Solar Questionnaire - I need your help!

[chatelot16]

a) IT IS NOT GOVERNMENT !!!

The CSPE and the feed-in tariff are political decisions.

the state is always like that! the state decides and the French pay!

my crystal ball says to me that the privileged tariff with CSPE will disappear one day, precisely when the normal tariff of electricity will have increased, and that photovoltaics will be profitable without special tariff

and there is no need for a big crystal ball to know that the price has not stopped going up

when the normal price of energy has increased the price of photovoltaics may also increase ... it is the one who has already installed them today who will get the best deal

[Did67]

That's what I think too :

- PV will continue to fall, now that there is a large market on a global scale, R / D is on the way, progress will follow ... The fall in the price of kWp is almost linear!

See eg: http://www.enerzine.com/1/13966+modules ... prix+.html

(...)
A dizzying fall in prices

According to Photon International magazine, the average price of monocrystalline modules fell from € 1,44 per watt in early January 2011 to € 0,82 per watt in January 2012, a drop of 43,1%. The average price of polycrystalline modules has decreased from € 1,47 per watt in early January 2011 to € 0,81 per watt in January 2012, a decrease of 44,9%. These prices are understood to be average prices, which means that “unbranded” modules found a buyer at € 0,70 per watt, the prices for branded modules being negotiated around € 0,90 per watt.

As a result, the price of photovoltaic systems is also in free fall.
(...)

[we can criticize the policy, but it is also an effect of the production volumes linked to the subsidy systems in place in the majority of countries; and the Chinese state market, which is another form of subsidization!]

- if the policy is intelligent, the subsidy will therefore be decreasing (this is currently the case in France, every quarter the tariff is revised downwards)

For "major projects", we are already less than 17 cents per subsidized kWh!

- the production price of electricity will increase: investments in upgrading existing nuclear power plants, construction of a new power plant (I hope there will be only one!), gradually the dismantling of the first power plants and the ultimate storage ... [find out how things are going in Brennilis, a little "hello", to imagine what it could cost!]

So the subsidy will go out! Sooner or later. It's mechanical. First, the new connections will no longer be subsidized, but the purchase price will be enough to finance projects for new installations, since they are less costly. The old contracts, with their subsidy, will continue until their expiry (because the investment was much more expensive). And then these contracts will also gradually expire ...

Those whose installation will still function (or can be relifted at a lower cost), will be able to negotiate the sale at the market price. But since there will always be a price difference between the repurchase at production cost and the purchase of electricity at the "customer" rate (= which includes in addition to the production price, the price of transport, fixed charges operator, its margin ... so roughly 2,5 or 3 X the cost of production; currently, the average KWH costs production in France 5 cents per KWH and is sold, including tax, around 13 cents / displayed price = 8 and a few, without any tax, VAT or subscription); the difference is the subscription and the sum of all taxes - 4 or 5 lines at the end of the invoice!

So in fact, they will have SO interest in self-consumption (it will be more "profitable" not to be charged 13 cents rather than to sell at 5 - I use today's rates to illustrate, but the gap will remain).

[Did67]

the state is always like that! the state decides and the French pay!

Apart from the "ticket boards" (the state "sells" its good faith and its image and issues monkey money; it works as long as everyone believes it), indeed. The State is "everyone".

If we admit that:


the jurist Carré de Malberg defines it as a "community of men, fixed on its own territory and possessing an organization from which results for the group envisaged in its relations with its members a supreme power of action, command and coercion ". He thus underlines the double meaning of the notion of State, which corresponds to a territorially defined mode of social organization and to a set of institutions characterized by the possession of the monopoly of the enactment of the rule of law and of the use of forcee public.


it is normal that if the State decides, everyone pays!

[abuse of language, it is not the State which decides, but those who have the power within this State]

Then yes. Your sentence is a "tautology" (except that we always like to imagine the State as a "miracle solution", an American Uncle who takes his bundles out of his pocket and "sprinkles" generously; when we have made progress in this understanding, I think some will pay me attention to state property - which is therefore theirs!] [I say "always", because it existed, from the time of printing; it also was the basis of the economic "success" of the Nazi system between 33 and 40!]

[chatelot16]

to do some calculation of profitability I fall once again on this kind of coefficient



still an absurd unity
1000kWh / kWp does not stand up

1000 (kWh / year) / kWp that makes sense

but why put hours and years in a unit? just to make a coefficient impossible to understand

as we know that one year = 24 x 365 = 8760 hours

1000 (kWh / year) / kWp = 1000/8760 = 0,114 W average / Wcrete

and it's still easier to understand: the average power of a panel is slightly greater than 1/10 of its peak power due to the nights and days without sun

a good figure to remember is 0,1 W / Wp equivalent to 876 (kWh / year) / kWp valid for the less sunny areas of France

[chatelot16]

I do not criticize this fact that the state decides and the French pay: it can not be otherwise!

I just criticize the affirmation of the genre CSPE is not the state

but if, it is a decision of the state, and that it is paid by a compulsory levy on EDF invoices or other taxes does not change much

and there will be no new tax ... the new for ecology will not be a tax but a contribution! they dared to say it a few days ago!

[Did67]

1) Stimulated by the discussion, I looked at my "counters": 6 posts on futura and more than 600 here [on futura, it is mainly to promote heating with wood, pellets, regulations on external probe). Here it is a little more complex and less "utilitarian" - the proof, this thread (and others!).

2) For an energy purist, yes, you're right.

But for a Boeotian, the calculation:

3 kWp (abscon, says nothing to him) produce 3 kWh per year (I agree with the "per year", not to be forgotten), this:

a) reconcile it to his electricity bill

b) it allows him to quickly locate the TRI ...

I continue: 3 kWh per year, sold 000 cents, therefore 30 euros of income per year (there, it becomes clear, even for the Boeotian).

So if, tax credit deducted, it costs him 11 euros including tax, the Boeotian immediately sees that it will take 000 years to repay the stake.

c) if he signs a loan and there is an annuity of 1 euros, he immediately sees - provided he reads what he signs - that he is going to be the turkey in history ! And if it's monthly payments, everyone transforms 500 monthly payments into an annuity.

On the other hand, the average monthly production is very variable, between the winter months - covered and with "short days" - and July / August, it varies enormously from one year to another (this spring and this summer are there. , as proof for that), while the annual variations are much less ... (even if there are some too!).

So I think the average annual production in Kwh per kWp seems to me to be pedagogically useful. And above all that he - the Boeotian - does not think that a kWp is a kW of production throughout the year!

So I often use the reasoning as I detail it above. With us, in our climate, it is quite exactly 1 kWh / kwc.an So the equation x installed kWp = x thousand kWh installed per year = 000 px thousand euros of annual income works well and is immediately understood. And restraint!

Not everyone is an engineer!

[Did67]

I do not criticize this fact that the state decides and the French pay: it can not be otherwise!

I just criticize the affirmation of the genre CSPE is not the state

but if, it is a decision of the state, and that it is paid by a compulsory levy on EDF invoices or other taxes does not change much

For me yes. In a context where the State permanently risks insolvency, yes. For me, that changes a lot.

It is not financed by public debt!

This cannot be "injected" to save banks, to face a State deadline ... In any case, much less easily than if it were a tax, paid to the tax authorities, managed by Bercy. .

If, on the "principle", it is the same (it is the "citizen" who pays; and there I agree), compared to the may not be honored tomorrow (this is what Bobfuck thinks - the State is in near bankruptcy, so whoever invests will only have to go and be seen tomorrow!), this changes significantly (this don't change everything, but that changes: EdF pays you the subsidized rate, reimburses itself to the CDC, which collected the CSPE, levied by EdF! Bercy never touches this money !!!

So there is a double fuse: EdF (partially privatized; which must honor tons of contracts, pay its supplies - including me if I invest! - First and CDC then.

Of course, we have to be honest: the CDC is a "financial arm" of the state. So the temptation exists that Bercy asks his CDC director friend to pay him a few billion, which will be lacking elsewhere!

This risk exists so much that it is already the situation: the CDC has an important slate with EdF!

So once again, I would like to be nuanced: I am not saying that there is no risk. I say that it is infinitely less than if this system was based on a tax managed by the Ministry of Finance.

Note in particular that tax evasion on this device does not exist. Difficult not to pay your bill. And 95% of people do not know that the little line at the bottom is - among other things - to subsidize PV! So they are not likely to dry up the source!

So I maintain: it changes a lot (but not all!).

[Did67]

still an absurd unity
1000kWh / kWp does not stand up

The card was not displayed.

Okay, double bullshit:

- in the title, it is wrongly "" kWp / kWp per year (a typo, I would rather say, so stupid!)

- and in the captions, in fact, the "per year" has been omitted.

[chatelot16]

when we do not forget the PER YEAR, it's fine ... but without the PER year it is not only incomprehensible but false

1000 (kWh / year) / kWp is not easy to write, but not everyone will understand 1000 kWh / kW.ans which is nevertheless mathematically equivalent

as long as doing math as much to simplify the kW and write 1000 h / years, which can also be understood: it is as if the panel operated at its peak power 1000 hour / year

therefore 1000 hours / 8760 hours = 0,11 in short

by saying that a sunshine is 0,11 W / Wp we give an understandable meaning to the kWp

we clearly see that 3kWp on the roof will have the same average power as a generator of 3000Wp x 0,11 = 330W

but the sellers of renewable energy do not like to give the figures in average power, because that shows too well that it is weak

in kWh / year that makes figures much bigger!

and by forgetting the by years it makes figures without any value which can no longer even serve as proof of false advertising

[chatelot16]

comparison between the small and the big

3kWp at 12 euro
3KWp X 1000 h / year = 3 kWh / year
subsidized purchase price 0,30 euro / kWh
3 kWh / year x 000 euro / kWh = 0,30 euro / year
12 euro / 000 euro / year = 900 years

smaller solution:

300Wp to 500 euro
300Wp X 1000 h / year = 300 kWh / year
simple savings on the normal rate of 0,13 euro / kwh
300 kWh / year x 0,13 euro / kWh = 39 euro / year
500 euro / 39 euro / year = 12,8 years

the small installation pays for itself roughly over the same duration, except that it doesn't even need a subsidized tariff

so for me it is more ecological than 10 people settle 300W without special meter, rather than just one with 3kWp and subsidized rate

once again my calculations are simplistic: in the case of 3kWp part of the profit is eaten by the subscription to the special meter, and in the case of 300Wc part of the profit will be lost when we consume less than the sun produces: but in this case we give a gift to edf: we lose the financial benefit, but we do not change anything to the ecological result!

seen like that the subsidized tariff gives an artificial profitability to large too expensive instalation, a multitude of small installation the cheapest possible would do the same thing without subsidy

saving 39 euros per year is a small gain ...