see the capacity for decentralized management of a new currency by an associative organization.
0 x
See you soon !
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15755
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5072




by Remundo » 03/09/10, 11:06

The argument of paying "heavy" subsidies is fallacious.

Some would do better to sweep in front of their door for the "costs".

If we take EPR, which costs € 6 billion for 1400 MW continuous ... + annual operating costs of around € 100 million per year, we see that over 20 years, EPR costs € 8 billion to provide 1400 MW

And we are crying for the payment of a few tens of millions of euros / year for investors who need 10 years to amortize their intallations (we have known better as speculation).

With 8 G €, we can drop the PV costs to 1 € / Wp, that is to say to have an 8GWp power plant which well placed in the South will produce around 1000 MW continuous in total energy independence, properly and practically without running costs.

And after 20 years, the EPR plant sinks dramatically into operating costs, still present and increasing because the minerals are dependent on oil, which will be unaffordable.

While the PV plant will continue quietly on its way.

-------------
in 2009, we produced around 300 GWh of photovoltaic electricity, at 50 cts € / kWh, this cost around 150 Million euros.

The same energy sold in nuclear energy will cost the consumer 30 million euros, but it is energy dependent on petroleum and abroad, with permanent operating costs in the supply and reprocessing of fuels (jse doesn't even talk about waste )

I see that we do not want to pay the price of energy independence and respect for the environment, the enhancement of buildings and the maintenance of activities and jobs on French territory ...

If we don't want to pay it now, we'll pay it X10 later ...
0 x
Image
bernardd
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2278
Registration: 12/12/09, 10:10
x 1




by bernardd » 03/09/10, 11:37

Remundo, reread my answer with a calm head ...

I am not saying that we should not have solar aid: I am saying that aid must be on investment, not on exploitation, because I showed that aid on exploitation is pernicious, and anyway does not solve the difficulty of investment for people with low income.

In addition, what you write is still very optimistic:

If we take EPR, which costs € 6 billion for 1400 MW continuous ... + annual operating costs of around € 100 million per year, we see that over 20 years, EPR costs € 8 billion to provide 1400 MW


On the production of 13TWh estimated by EDF for an EPR of 1650MW, it will only supply 10,8TWh for final consumption (see recent calculations on the wire ... nuclear ...).

If EDF invested this money in the purchase of thermal and photovoltaic panels by a grouped order and resold at cost price, it would be much more effective for France.

Of course, it would be even more effective if France's nuclear choice had not killed any nascent photovoltaic industry: we have to accept the industrial mistakes of some, for which it is we who pay the odds. Like nuclear waste then?
0 x
See you soon !
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15755
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5072




by Remundo » 03/09/10, 11:50

Hi Bernard,

It is true that installers tend to overcharge, but hey, it's not just in the PV ... It's the craft that wants that.

You should know that they are themselves pressured by regulations and financially by the State. And on construction sites, it's not always funny ...

Personally, I do hybrid crafts / self-construction, but it is an exceptional situation and not at all generalizable.

The decree of March 2010 had already broken the market for "large new" with an acceptable transient until 2012 for 3 kWp and old buildings, then -10% / year for all new from 2012 (I will lets imagine what 0.9 x 0.9 ... x 0.9)

There it goes even stronger. We hit -12% at once without warning, in addition to the drop in March 2010.

I think the PV market will decline very significantly, and this is the expected effect.

On the fact that the PV of individuals and SMEs is stifled by EDF, this is obvious and regrettable.

Each time he acts his "heavy subsidies" which he does not even pay, brandishes millions of euros not to mention his billions, ignores the independence and cleanliness of PV by claiming that nuclear is. .

Do we have to talk about the administrative maquis to get hooked up and pay? : Mrgreen:

It all works pretty well :?

@+
0 x
Image
bernardd
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2278
Registration: 12/12/09, 10:10
x 1




by bernardd » 03/09/10, 12:16

But the problem of craftsmen is the problem of the majority, and the only way to solve it is this:

By the way, we can see that it is once again the private capture of monetary creation by credit which makes it possible to maintain the monopolies / oligopolies at the expense of the initiatives of independent entrepreneurs.

As surprising as it may seem, the best help for photovoltaics is the universal dividend, presented now [urlhttp: //www.creationmonetaire.info/2010/09/rien-nest-plus-puissant-quune-idee-dont .html] here [/ url] by a German boss. We see the dawn of the decentralized management capacity of a new currency by an associative organization.


The subsidies favor the integration of the waterproofing function, which artificially increases costs, and the resale to EDF, instead of local consumption: it is also necessary to question the prohibition of sale to its neighbors or in a village.

In fact, it is the management of municipal networks by EDF that must be called into question, like the management of water by private companies: this is not always bad, but the sword of Damocles of non-renewal of contract is necessary to move forward effectively : Mrgreen:

Investment aid would be more effective than an artificial redemption price.
0 x
See you soon !

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Renewable energy: solar electricity"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 103 guests