Page 1 on 7

Photovoltaic: 2010 redemption price in France?

published: 08/01/10, 12:13
by Christophe
What will be the redemption price in France for solar PV after January 1, 2010? Nobody knows exactly because the official publication is still not passed but it should not be very far from the current price (a few cents less / kWh).

Pending official clarification, here are 2 articles:

Arm wrestling over new solar electricity tariffs

The government has still not published the new purchase prices for photovoltaic electricity by EDF. The players in the sector oppose those who want to prevent the owners of solar installations from reaping "super-profits".


How to develop the solar sector without it costing the consumer or the taxpayer too much? This is the thorny issue facing the government. So thorny that he struggles to make decisions on the subject. In principle, the ministerial decree fixing the new feed-in tariffs for the electricity that will be produced by future photovoltaic installations - data absolutely essential for the future of the French solar industry - was due to be published at the end of December, in order to come into force in January 1st. But these tariffs, which set the prices at which EDF will be obliged to buy back the electricity produced by a photovoltaic installation for twenty years, are still pending. Since September, the versions follow one another. And the final decree is not yet signed, let alone published in the "Official Journal", to the chagrin of professionals in the sector, suspended from this arbitration.

The government has been pondering the issue for months. In September, the Ministry of Ecology had publicly presented a draft decree on the subject, before reviewing its copy several times. This new delay is symptomatic of the standoff between players in the sector and those who wish to prevent owners of photovoltaic installations from reaping "super-profits" thanks to public subsidies.

Equipment prices drop

In mid-December, the government had already modified its project following an opinion from the Energy Regulatory Commission (CRE), which stressed the high profitability that photovoltaic installations would have with the new tariff, and its cost for the community. The deficit between the price of photovoltaic electricity paid by EDF and invoiced to individuals is in fact covered via a contribution to the public electricity service (CSPE). "A return on invested capital of 7 to 8% is already a very incentive," said the Commission in its opinion, which has not been officially published. "For individuals, the internal rate of return on projects is, on average, 15,2%", adds the Commission. A figure deemed "delusional" by some players who consider that it does not take into account the costs of capital financing.

However, everyone agrees that the sharp drop in the price of photovoltaic equipment (around 30% in 2009) justifies a reduction in the prices of the electricity they make it possible to produce. It remains to find the right cursor. Whatever they are, the new rates will not in all cases concern installations already in service.

Today, the industry says it is completely calm about the results of the races. “On December 22, the government presented an extremely detailed draft decree to the Higher Energy Council. I do not imagine that this decree is not published with some modifications of details close, explained the president of the union of renewable energies, André Antolini, on LCI. This draft decree provides for a buy-back rate of 0,58 euro cents per kWh for installations "integrated into the frame", that is to say ensuring a waterproofing of the roof, mounted on dwellings, offices , educational or health buildings. The price drops to 0,50 euro cents per kWh for other sites. Finally, an intermediate tariff is created for buildings with “simplified integration”, that is to say when the panels are simply placed on the roof, but do not guarantee watertightness, like agricultural sheds. According to some specialists, the delay in the publication of the decision is in particular linked to the government's questions about the regionalization of the prices of ground photovoltaic power plants. In September, the Ministry of Ecology had published a draft decree, which marked the introduction of a modulation of the feed-in tariffs for ground installations with a power greater than 250 kWp. This provision was aimed at achieving better geographic modulation of the ground power plants. It was notably defended by EDF Energies Nouvelles, which played a decisive role in the creation of a solar panel factory at First Solar in France. But this strategy is not necessarily unanimous. “Within the sector as well as the State, two visions clash. Those who defend a centralizing vision of photovoltaics with the creation of ground-based power plants, and the proponents of decentralization who rather bet on a multiplication of on-roof installations. These two visions are not necessarily incompatible, but they do require budgetary choices, ”explains an expert. After the failure of the carbon tax and a few months before the regional elections, the implementation of a “less ecological” decree can also raise questions on the political level. Enough to give yourself a few more days of reflection before making a decision.



Case to follow so ... I already found this on

2010 purchase prices (decree of July 2006)

5th January 2010

While waiting for the eagerly awaited "new tariff decree", here are the purchase prices for the complete requests for a purchase contract Purchase contract Contract which manages the contractual relationship between the photovoltaic producer and the buyer. The purchase contract is issued by EDF AOA (Agence Obligation d'Achat) or a Local Distribution Company (ELD). carried out from 01/01/2010, with a K coefficient equal to 1,05006.

The PPEI index has dropped by almost 8% since the calculation of the purchase price The electricity purchase price The price at which photovoltaic electricity is purchased. The tariff is fixed by decree 2009, hence the significant drop in the tariff.

Basic rate T = 31,502 c € / kWh
Basic rate with integration premium T + I = 57,753 c € / kWh

Corsica, DOM, St Pierre and Miquelon
Basic rate T = 42,002 c € / kWh
Basic rate with integration premium T + I = 57,753 c € / kWh


Wait & see ...

Edit here is the office update in 10/2010:


published: 13/01/10, 11:18
by Christophe
Ayé it fell today! There are frankly no big changes ... so "all that for that" ... : Shock:

New decree: In the name of the purchasing power of the French!

And the new rates are. This version must be the right one. Finally ! The 58 euro cents per kWh, the highest in the world, would therefore be maintained on January 1, 2010, based on the 55 cents of 2006 after indexation, for installations with "built-in", when they are integrated into residential, educational or healthcare buildings with strong architectural and visual challenges.

For other buildings (offices, industrial, commercial, agricultural), the rate is set at 50 cents per kWh. This rate must favor the most accomplished architectural and aesthetic solutions. Warning ! These two “integration into buildings” tariffs are reserved for existing buildings (with the exception of residential buildings for which technical and architectural constraints exist in both new and existing buildings). This measure is taken to avoid new turnkey buildings, without any real use, paid for by photovoltaics and delivered by certain operators. A practice that was often found in the agricultural world.

Installations with “simplified integration into the building” will be able to benefit from a new rate set at 42 euro cents per kWh and no longer at 45 cents. The creation of this new tariff will encourage the development of solar on professional buildings (industrial, commercial, agricultural buildings) for which solutions fully integrated into the building are not always possible.

The new tariffs will be kept unchanged until 2012. In order to give players long-term visibility, the draft decree includes a degressive indexation formula for tariffs from 2012, which will allow the level of support to be adjusted. the price evolution generated by technological developments.

The new pricing system only applies to new projects. Projects that are already the subject of an electricity purchase contract request with EDF or for which a purchase contract has already been signed continue to benefit from the tariff regime set in 2006. However, to detonate the speculative bubble which has not stopped inflating since November 2009, the government has decided that the projects for which the request to purchase electricity was made as from November 1, 2009, and which have not been the subject of a complete request for connection to the public network on January 11, 2010 must be the subject of a new request to purchase electricity under the new tariff conditions. This provision goes against what was written in the previous decree which still retains its validity today. Beautiful legal battles are thus on the horizon. And a question arises. Why did the government take so long to issue this order, which was expected in the fall, knowing that a bubble was being formed?

And what a bubble! From the beginning of November 2009, the photovoltaic bubble took on stratospheric dimensions. It is therefore due to this excess that the new decree fixing the purchase prices for photovoltaic electricity was signed earlier this week before being published in the Official Journal today Wednesday. And the numbers speak for themselves. While in mid-2009, EDF registered 5000 purchase contract requests each month, today around 3000 per day, increasing the requested power from 1000 to 4000 MW in just one month . An exponential to thrill a recipient of the Fields medal.


The corresponding financial commitment (over 20 years) reached several tens of billions of euros. The assumption by CSPE of this commitment generated in just two months would alone require a significant increase in the price of electricity. Continuing this frantic pace would lead to an even more massive financial impact. Faced with this situation, the government, which deeply regrets and condemns the intervention of unacceptable speculative behavior, particularly in the agricultural sector already largely affected by the crisis, has decided to take measures to combat this new form of speculation, intended to suppress the windfall effects and protect the purchasing power of the French. Through this new decree, the government calls on the various players to support a fair and reasoned development of solar in France.

So finally what to remember from these new rates? That the field of application of the integrated super tariff is reduced like skin of sorrow. That the new 50 cent rate should be distilled sparingly. That these two integrated tariffs no longer concern new buildings, which may seem like a regret, and sanctions the opportunism of operators who offered turnkey buildings. There remains the 42 euro cents and no longer 45. It should benefit very large projects which will benefit from substantial economies of scale! With this new decree, some may be able to say that they have sawed off the branch on which they were sitting and with them a sector in training, still young and fragile, which should nonetheless continue to grow in line with the objectives from Grenelle.

Contrary to what had been announced by the office of the Minister of Ecology yesterday, the new decree was not published in the Official Journal on Wednesday, January 13. To be continued... ... ovoltaque/

ps: there would not be an error of a factor of 1000 on the scale of the curve ???? Because if we read "quickly", that's the equivalent of 4 nuclear reactors requested for December 2009 ... In short it should read 4.0 MW or 4000 kW!

published: 13/01/10, 11:30
by Did67
In retrospect, in relation to the discussions we had:

1) Yes, it is profitable for those who invest. The proof !

Yes, it has become a "disguised subsidy" to farm buildings. I recall what I have developed in relation to the buildings of the Obernai agricultural school: the production of electricity covers the depreciation of the building; agricultural production "below" is therefore done without depreciation charge for the building. In short: gross margin = net margin. So, it is a disguised subsidy!

2) Yes, it is not "sustainable" in the sense "reproducible on a large scale / generalizable to all"

3) I persist in thinking that this is the most clever way to "tax" the cost of electricity of nuclear origin (because solar energy is "socially" valued therefore "we" cannot oppose it ). It is therefore the way to encourage savings in electricity / insulation / promote alternative heating sources (wood, pellets, etc.).

So you have to go all out as long as the system exists!

published: 13/01/10, 11:34
by Did67
I think that excluding new farm buildings will seriously diminish the market.

Randomly, this was an important part of connection requests in recent months. And I know even more projects!

Fall in prices of facilities to be expected !!!

published: 13/01/10, 11:37
by Christophe
Well, we will not redo the discussion of for / against solar PV + subsidies ... the reader will refer to this subject: ... t7271.html ou ... t7367.html (among others ...)

Yes it remains interesting but it is necessarily done (especially in times of crisis) to the detriment of more econologically effective solutions. That's all that bothers me ...

This is the conclusion of the short new summary that I have just written: ... -4204.html

In addition, subsidization keeps installation prices high ...

published: 13/01/10, 11:41
by Christophe
Did67 wrote:Fall in prices of facilities to be expected !!!

So much the better, right? At less than 2 € / Wp it would not be bad, right? We can always dream...

published: 13/01/10, 12:16
by Did67
Yes, yes, we are not going to do it again ...

We will continue to diverge: in my opinion, the subsidy is not made to the detriment of something else, it indirectly "taxes" the cost of electricity of essentially nuclear origin (by the CSPE - which will not go elsewhere by nature itself).

And I am going to be a good player: I concede to you that in the treasury of a family, the investment in the PV can be done at the expense of something else that is "econologically" more useful. Yes, there you are right. It could be ... Or if you want, sometimes yes no doubt, sometimes no (the ex of the PV roof that I mentioned, there would have been nothing instead) ...

A glance in the retro can sometimes be useful! Or funny? There, it's funny all the same:

- a "photovolatic" bubble
- the government which organizes a Grenelle, which speaks of thousands of jobs in the "green" and which accuses investors of "taking advantage" of the device (windfall) ... Well yes, I thought that was the objective, to develop solar energy. They do not know the spreadsheets, ches Borloo ???

published: 13/01/10, 18:42
by Remundo
I believe there were about 200 MWcrete installed in France in 2008.

Which produce on average 20 MW. It is a straw and the photovoltaic absolutely needs attractive purchase prices per kWh, if not, it dies and nuclear ends up perfecting its hegemony.

A single 1GW nuclear power plant produces 50 times all that is supplied by the PV. Only one I said! There are more than 60 in France :P

There are other sectors to support: biomass, hydraulics, wind power, geothermal energy. Hybrid thermal / photovoltaic roofs ...

And that doesn't stop insulating the houses. All of this is complementary. : Idea:

published: 13/01/10, 18:55
by Christophe
Uh Remundo we said "no debate for / against the PV here please" but several errors there you said:

a) 20 MWh I presume?

b) there are not 60 nuclear power plants in France but there are 58 PWR reactors (not to be confused with EPR, European Pressured reactor, which means strictly ... the same thing !! ihhihi) ... _en_France ... _en_France

ERP: ... op%C3%A9en
Rep: ... ris%C3%A9e

Take 60 years of technical life for the EPR! Not bad !! It will give greenpeace a job for at least 100 years! Pkoi they are against then? :D :D

c) a nuclear reactor produces many, many, many more than 50 * 20 MWh per year! For a 900MW reactor with an annual load factor of 80%, we are already at 900 * 8760 * 0.80 = 6 MWh or about 307 TWh ... this is 200 times more than 6.3 MWh !! : Cheesy:

published: 14/01/10, 11:21
by Remundo
Thanks for links Christophe,

but I spoke well in POWER. I was not clear enough ...

On average, a solar MWp produces 10 times less power, because the alternation day / night already divides by 2. Adding the clouds and the short days of winter ...

For example in France, a 10 kWp installation will produce 11 kWh annually, which gives an average power of 000 / 11/000 = 365 kW. Basically, there is factor 24.

So you see, I'm not that wrong. And if everyone had the basics of physics, they would say less nonsense about "the speculative bubble and the overcapacity associated with PV". :?

It is scandalous to tell such nonsense. :!:

After obviously, we can debate subsidies, but it seems to me that they are still very necessary. Because in any case, oil and nuclear practice tariff dumping.

In 2008, there was talk of 175 MWp installed in France.

A recent SOLER study in September 2009 also advances 175 MWp. I personally think that we are at 200 MWp.

You will see in this study the explanation of the government's reluctance: the queued PV power is really taking off and that puts the balls to other electricity lobbies that individuals / SMEs are able to produce themselves, cleanly and in small quantities yet, but susceptible to become meaningful ...

So here are the friends, tell yourself that a single nuclear GW in France (and there are about 60 of them) produces an average power 20 times greater than all the connected photovoltaic installations.

Also tell yourself that clean energy pays for itself right now, and that dirty energy, that is always paid, but later and more expensive.

And this information should leave you dreaming when reading the statements of the "idiocrites" of the government. : Idea: