CSPE: Sipperec rule clocks for photovoltaics

[bernardd]

This interview given by the president of Sipperec is very interesting:
http://energie2007.fr/actualites/fiche/ ... 20310.html

Le Sipperec, it is the community which manages the electricity network of all the municipalities of Ile de France: in the heavy category, therefore ...

Its President sets the record straight for photovoltaic subsidies:

Let’s reestablish the truth: purchase prices for all renewable energies represent 3% of the CSPE, gas cogeneration 29%.

But furthermore, I discover that contrary to what I had heard, especially on this forum, it is not ERDF which takes this subsidy on its own funds:
CSPE =

Contribution to the Public Service of Electricity SPE, a mechanism which allows EDF to reimburse the costs of its public service obligations, the purchase prices of which represent less than 3%.

By the way, this site looks very knowledgeable on everything related to electricity in France.

We also find that network losses in 2008 were 33TWh.

Which is consistent with the figure of 32TWh seen on page 3 of this very instructive document also:
http://www.statistiques.developpement-d ... 28513f.pdf

The economy of distributed production is known.

[Christophe]

But furthermore, I discover that contrary to what I had heard, especially on this forum, it is not ERDF which takes this subsidy on its own funds:
CSPE =

Contribution to the Public Service of Electricity SPE, a mechanism which allows EDF to reimburse the costs of its public service obligations, the purchase prices of which represent less than 3%.

Source?

I never read this ... or it is very old or I missed it ... obviously it is the average consumer who finances solar PV ... already widely mentioned here or there .. .we will not redo the debate!

What bothers me most is that the PV market is increasingly held by certain crooks who have mafia methods ... too bad it stains on honest solar craftsmen ...

Quite a lot, the 33 TWh is still 33 h (i.e. 000 years and 4 months at 9% load factor) of a 80 GW reactor working !!

[bernardd]

Source?

Exceptionally, because it is you, you have the right to re-read the article a second time at the end of the cited URL.

But not more

[Christophe]

But no, don't get angry, your articles are good, I was talking about:

"in particular on this forum"

[bernardd]

But no, don't get angry,

For me, smiley = joke, because smile = smile.

We can make fun of it forum.

But ... you mustn't.

(free extraction of the credits of the film "the Corsican affair" ...)

"in particular on this forum"

Precisely, I do not know either, otherwise I would have put it. But that is in any case what I understood from the discussions on the useful / useless aspect of the subsidies.

However, it turns out that gas subsidies are much higher.

So if you are wondering about a photovoltaic "mafia", the players in the gas market are even fewer ... But I had never seen this original point before this article.

[Christophe]

Well this smiley = anger = not really "joke" ... there are plenty of others to laugh like ...

However, it turns out that gas subsidies are much higher.

Sorry but this figure is bad faith, it is a way of "manipulating the figures" (and opinion) ...

Indeed; it is obviously necessary to report this% of REAL subsidies to the production of energy... it is a safe bet that the production of gas cogeneration is well, well, much more important than that of PV ...

I believe, I can be wrong to check therefore, that the kWh electric gas cogeneration is bought around 10 cts euros ...

After checking, it's less (well, it was less in 2002): http://www.drire.gouv.fr/ile-de-france/ ... ternet.pdf
https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... 9K261p.pdf

Average purchase prices observed

For 2002, the purchase prices by EDF of the electricity produced
by cogenerations benefiting from the purchase obligation,
ranged from 6,7 to 8,9 euro cents per kWh,

Cogeneration is generally only profitable thanks to the recovery of heat ...

So if you are wondering about a photovoltaic "mafia", the players in the gas market are even fewer ... But I had never seen this original point before this article.

Hey, I did not say that gas and oil were not (the world of energy = mafia anyway given the interests ... it is not for nothing that the energy supply is "strategic "for a country!) ... but at least they are known ...

[bernardd]

Well this smiley = anger = not really "joke" ... there are plenty of others to laugh like ...

So how do I go about taking an evil tone? evil seems to me quite indicated. A little devil is not always angry ...

However, it turns out that gas subsidies are much higher.

Sorry but this figure is bad faith, it is a way of "manipulating the figures" (and opinion) ...

Ah, do you know exactly what she is referring to? Before speaking in bad faith, you should at least ask him the question.

In my experience, Sipperec is not used to speaking in a vacuum.

But your reaction surprises me: for me, the real question would be above all to understand why it would be useful for funds intended for the public service to subsidize any fossil energy such as gas ... And up to 29% moreover, while cogeneration plants with equivalent power could operate on wood and direct thermal solar.

And besides, why no installation in France of wood steam turbine which is supplemented in concentrated solar during the day? Is it just that we're too stupid to get there? Why Desertec is a German project? Why has Odeillo been almost abandoned?

If Sipperec addresses this subject, I am convinced that there is a reason.
It remains to seek to understand.

[Christophe]

A) She says that 29% of CSPE subsidies go into gas cogé and 3% into renewable energy ... so what?

I say: relate this to the energy produced and you will see that the gas in cogeneration is LESS subsidized than the solar PV ... or what retains the reader is that the kWh gas affects much more than the solar PV what which is wrong ...

It would also be interesting to know what the remaining 68% is for ... answer:

code: Select all

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_de_service_public_de_l'%C3%A9lectricit%C3%A9

CSPE allows remunerate electricity distributors (EDF and the local distribution companies) for any additional costs associated with the public service task entrusted to them. In particular, this concerns three aspects:

* The obligation to purchase the electricity produced by cogeneration gas and renewable energy,
* Tariff equalization, that is to say the extra cost of electricity production in some areas îliennes not connected to the network,
* The social aspects of the supply of electricity, particularly since its classification as "essential products" in July 2006.

What is subsidized is cogeneration, not gas ... but the subsidy debate is a bottomless pit ... as I said a few months ago: EVERYTHING IS SUBSIDIZED ... "everyone world pays for everyone "in our social societies ...

B) Completely agree on your substantive questions on R&D ...
We know the answer: we have nuclear power, not them ...

C) I think Sipperec wants to take advantage of the financial windfall that still constitutes the PV ...

ps: like another devil there is this one: Link "See more smileys"

[bernardd]

A) She says that 29% of CSPE subsidies go into gas cogé and 3% into renewable energy ... so what?

I say: relate this to the energy produced and you will see that the gas in cogeneration is LESS subsidized than the solar PV ... or what retains the reader is that the kWh gas affects much more than the solar PV what which is wrong ...

You assume that, but it is only an assumption.

The problem is not on the number of KWh produced: it is of course on the principle of subsidizing gas: what is the justification for subsidizing fossil energy?

In addition we are told all over the pub that gas is already interesting. And that increases our dependence on imports.

C) I think Sipperec wants to take advantage of the financial windfall that still constitutes the PV ...

You who are often the victim of defamation, do you reverse the roles? No evidence, and I would say even more unlikely: sipperec does not really lack means.

Perhaps they are fed up with certain behaviors, which they can identify even better than the average citizen cannot do? Without however being able to speak of it more explicitly?

ps: like another devil there is this one: Link "See more smileys"

Yes, more imp: but the eyes do not even blink!

[Christophe]

Ah no these are not assumptions, look at the .pdf that I put above on cogeneration ... do some research if not ...

I told you: what is subsidized is not gas, it is the principle of cogeneration .... and that's good! A gas-fired power station that heats an entire district using a district heating network is good for primary energy savings ... because without coge, this energy would heat birds ...

ps: defamation is not "to think that 1 hypothesis" ... it is "to assert that 1 lie" ... there is nothing defamatory here so calmos with the "bad words" ... for what is of the "often victim" ... you look too far I think ...