Slashdot Mirror

That's the pricing for microfit. Just a FYI

http://fit.powerauthority.on.c... Then check the normalized price across the province, it works out to being around 0.528 still. Because if you're a native, you get an extra payment premium on top from the province. Which is around $1.50kWh, across nearly all solar or wind projects. Those prices listed above are the normalized rates for anyone else. I'm talking about the actual and total overall cost.

We're still paying 0.528kWh for solar here in Ontario

That's not market value. That a legislated price from five years ago. It's now down to about 35 c/kWh and dropping. Even at this price it is quite lucrative for anyone considering rooftop solar because people are making a profit at just 13 c/kWh.

47.9 cents/kWh? That's insane

It's 0.50-1.50kWh here in Ontario. This is what Feed in Tariff programs do, drive the price of electricity through the roof. It is now so bad in Ontario, that people are going broke trying to pay for electricity bills. The federal Liberals, are now looking at this *exact* policy. If it passes, you can be assured that you'll likely see mass protests and riots in the streets here in Canada. People can't afford 0.18/kWH(which is the peak price in Ontario) already. Top this off with the provincial Liberals in Ontario, the federal Liberals in Ottawa and the NDP in Alberta wanting to push a carbon tax? Not a chance that there won't be huge problems, especially when the most conservative estimate is that it will raise the cost of goods across all sectors by 20%

You want to know what the kicker is? In Ontario "green energy" accounts for under 1% of total generation and over 55% of the total price sold to consumers.

Ditto for Australia:

Electricity prices across most of the country are tipped to jump - hurting the poor and costing blue-collar workers their jobs.

And the worst of it? These policies will actually make no known difference to any warming, which is probably good for us anyway. It's all for nothing:

        Electricity prices across most of the country are set to surge during the next two years, largely driven by the closures of coal-fired power stations in South Australia and Victoria and ongoing investment in wind generation, a national energy market regulator says.

        The Australian Energy Market Commission’s annual report into residential electricity price trends shows average price increases for each of the next two years of between 2.4 and 9.3 per cent are expected in all states and territories except Tasmania and Queensland, where the average cost is forecast to dip annually by 0.6 per cent and 1.5 per cent respectively.

        This comes as businesses face higher costs in South Australia, already hit by two major blackouts in little more than two months. Australian Stock Exchange data shows ... that for companies to purchase a megawatt of electricity for March, it would cost South Australian buyers $145, those in Victoria $54.70, Queensland $98.25 and NSW $61.50. The national electricity market average is $89.86.

47.9 cents/kWh? That's insane

It's 0.50-1.50kWh here in Ontario. This is what Feed in Tariff programs do, drive the price of electricity through the roof. It is now so bad in Ontario, that people are going broke trying to pay for electricity bills. The federal Liberals, are now looking at this *exact* policy. If it passes, you can be assured that you'll likely see mass protests and riots in the streets here in Canada. People can't afford 0.18/kWH(which is the peak price in Ontario) already. Top this off with the provincial Liberals in Ontario, the federal Liberals in Ottawa and the NDP in Alberta wanting to push a carbon tax? Not a chance that there won't be huge problems, especially when the most conservative estimate is that it will raise the cost of goods across all sectors by 20%

You want to know what the kicker is? In Ontario "green energy" accounts for under 1% of total generation and over 55% of the total price sold to consumers.

Since they're already vastly cheaper than nuclear, your argument is shit. Get a real one. We're all tired of yours.

No, they're not vastly cheaper then nuclear. At between $0.50kWh and $1.50kWh they are no where near as cheap when nuclear is $0.07-0.08kWh including refurbishment costs for the reactor after 25-35 years. Hell it costs between $40m and $150m to build a 1GW natural gas power station in the asshole of Canada which pays for itself in under 10 years, it costs nearly $800m for solar or wind over 50-70 years to pay for it. That's at current rates.

People living under "green energy" recoil in horror as energy prices go through the roof due to FiT programs. Progressives continue to wonder why all those people don't vote for them and, tell their friends that they know what's best for everyone.

Renewables are cheaper than nuclear since years.

You're pushing pure bullshit. In some cases the cost of wind and solar are even worse. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th gen costs of wind and solar are between 0.32kWh and 1.5kWh(that's $1.50kWh aka one dollar and fifty-cents per kilowatt hour) depending on where it is and who's getting the payment. Installation wise, per GW nuclear is still cheaper. Hell I live a literal stones throw from the 2nd largest nuclear generating station in the world.

This is the exact same thing that's happening in US states like Illinois and Minnesota as well. "Green energy" is not cheap, is damned expensive. Around here it's drive the "peak energy" costs from 0.07kWh to 0.18kWh in less then a decade.

Now the feed in is around 50c I think meaning my panels pay about 60% more than if you were to do it after buying a house that doesn't have them already installed.

Actually, having just looked into this myself, I can tell you that the rate as of January 1st, 2015 is 38.4 c/kWh (source).

You're getting an amazing deal compared to current prices, but you also would have had to pay a lot more for your install costs, I imagine. So, it all balances out, I'm guessing.

It is also important to mention that the years of government ignoring Ontario's strength in uranium, hydro and coal resources in favour of Ontario's relatively weak wind resource has resulted in electricity costs rising. The Ontario government's own plan projects a 42% increase in home electric bills from 2013 to 2018 and further to 68% increase by 2032.

In addition, Ontario contracted itself into buying the most expensive, wind-generated electricity first, pays other contracted generators to NOT GENERATE electricity in times of excess supply and sells surplus power to neighbouring jurisdictions at a loss.

Are you not able to distinguish between wind and PV?
Try again : http://fit.powerauthority.on.ca/sites/default/files/FIT%20Price%20Schedule_June%203%202011.pdf

Solar power... in Ontario??? I'm glad to know you have messed up pricing there (or rather, you said, "used to," which implies you don't any more), but in most places the power company pays you a lot less for solar power than what you pay them.

Tell me about it. Totally nuts. I heard they reduced pricing last fall (when they found themselves in a couple of billion dollar hole) so I double checked. Well, now it's $0.549/kWh. And they cranked up the pricing when you buy from them in the mean time (no real surprises there). Colour me skeptical, but do you have an example where residential feed-in is paid less than they sell for? As per this page, the minimum paid is in Hawaii at $0.224. That's still well above what anyone pays for power.

He also is something of a crackpot. He also isn't a climate researcher.

OK, I'm just looking over the awards and accolades he received in his Wikipedia page. Fellow of the Royal Society, CBE, Dr A.H. Heineken Prize for the Environment, RGS Discovery Lifetime award, Wollaston Medal, ... I'm counting some 10 books published. Some crackpot.

To counter global warming in power production,

(wind+hydro+nuclear+thermal solar+waste gas) > gas > coal > shale gas (all new gas) > PV Solar

For all the first in brackets have very low emissions. Most of the processes, like mining for raw materials, smelting, etc., is done or can be done via electricity from non-emission sources.

Now, natural gas produces CO2. Coal is even worse, while shale gas is like coal+gas - it looks clean but it results in more effective emissions than either.

Photovoltaic solar is the worse, most polluting solution. If PV panels are placed in desert areas, they will recoup energy required to produce them in staggering 8-10 years!! Many home installations of PV panels in California are terribly wasteful - they will never even produce the energy that was required to build them in the first place.

So how are PV installations happening? Subsidies. Feed-in fees. PV company uses cheap CO2 emission energy, like coal, to produce panels @ $0.05/kWh. Then when installed, government provides feed-in tariffs at $0.40/kWh, or in some places, $0.80/kWh.

http://microfit.powerauthority.on.ca/solar-pv

For $0.80/kWh, it is cheaper to burn $400/bbl oil than use these panels for energy production. And keep in mind, the cost of these panels is with $0.05/kWh wholesale electrical rates! How much would they cost if made with $0.80/kWh electricity? Probably $20/W, or $100/W-effective.

PV panels and feed-tarrifs are the largest scam since biofuels few years ago.

They estimated 22 years to reclaim the investment at $0.42/kWh under Ontario's Standard Offer Program. Which is allowing $0.42/kWh for PV and $0.11 for all other renewable systems.

You can watch the live output stats (requires flash) of the Exibition Palace 100kWh installation in Toronto and see historical data.

The system has been online since last August and they should have a much better month this June, but the 100kW Solar PV installation poorest functional month was 1.8MWh (January) and best was 9MWh so far. At the $0.42/kWh this translates to $756-$3780 per month or 24-121 years to reclaim the investment. At $0.11/kWh this is $198-$990/month or 92-462 years to break even on the investment.

I would think the real annual output will land in the center and at the $0.42/kWh rate, they will reclaim the $1.1 million in around 40 years if the panels output doesn't degrade severely through that period.

In higher annual insolation areas like California and Hawaii with peak electrical usage due to AC, solar PV is getting better for low-maintenance installations like a Walmart or Google roof, when the PR factor is taken into account, but in Canada, it's a long way off from feasible due to the low winter insolation and "Twin Peaks" electrical load with the highest peak in February when solar PV has no real output.

SHPEGS is our attempt to design a more suitable renewable power system for Canada, Northern US and Europe.

• The 40MW press release would be the largest Solar PV plant, but the Solar Thermal at Kramer Junction is 354MW and has been operating for over 20 years along with the other SEGS style systems. Nevada Solar One is 64MW and will be completed soon.
• Solar Thermal Electric Generation was not included in the $0.42/kWh (only Solar PV), any solar thermal or hybrid installations under this program would only be eligible for the $0.11/kWh and the rules have several wordings around hybrid systems that make it unclear whether a solar thermal/geothermal hybrid would even qualify at all
• After some more looking and reading the rules, they have blatantly advertised 40MW to claim "The Biggest" and get mediots to post their press release and create hype for their company, but the rules are clear on a 10MW limit.
• OptiSolar doesn't actually have a commercial thin film PV product yet, but they have been hiring.

but Bucky Fuller said it best:

• This program was intended for small power producers with a limit of 10MW. The 40MW is a press release to claim "The Biggest" and supposed to be built in 10MW stages. According to the rules there is a hard limit at 10MW. The $0.42/kWh was intended to provide a Solar PV cost study and these guys are trying to bend the rules to take advantage of the program. The 40MW will be difficult to do without getting a rule change.
• The solar insolation in Sarnia is very low for 6 months of the year and non-existent at winter solstice with 8 hours of low angle daylight. Canada has 2 peaks in electrical usage (August and February) as opposed to a warmer climate with a single summer peak. In February there is no real output from a Solar PV panel and the EROEI of Solar PV in this location is 50% of locating the same panel in the Mojave desert. They would have to pick up the solar field every fall and snowbird it to Arizona for the winter for it to put out any power.
• Solar Insolation at Sarnia in kWh/m2 on a 43degree panel (from above nasa link):
  Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. avg.
  1.89 2.67 3.30 4.21 4.92 5.16 5.19 4.85 4.21 3.18 1.97 1.60 3.60
• The 40MW is peak output at noon on summer solstice. The plant is going to produce a lot less output for the rest of the year. They should rate output of intermittent power in MWh/day average and not in MW. MW makes sense for a coal or nuclear plant where the output is constant.

The SHPEGS project is an open renewable design project that is attempting to take advantage of the Canadian climate that has high summer solar insolation and cold winter temperatures and provide base-load renewable electricity and thermal storage from a direct/indirect hybrid solar collection system built with common materials.

• This program was intended for small power producers with a limit of 10MW. The 40MW is a press release to claim "The Biggest" and supposed to be built in 10MW stages. According to the rules there is a hard limit at 10MW. The $0.42/kWh was intended to provide a Solar PV cost study and these guys are trying to bend the rules to take advantage of the program. The 40MW will be difficult to do without getting a rule change.
• The solar insolation in Sarnia is very low for 6 months of the year and non-existent at winter solstice with 8 hours of low angle daylight. Canada has 2 peaks in electrical usage (August and February) as opposed to a warmer climate with a single summer peak. In February there is no real output from a Solar PV panel and the EROEI of Solar PV in this location is 50% of locating the same panel in the Mojave desert. They would have to pick up the solar field every fall and snowbird it to Arizona for the winter for it to put out any power.
• Solar Insolation at Sarnia in kWh/m2 on a 43degree panel (from above nasa link):
  Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. avg.
  1.89 2.67 3.30 4.21 4.92 5.16 5.19 4.85 4.21 3.18 1.97 1.60 3.60
• The 40MW is peak output at noon on summer solstice. The plant is going to produce a lot less output for the rest of the year. They should rate output of intermittent power in MWh/day average and not in MW. MW makes sense for a coal or nuclear plant where the output is constant.

The SHPEGS project is an open renewable design project that is attempting to take advantage of the Canadian climate that has high summer solar insolation and cold winter temperatures and provide base-load renewable electricity and thermal storage from a direct/indirect hybrid solar collection system built with common materials.

Oops -- I forgot the URL to the programs website, for the interested:

http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/sop/

Yaz.