Solwatt plan, solar photovoltaic profitable in 7 years?

[Christine]

The Walloon region has just launched a program, the aim of which is to develop photovoltaic solar energy for individuals, ensuring a return on investment in 7 years.

But by reading the leaflet distributed in all mailboxes, we realize that the installation bonus cannot exceed € 3500. They give the example of a family of 4, having 32 M2 of panels to be in electrical "autarky": I do not see how an installation with 32 m2 could be profitable in 7 years with only 3500 € of premium. (see image below)

Or do they do their calculation by assuming that all of the production is sold at 1 price X while their consumption is bought at a price below X? But in this case, who pays the difference? It cannot work on a large scale ....

Of course, the advertising messages imply that all Walloons will not only be able to reduce their electricity bill to 0, but also make money quickly thanks to this system. This morning again, the minister in charge resumed this message in the information broadcasts but without giving an explanation on the calculations.

In short: good measure or illusion?

[Christophe]

So, a huge debate that I think I summarized yesterday in a not too bad way here, I mentioned EDF but the thing is precisely the same in Belgium although a little more advantageous here!

the decentralized production, by EACH home, of electricity has never been supported by EDF.

Maaaaaaaaaaaais siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii !! They are the ones who buy your electricity at an ADVANTAGEOUS price (lol) if you have a project and it is accepted (provide 20% of the budget under the table) ... It proves that they invest no ?

Well, no kidding ... the reality is that Edf retains its monopoly on distribution and mining engineers or polytechnics are very good at calculating the "best prices" and criteria for purchasing electricity .... to keep the system in its current form as long as possible ...

Because if the projects were really profitable and accessible, there would be hundreds of thousands ... Everything is just at the "limit" of profitability to preserve the integrity of a system ... Here is the (sad) reality ...

2) The return calculation is a little more complicated than just the investment premium (pretty ridiculous we agree):

Let's do a little "simulation": a family which consumes 4800 kWh per year and which has decided to invest to produce 100% of its energy.

a) it is obviously necessary to take into account the reduction see canceling energy consumption assuming the panels are sized to produce 100% of the consumption. So for a family who pays € 100 per month which is reasonable (please do not yell non Walloons, it's 25 cts per kWh here !! 3 times more expensive than the purchase price of the wind kWh in France ) i.e. € 1200 per year for 4800 kWh .

b) and especially the famous Green Certificates, it is a system which, I believe, only exists in Wallonia. It's a completely virtual market for green electric energy paid by companies that pollute and to encourage the development of green electricity.

So assuming the 4.8 MWh completely produced by the family's installation, it will receive green certificates per year: 4.8 * 7 * 90 = € 3024 per year

c) Now less funny: the money to be released, in other words, the cost of the investment? To produce 4.8 Mwh with a yield of panels + inverter (optimistic) of 10% and a gross solar deposit of 1100 kWh / m².year in Belgium, a significant number of solar panels is required.



Solar energy: solar deposit map in kwh

So: 4800 / 0.1 * 1100 = 43.63 or 44 m².

We will assume that each m² costs 1000 € all inclusive or 44 €.

44000 € is enormous, some would say! Yes it seems a lot but we see more 4x4 and large sedans (hyper devalued after a few years) at this price on the roads than solar installation on roofs ... which are they durable ...

So there is a big reasoning problem among consumers, isn't there?

d) Finally and assuming that the family has not made any credit for the € 44, the return would be:

44 / (000 + 3024) = 1200 years.

[Christophe]

Here we can go further and estimate roughly the pure financial return of this installation:

a) green certificates are valid: 15 years.
We will therefore assume that for 15 - 10,4 = 5 years, green certificates are beneficial: 5 * 3024 = € 15120.

b) lifespan of the panels: 25 years or 15 years of "free" production or 15 * 1200 = € 18000.

This obviously does not take into account the increase in the price per kWh.

Total gain = € 33120 after 25 years for an investment of 44 paid without credit therefore!.

So far from being fabulous and assuming that there is no problem and that the installation runs 25 years !!

In% per year this is roughly 2,2%. In short, less than inflation with the technological risks that this entails ...

FYI, a "secure" 3% bank placement would have yielded: € 48 in 126,23 years ...

Potters and those who have the means will quickly put their money elsewhere (oil or gas for example) to be able to afford their 4x4: and we fall back on my judgment of the profitability and the repurchase price fixed to preserve the integrity of our energy and financial system in place !!

Voila ... if that's a plan to promote solar ... what was it before then?

ps: if there is gourance somewhere, please report it ...

[Christophe]

Precision: my intention is not to spit on this plan and the development of solar energy but to say that with such conditions (both technological and financial) solar will never take off unless the price of energy, and therefore of electricity, explodes!

Only here if we know that it will not fall, we are far from an explosion and people who have money to invest will do the same calculation as me (and much more precise: with interest rates, taxes and all the bazaar) and will necessarily decide not to invest ...

In short you have to be green and motivated to lose money to embark on an investment in solar PV ... but when we have looted everything we will realize that money cannot be eaten ...

It is therefore the complete system of our value scales that must be changed and quickly ... DIY will not lead to anything ...

For the financiers, bankers and politicians who set up this kind of stupid plan, I ask them the following question: how much does climate stability and the habitability of a planet cost? Obviously, we prefer to ignore this kind of question and leave the answers to future generations ...

[Christine]

To start, a little reminder to say that write in big and bold on a forum is equivalent to yelling, which is neither desirable nor pleasant.

So assuming the 4.8 MWh completely produced by the family's installation, it will receive green certificates per year: 4.8 * 7 * 90 = € 3024 per year

Can you clarify by specifying what are 7 and 90?

On the other hand, green certificates are therefore paid to the producer, even if he consumes his electricity himself: it is therefore not a buy-back price as it would be in France.

FYI, a "secure" 3% bank placement would have yielded: € 48 in 126,23 years ...

certainly, but the money is blocked for 25 years whereas in our case, the family "retouches" € 4224 of liquidity from the 1st year and can replace it etc. This is a significant advantage, I believe.

[Christophe]

To start, a little reminder to say that write in big and bold on a forum is equivalent to yelling, which is neither desirable nor pleasant.

Well it's to make it easier to read ... my child

Can you clarify by specifying what are 7 and 90?

The 2 are given in the doc that you scanned ... so I didn't think I should explain it:

- 90 € = price of the green certificate (which varies like a scholarship) I took 90 € because it is a price which already seems advantageous. A worm certificate is paid per MWh produced * "greener than green" coef
- 7 is the "green" coefficient which is in the last paragraph of doc. The more "clean" your source, the higher this coefficient.

Good I have a very precise doc on the system of green certificates, I will put it in the downloads this afternoon!

On the other hand, green certificates are therefore paid to the producer, even if he consumes his electricity himself: it is therefore not a buy-back price as it would be in France.

Yes, that's what I meant by an advantageous "virtual market".
Belgium is well ahead. Such a calculation in France with EdF who does not care about the environment except in the pub it is the insured dead loss for the investor ...

FYI, a "secure" 3% bank placement would have yielded: € 48 in 126,23 years ...

certainly, but the money is blocked for 25 years whereas in our case, the family "retouches" € 4224 of liquidity from the 1st year and can replace it etc. This is a significant advantage, I believe.

Yes I hadn't thought of that but for me it's not the 1st but the 11th year ... but yes it can be an advantage: we therefore gain 15 years to start touching our interests.

[loop]

Hello

Your approach is limited to a financial argument (not to say capitalist), as any salesperson would
I offer you a slightly broader vision of this debate which would consist in examining the consequences of a connection on the network of thousands of individual producers and the ecological consequences of the massive production of PV with silicon.

For point 1:

Wind power is often criticized for being an intermittent energy which "disrupts" the production on the network, so as not to add more with micro-producers, who in addition would supply and consume at the same time

For point 2:

Is PV a real ecological investment?
Does the purification of Silicon have a gray energy significantly lower than the production during its photovoltaic lifetime?
Let's take an example
How much energy is needed to melt 1 kg of glass?

Good reflection

[Christophe]

Your approach is limited to a financial argument (not to say capitalist), as any salesperson would

Exactly and like 99% of potential customers ...

For your 1) I think that the intermitence of solar which is real (forcing) is less problematic than that of mega wind turbines because:

- it's "daylight" every day, yes! Unlike thermal, the brightness is enough to produce PV even if it is bcp less important than with direct radiation ...

- there is not necessarily a wind every day.

- no power peak with solar: the production curve is smoothed and looks exactly the same over a 24-hour cycle (only the amplitudes vary). I mean: solar PV does not go from 0 to 100% in a few minutes unlike wind power even if there must be "smoothing" ...

- finally, each solar park is much smaller than the power installed in wind turbines ...

For your 2): I don't have the precise answer but it interests me strongly (I had to say this 3 times in a week concerning the PV ...)

[Christine]

Hello

Your approach is limited to a financial argument (not to say capitalist), as any salesperson would
I offer you a slightly broader vision of this debate which would consist in examining the consequences of a connection on the network of thousands of individual producers

And if the groundhog wrapped chocolate, we would not have this debate and we would live in a wonderful world.

Do not confuse capitalist and realistic

[loop]

We can be captive and invest sustainably for our future
It's eco-capitalism

For the manufacture of silicon

http://web.univ-pau.fr/~scholle/ecosyst ... 2-1-fr.htm

Remember the silicon melting temperature

A+