31 Oct 2011
The government has confirmed it is planning to slash solar incentives by more than 50 per cent, cutting the feed-in tariffs available to domestic and small-scale business installations, from 43p per kWh to just 21p per kWh.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) today launched a consultation on the proposed changes, confirming it wants the reduced tariffs to come into force as early as 12 December.
Under the proposals the new tariffs would apply to all new solar PV installations with an eligibility date on or after 12 December 2011.
Such installations would then receive the current tariff before moving to the lower tariffs on 1 April 2012, assuming the government does not make further changes following the closure of the consultation on 23 December.
The timeline prompted criticism from the solar industry, with founder of Solarcentury Jeremy Leggett stating on Twitter: "So you 'consult' until 23 Dec but cut off tariff from 12th? I guess you have a good lawyer?"
The proposed changes are largely in line with those that appeared in a document inadvertently published by the Energy Saving Trust on Friday.
If brought into effect they would cut rates of return for solar installations from current levels that have, in some cases, topped 10 per cent to just 4.5 per cent to five per cent.
Significantly, the returns would be below the five to eight per cent originally envisaged by the feed-in tariff scheme.
The consultation also proposes cuts of between 14 per cent and 55.5 per cent for larger installations with between 4kW and 250kW of capacity.
The largest cuts of more than 55 per cent are reserved for installations with 4-10kW of capacity, while larger installations with 150-250kW capacity that are typically favoured by businesses and community projects will see tariffs fall from 15p/kWh to 12.9p/kWh.
Industry experts have warned the deep cuts would lead to a severe contraction in demand, and an end to free solar financing schemes and social housing projects.
Leading solar firms are predicting significant job losses if the proposed changes come into effect and are promising to mount a high-profile campaign against the scale of the cuts and the rapid pace at which they are expected to come into effect. There are also rumours that some solar firms could pursue legal action against the government over the rapid timeline for the consultation and the manner in which the proposed cuts could come into effect before the consultation exercise is officially completed in late December.
However, climate minister Greg Barker insisted the deep cuts were essential to ensure the feed-in tariff scheme remains within its spending cap and provides more "sustainable" foundations for the UK's solar industry.
"My priority is to put the solar industry on a firm footing so it can remain a successful and prosperous part of the green economy, and so it doesn't fall victim to boom and bust," he said in a statement.
"The plummeting costs of solar mean we've got no option but to act so we stay within budget and not threaten the whole viability of the FITs scheme.
"Although I fully realise that adjusting to the new lower tariffs will be a big challenge for many firms, it won't come as a surprise to many in the solar industry that have themselves acknowledged the big fall in costs and the big increase in their rate of return over the past year."
DECC said that based on the current rate of adoption of solar panels, the feed-in tariff scheme would breach its Treasury-imposed £863m spending cap and solar PV would cost consumers £980m a year, adding around £26 at 2010 prices to annual domestic electricity bills in 2020.
It added that under the new proposals, feed-in tariff PV costs will be limited to between £250m and £280m in 2014-15, reducing the impact of PV installations to an estimated £3 a year on energy bills by 2020.
The consultation also proposed a new energy efficiency requirement that would mean any household or business applying for feed-in tariff incentives from April next year would have to meet minimum energy efficiency standards.
The consultation suggests these standards could include ensuring the building has an Energy Performance Certificate level of C or above, or requiring people to take up Green Deal measures before they can install solar panels.
DECC said that as a transitional arrangement installations with eligibility dates between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2013 would have 12 months from entering the feed-in tariff scheme to comply with the energy efficiency requirement.
Industry insiders have warned that unless any new standards are well structured they could act as a further barrier to solar adoption.
In addition, it proposes new multi-installation tariff rates for aggregated solar PV schemes, presumably aimed at free solar and social housing projects, where a single individual or organisation owns or receives feed-in tariff payments from more than one PV installation located on different sites.
Under the proposals the new tariff rates would come into effect from 1 April 2012 and would provide tariffs of 80 per cent of the standard tariff rate for all aggregated PV schemes.
The change would represent a further blow to free solar financing schemes and social housing projects, which are already likely to be halted if rates of return fall below five per cent – a level at which industry insiders believe it will be impossible to attract private finance.
However, the government said that as part of the review it would "consider whether more could be done to enable genuine community projects to be able to fully benefit from FITs and whether, for example, a definition of community scheme is required and, if so, how this should be defined".
Green groups accused the government of dealing a crippling blow to a fast-expanding green industry.
"This is a real setback for jobs in Britain today, with the government announcement that they are slashing funding for solar panels," said Louise Hutchins from Greenpeace. "The renewable sector is one of this century's critical growth industries, with the solar industry creating more than 20, 000 jobs in the last year alone. There's a real inconsistency with the government's approach to job creation – on the day that deputy PM Nick Clegg announced funding for 35,000 new jobs the Treasury pulls the rug out from under this vibrant industry."
Her comments were echoed by Friends of the Earth's energy campaigner, Donna Hume, who warned the changes could put tens of thousands of people out of work.
"Greg Barker says he wants to make subsidies fairer, but the new rates mean that unless you have significant savings, you're unlikely to be able to afford solar panels," she said.
"The government should be encouraging more people – not fewer – to save money by making their own electricity, freeing us from the stranglehold of the Big Six energy firms that are pushing up our bills."
LATEST STORIES ABOUT SOLAR
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
LATEST JOBS
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
HIGHLIGHT
Market has failed to provide sufficient new capacity to deal with increase in demand, energy minister warns
INSIGHT
INSIGHT
Service provider builds a compact, energy-efficient and scalable IT infrastructure
A look at alternative approaches to managing energy for cost and/or sustainability reasons in data centres
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Add your comment
Solar fits
The fit payment has dropped and so have the prices of installation a 9% tax free return on your money is good value in any body's mind today. We have not dropped an staff just adapted to the new price structures anyone out there wants a free quote then getting touch with me anywhere in the uk. This is still a beefy viable proposition
Posted by Joe, 13 Dec 2011
uh?
solar energy feed in tariffs are being cut by half here in the UK? a terrible decision which could cost 25000 jobs. so much for being the greenest government ever. i think every new build should have solar panels built in to the design. how hard can that be? http://www.totalsolarenergy.co.uk
Posted by sunbeam, 16 Nov 2011
£££££££
These cut backs are not about additional energy costs. If this was then energy providers would be stopped from charging between £0.12 to £0.18 per kW for electricity. This is about Politics and Germany starting to control Europe and our so called Green Government stopping German Exports of PV Panels. When will we wake up to the fact that Germany are world leaders in this Industry and we can only benefit from this. WW2 with £££££ not bullets. I have always been blue but now who knows. ??? Cameron has proved he has no Idea except how to Cut Cut Cut. Ant one can do this but at what cost ????
Posted by Harry, 14 Nov 2011
subsidies good if effective
I understand the EMR (electricity market review) will subsidise the giant clean energy companies, including back up gas, nuclear and large scale renewables. This will come from customers bills. The idea is to fund the transition to more secure supplies, with low carbon an added justification. The little subsidies to thousands of producers was and is changing the attitude to energy. It creates a live within the means of nature incentive. Anyone awake will use electricity when nature is producing it, less when not. What an essential lesson for our survival as a species. Though I agree with govt. that profit to rentaroofers and their investors was not a target outcome, and would be happy to see this sector taxed or otherwise curtailed. To the renewables bashers amongst the commentators: We live happily within the output of wind and solar and water power, these are tiny tiny generators and brilliant. You have clearly not tried to do so, nor experienced the rewards. Maybe learn about what you speak about first? Subsidies, like all govt. spending have a goal. If the goal is good and is achieved the govt. spending is good. If not change it. But it should not be a tax on the poor. Each person should have a low cost power ration, after which price could rise. That would also encourage less profligate consumption, more energy awareness.
Posted by vicky, 02 Nov 2011
Kev need his head examined
Kev by name and Kev by nature. Lets see how much it costs us putting 10,000 people out of work....around £800,000 per week, plus we still don't get anywhere near our carbon reduction targets which will cost us billions in fines in 2020, never mind the effect that global warming is having on the planet. I suspect 'Kev' must be a narrow minded Tory voter.
Posted by David Garcia, 01 Nov 2011
Pot, Kettle, Black
Greg Barker: The £320,000 profit on flat bought with taxpayer help (Cut, paste, google) Interesting Telegraph article on Mr Barker's attitude towards his own use of public funds/ profiting from public funds!!
Posted by NJR, 01 Nov 2011
Leave
From Renewable Energy News Today. China has made a $313 billion commitment to green energy, primarily solar, over just the next four years. The obvious think to do is to get out of the UK and go to a country with the vision.
Posted by sunpower, 01 Nov 2011
PV HYPE
Ploughcroft’s hypocrisy is stunning. He carries considerable responsibility for hyping up PV installation by going on Dragon’s Den to promote PV installation as the next best scheme to get rich quick, that’s despite the fact not only was he was 3 years too late, but one of several thousand other people that were piling in with the same bright ideas. What was even more extraordinary was the fact that he got backing, because as the Dragon’s promote themselves as astute they should know that basic law of ‘bright ideas’ is that by the time a ‘bright idea’ has got to this stage, the real smart money has already moved out. This all depressingly proved how frothy and spivy the whole business was becoming, which is proved a disaster as PV technology is stunning and does actually do what is says on the box. All this does not go unnoticed by the people in DECC or more relevantly the carbon energy lobby who loathe the whole concept of FITs as proved by worldwide opposition to such legislation by the vested energy interests.
Posted by sunpower, 01 Nov 2011
E-Petitions
I don't see anyone suggesting a Parliamentary debate on the subject of FITS cuts. I think this is why the Government has been so brutal in the time allowance for consultation to 23rd December, it is because they don't think an E-Petition can be got up and running in that time. Under new legislation if we could get 100,000 signatures on an E-Petition it would force a Parliamentary debate. That would attract enormous adverse publicity for the Government if the motion to be debated was a fair one. The Government is saying it is bringing the rate of return down by the rate the installation costs have dropped to make the rate of return what it was in the first place. That is complete rubbish costs have not dropped by 50%, it is more like 15%. How about an E-Petition to be debated by Parliament suggesting that FITS are reduced and or increased indexed to the base installation figure at the time the scheme was originally introduced. That should put the Government on the back foot as they will either have to admit that they got their numbers wrong in the first place or admit they are going back on their original commitment and casting aside 20,000 jobs in the process. Thinking about it further perhaps we should have an alternative in the E-Petition to bring back coal powered generation which is a logical extension to abandoning Kyoto.
Posted by Jonathan, 01 Nov 2011
Current Applications
Hi, I presume this change will only affect future applications ?, ie any previous or current 'in the system' application will still get the rate when the sign up was made ???. Or will this proposed change take effect on all previous and current PV systems with agreed payment rates being retospectively changed ??.
Posted by Will Campbell, 31 Oct 2011
What did you expect
Did you think the gravy train was going to run forever? Fat cat investors filling fields with PV and fit for free companies rubbing their hands at a 10% return. It was never about saving energy it was about hitting targets and the govt were caught napping when the world and his wife started a PV company. Well done David, I for one don't want to pay for the fat cats returns.
Posted by Andy, 31 Oct 2011
bonkers
the cut in the f-i-t makes the fitting of solar panels unecconomic now, a return time of 20 years - no chance. what is to stop the government from changing its mind again next week and ditching the tarrif altogether?
Posted by ian peckitt, 31 Oct 2011
@saftlad
If the 'new tehchnologoes' can't compete with the existing players, then they aren't worth having anyway. You want moey to play with your new toys? -- go to a bank and borrow it there. Do not steal it from my power bills. I spent nearly all of my professional career in the iT business which has changed beyond recognition since I started in the mid-1970s. I don't remember any need for government subsidies in that business. Nor do I see any need for windmills or solar cells or any other plaything to be subsidised. If you make a better moustrap - the world comes to your door. But if it costs ten times as much and only works occasionally they will rightly ignore it. So should we.
Posted by Latimer Alder, 31 Oct 2011
Rejoice Part2??
Latimer, if new technologies were not subsidised, then they would never get off the ground and compete with existing power players. If the Govt are serious about cutting the carbon footprint (which I seriously doubt given retrograde steps such as this), then such subsidies are essential. That said, I would prefer to see the FIT rates remain as they are for Joe Public, whilst the likes of the Rent-A-Roof companies are faced with a longer ROI.
Posted by Saftlad, 31 Oct 2011
The inmates...
.. have clearly taken over the asylum. An embryonic industry on trajectory to deliver the goods shot down in flames by decc / treasury / power companies / and a totally inept government!
Posted by George Parr, 31 Oct 2011
rejoice Part 2
Seljon asks if I want to cut the subsidies for 'renewables'. Yep. Bigtime. If they aren't sensibly economic without being subsidised to several times the going rate. kill the subsidies immedialtely and let the 'industry' wither and die. Parasites. Once that has happened successfully we can look at the rest.
Posted by Latimer Alder, 31 Oct 2011
Taxing
Makes you wonder if they would cut the FIT if it was a taxable income!!!!!
Posted by Julie Rostron, 31 Oct 2011
Rejoice??
Latimer I am assuming you want our entire energy system turning off as it is wholly reliant on subsidies, or is it only renewables you want turning off?
Posted by seljon, 31 Oct 2011
Untrust-worthy government!
Invest in uk? what a shame! Government let downand will loss votes! Surely if 100,000 people protest - Parliament have to re-open? Date for downing street solar energy FOTS cuts protest please anyone?
Posted by Kath, 31 Oct 2011
Senseless
It beggars belief that a whole industry is given six weeks to react. Why does the eligibility period occur before the end of consultation. Who would believe DECC and their shabby politicians on anything now? Better off investing outside the UK.
Posted by Ian, 31 Oct 2011
Rejoice!
End of the ripoff subsidy farmers selling 'investment vehicles' and using poor people's energy bills to pay for it. Excellent news. And now for the windmills. Kill the subsidy parasites forever!
Posted by Latimer Alder, 31 Oct 2011
solar market deblacle
Gov is expecting tesco, aldi, kwikfit and asda to join solar market soon
Posted by eddy, 31 Oct 2011
Term based politics Vs National sustainability
We have had solutions for reducing oil consumption for decades, but our economy would fall apart. We now have technologies that could potentially enable the UK to become energy self sufficient. Yet again, tax and corporate self interests will be allowed to prevail by law. I suspect that no one in Government has been asked to calculate the sustainable value from a UK economy driven by energy self sufficiency. Why should politicians care? Their term of office and tenure to post are not sustainable metrics. Remember the scandal of the Wind Farm company on the Isle of White, allowed to go bust a short while ago at a time when we should be ploughing investment into UK evergy innovations and growing our skill base.
Posted by Mike Olive, 31 Oct 2011
Solar Tariffs, lack of leadership and perspective
Greg Barker today has killed the solar industry in the UK and the changes will precipitate many job losses. The government seems to be slighlty rudderless and without leadership. On the one hand we have a scheme about to go through to build a train line to Birmingham for £30bn saving commuters half an hour? and on the other we see support for the carbon capture and storage trial in Scotland pulled over costs at £100m and the solar feed in tariff cut to the extent that the industry will be decimated. PR can only go so far in runnig a government. It is becoming increasingly apparent that this government does not know what it is doing and is responding to events and the treasury and not to any vision of the future. How many companies in the UK rely on the vision and direction of the company to be dictated by the finance director or worse financial controller? It seems that George Osborne, who lets no forget is in his early 40s is driving the ship. DECC keep coming up with nice sound bites, but this feels rather like the bad old days of Tony Blair and hollow promises. We need leaders and not PR junkies.
Posted by Mark Hoskin, 31 Oct 2011
Solar Panels
The large companies have installed fields of panels,the government,doesn't want to pay out too much,so the householder suffers,having refunds cut in half,by such a reduction.
Posted by derek, 31 Oct 2011
10,000 job cuts to save £3 a year!
Look at the justification for the cuts - to save £3 a year by 2020 on energy bills. 10,000 unemployed a price worth paying for a £3 saving? The economics of the mad house
Posted by seljon, 31 Oct 2011
Tell me please...
This new tariff and deadline will just give the industry a very busy november whilst re-setting the return on investment to when the scheme was first rolled out...wont it?
Posted by Paul, 31 Oct 2011
Crass
This is government at it's short term best. Yes FIT should and can be cut but there is a mechanism to do so. To destroy companies in the short term is not the way forward not to mention the cut to consumer confidence. The FIT could be cut hard for the Free roof schemes, and less so for the private consumer doing their bit and employing local firms. It could be tiered to reflect cost of product used and where it comes from, easily done through the MCS scheme. The government chooses to ignore the industry and follow it's self imposed caps on FIT payments. With the sum total of senior Execs of Centrica earning as much as the cost of the FIT budget government clearly needs to look at other industry tariffs before cutting the renewable industry.
Posted by flamefix, 31 Oct 2011