Solar Feed In Tariff Website

The Chinese National Energy Administration has announced via the state run newspaper China Daily that they will be seeking to produce around 15 per cent of all the country’s energy by renewable means within the next 10 years.

China, despite being criticised for its heavily industrialised, polluting economy and images of Beijing obscured by dense smog during the 2008 Olympic Games, the government is taking proactive steps towards reducing carbon emissions with measures that would shame certain other attendees of the Copenhagen climate summit.

With the growing realisation of the fallibility on basing the huge Chinese economy on fossil fuel imports which could become untenable within the next 25 years, the Beijing government is planning to spend billions of dollars in investing in solar and wind farm sites in addition to research projects which could keep China at the cutting edge of green energy generation.

Renewable energy generation grew by 1 per cent in China in the last 12 months with the government hopeful that figures will grow from the present 9.9 per cent to 15 per cent by 2020. The Chinese government is keen to diversify its economy as well as its means of energy generation with the dual purpose of slowing the effects of climate change and making the economy more robust in the face of any potential fuel crises which could arise in the near future.

In spite of passing legislation designed to have an immediate impact on renewable energy uptake such as the feed-in tariff, a mechanism to incentivise investment in green technologies, government spokesman Zhang Guobao is realistic about the timescales involved in such projects. Speaking to China Daily, Zhang commented that,

“Power projects take a long time to be up and running, and we are basically allowing five years to complete them although it is a 10-year program, otherwise, the facilities cannot be put into use by 2020.”

Zhang added, “It appears that some local governments approved energy-guzzling projects during economic crisis so only by fully implementing our energy saving regulations can we realize economic growth with less energy consumption.”

On Friday rumours emerged that the German government is likely to significantly reduce the price paid for electricity produced by solar panels. Furthermore, the reduction may be made as early as April rather than in July as previously anticipated.

We expect an official announcement this week and will update you then but the rumours alone have already sparked hefty losses in solar energy stocks around the world. This is not surprising considering how large a proportion of the world solar market Germany represents. In 2009, close to 4GW of solar energy capacity were installed. The next biggest markets, Italy, France and the US were a maximum of 1 GW each. If demand drops significantly in Germany, it could lead to more pain for solar equipment manufacturers.

Personally, I believe a significant reduction in Germany’s feed-in-tariff is a good thing for the industry. Things got out of hand in 2009 as installers and manufacturers (particularly inverter manufacturers) struggled to meet demand. Everyone wants the solar industry to grow, but it must be stable growth. Too much too soon and there isn’t enough time for problems to resolved.

For example, in the southern part of Germany, solar energy makes up close to 5% of all energy production now. This is already causing problems for the electricity grid because of the intermittency of solar power. If solar energy were to grow more slowly, these problems could be dealt with as they arise.

The other problem of the feed-in-tariff is that it was making people too rich. Solar farms in Germany are providing 10-15% annual returns virtually risk free. No hedge fund can offer that. Given the risk of a solar investment, the return needs only to compete with long-term savings accounts, so if they provide just a 4% return, that should still be attractive. It is hard to predict what the effect of the drop in feed in tariff will be. Certainly, if the return on investment is lowered, there will be a reduced incentive and less of the ‘urgency’ which gave rise to the boom of last year. However, if there is still a reasonable, positive return on investment, then large numbers of people will still take up the opportunity. If someone handing out 20 pound notes switches to giving out 10 pound notes, would people start walking away?

On the verge of releasing details of the UK feed-in-tariff, what does is the message for UK policy makers observing this 17% cut? Why should they listen to the voices calling for an increase in the tariff whilst all our neighbours are busy cutting theirs? I would ask the government not to waiver in their commitment to growing the UK solar industry. The market in Germany is one thousand times greater than that of the UK (4 gigawatts compared to roughly 4 megawatts last year). The Germans have created an efficient industry with that is able to provide solar installations at competitive prices. The UK industry has not got off the ground yet. We must provide a decent incentive so that people begin to accept the concept of solar energy in the UK.

The experience of Germany shows that subsidies do not have to be provided forever, however the industry must be there before you can scale back.

My message to policy makers is this; we have a lot of catching out up to do, so don’t lose your nerve before we have even started.

With the UK still struggling out of recession and with little good coming of the much heralded Copenhagen climate change summit, brighter news has presented itself in the recent report that the UK has over achieved on its carbon emission reduction targets.

Set by the Conservative government back in 1990, the original reduction target was to be 34% by 2020, however, recent findings suggest that this reduction will now be something nearer 36%, with a number of factors helping to reduce carbon emissions across the UK. The report, carried out by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) and released in October is already sparking debate as to whether the government is doing enough to fight climate change through carbon reduction policies.

Government action

While the government has announced that it will not go ahead with the construction of any coal power stations employing carbon capture and storage, many believe that not enough is being done to bring about a wholesale change in the way Britain produces its energy.

However, despite surging ahead with non-renewable energy programs, it would be difficult to argue that ministers in Westminster have turned a blind eye to the potential of green energy. Indeed, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has already overseen the devlopment of some of the largest off-shore wind farms in Europe.

The Clean Energy Cash Back Scheme (essentially a feed-in tariff) similarly represents a commitment to reduce carbon emissions through legislation. The DECC is already publishing papers on the future landscape of the UK power infrastructure with a grid capable of connecting various micro-generation sites across the country.

The recession factor

With the world financial crisis manifesting itself in the UK in the form of a protracted recession, this has of course had an effect on energy use with the population using less energy and therefore generating less carbon. Critics of the reports findings have highlighted that some of the carbon reduction percentiles can be accounted for by the economy and any imminent up-turn could similarly skew the figures.

In response to such assertions, Ed Milliband, minister for the DECC stated that,

“The recession will not deflect the Government’s efforts to cut emissions and move to a low carbon economy. We must redouble our efforts at home and internationally.”

Solar panels fall into two main technological categories. The incubant, established tyoe are called crystalline silicon solar panels and the exciting but unproven type are known as ‘thin-film’ solar panels. To understand the advantages and disadvantage of each technology I’ll briefly explain how each type of solar panel is made. Crystalline silicon solar panels are made from 50 or so ‘solar cells’ connected together and encased in glass. Each solar cell is in fact a thin slice of large crystal of pure silicon (called an ingot). These large crystals are grown from a seed crystal surrounded by molten silicon at very high temperatures. The silicon used must first be extracted from silicon dioxide (also known as sand) and then purified to a very high level. Once the crystal is formed it can be sliced into wafers. The wafers are then specially treated to make a junction between a positive and negative type semiconductor, and then other layers such as the conductive contacts are added to make a working solar cell. This process has many steps and consumes a lot of energy. However, many companies have spent a lot of time refining the process to make it as efficient as possible so almost all parts of the process are now automated.

Thin film solar panels are made using a radically different process. The underlying physics is similar in that they still use a junction between a positive and negative doped semiconductor, however thin film solar panels have the potential to be made in much fewer steps than crystalline silicon. The idea is to take glass (or sometimes foil or plastic) and coat it directly with a series of layers, including the active semiconductor layers to produce a working solar cell. The glass is then encapsulated with a protective plastic and a second sheet of glass as protection. This process saves having to make lots of small cells and connect them together. The other advantage is that the layers are very thin, hence thin film solar cells. The active layers of the cell are only a few nanometers (billionths of a meter) compared to 0.2mm for each silicon wafer.

The important point of all this is that the manufacturing cost of thin film solar cells has the potential to be significantly lower than crystalline silicon. Unfortunately, there are some catches. Firstly, they are not as efficient as crystalline silicon. Crystalline silicon reaches 16 – 18% efficiency in modern solar panels, whereas the most efficient thin film solar panels on the market today  are under 11%. The next drawback is reliability. Thin film solar panels have had less time to prove themselves and have been known to suffer from degradation meaning that their performance gets significantly worse over time.

Despite these drawbacks, several companies have managed to become very successful in manufacturing thin film solar cells. The most notable is called First Solar who are now one of the top two largest solar panels manufacturers in the world and have a significant advantage over rivals due to their low manufacturing costs. First solar make thin film solar cells made from cadmium telluride, one of a number of semiconductor materials that can be used for thin films. First Solar’s panels are less efficient but are very popular for large scale solar installations because of their low cost.

Before the financial crisis, when silicon was in short supply and very expensive, all thin film solar panels were a good idea. First Solar could not produce enough and billions were invested in a large number of thin film solar companies aiming to follow in their footsteps. Now that the silicon shortage is over and the price of crystalline silicon solar panels has fallen, the environment for thin film solar cells is more challenging. First Solar will remain a strong player as they have managed to get to high volume and have a reliable production process. Many of the 200+ start-ups hoping to replicate their success will struggle however. For thin film solar cells there are a wide range of different manufacturing processes and materials that can be used, and there is still a lot of research being done to improve our understanding of the underlying physics. This means that there is a lot of opportunity to invent a ‘unique’ technology and start a company but only the best thin film solar companies will make it however. They have to show not only that their technology is efficient and reliable, but also demonstrate that large scale production is feasible and low-cost. Many ideas that look good on paper or in the lab turn out to be impractical when it comes to volume manufacturing.

At present, it seems like crystalline silicon will retain a strong market share for the foreseeable future (it current represents 80-90% of the market) but I believe that eventually certain thin film technologies will begin to displace crystalline silicon. There is a lot of potential for efficiency improvement in thin film, as well as lower manufacturing cost. Some technologies, particularly that usce solution processing are really very exciting.

What does this mean for the UK solar industry? Very little actually. I would expect over 90% of the UK market will be crystalline silicon for a long time. The reason is that the UK market will be dominated by smaller rooftop applications (partly due to the structure of the feed.in tariff as discussed last week). In such space-constrained applications you want to use the most efficient technology to maximize the energy generated from the available area. For now, this means always choosing crystalline silicon as it’s efficiency is significantly above any thin film solar panel out there.

Keep an eye out for breakthroughs in solar technology as some are surely bound to occur, but beating high quality crystalline silicon solar panels made in China for cost, efficiency and reliability is not easy.

Labour MP and advisor to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) Alan Simpson has warned of the presence of an cartel acting against the interests of renewable energy in the UK. At an event organised by Solar Century to promote the government’s proposal of a feed-in tariff system, Simpson announced that there is currently a lobby opposing the renewable campaign headed by the big utility companies keen to protect their own commercial interests at the expense of the development of green energy in the UK.

With the government’s announcement regarding the introduction of the Clean Energy Cash Back system (essentially a feed-in tariff system) in April 2010 much debate has raged regarding the tariff rate which will be required in order to optimise investment in the fledgling UK renewable energy industry.

The feed-in tariff works on the principle that small, renewable energy producers are guaranteed a fixed, premium rate for all units of energy they feed back into the national grid. The renewable energy units are purchased by the utility companies, something which they are obliged to do by the tariff legislation. In actual fact, the government has set a rate of 5p/unit with a subsidy of 36.5p for units of energy generated by small scale solar and wind installations, something which Simpson has controversially asserted will not be sufficient to spark the must needed investment in the industry.

Simpson claims that with the current rate set at 5p, the ROI for solar investors will only be around 5-7 per cent, yields which would possibly not be generous enough to turn the heads of investors who would potentially be attracted by more generous tariff rates elsewhere in the world. With a tariff rate of 10p, Simpson believes that returns could be a more healthy 10 per cent, rendering the UK as a highly competitive market in the world for attracting renewable investment in the long term.

For the UK to finally become one of the major players in the world of solar drastic changes will need to occur within the coming years to catch up with established markets such as Spain and Germany who are currently generating 2,511 MW and 1,500 MW of renewable energy annually respectively compared to the UK’s peak 6MW. Simpson certainly believes that this shortfall can only be remedied with the introduction of comprehensive tariff systems. Speaking at the Solar Century event, Simpson announced,

“Current energy policy in the UK is dominated by the vested interests of “Big Power”. The national grid is monumentally inefficient as an energy system. It was a half-decent idea for the middle of the last century, but 70%-80% of energy put into the grid disappears before you or I even switch the light on. We need not an energy, but a power revolution that takes control from the centre and literally puts power back into the hands of the people”.

Those within the industry back the words of Alan Simpson and are well aware that the future of the UK renewable energy industry is completely reliant on a strong tariff rate. Come April, it will be there to be seen if the government’s rhetoric on tackling climate change can be matched by a determination to take on the big utility companies and drive through a system which will see the UK become a leading light in the green energy revolution.

The end of the British government’s consultancy period on the introduction of a feed-in tariff (FIT) system, to be called the Clean Energy Cash Back System when introduced in April 2010 finished last week, sparking debate on the viability of the proposed system.

The Renewable Energy Association (REA) has raised doubts as to the potential effectiveness of the Cash Back System. The proposed system, essentially a feed-in tariff, works by offering fixed, premium rates for renewable energy fed-in to the grid by small scale (sub 5mW) energy producers, and bought by the utility companies who are obliged by the legislation to purchase the units of energy over a set number of years.
With the key purpose of the tariffs to attract investment in young renewable industries through incentivisation, the REA has expressed doubts about whether the rate offered by the government for clean energy will prove sufficient to spark sufficient investment.

Indeed, while supporters of the scheme have stated that 5% of the UK’s energy could be generated by renewable means by 2020, the UK government has set the meager target of 2% by 2020 triggering worries that the rate will not be high enough to demonstrate attractive returns for those wishing to invest in the new industries.

Speaking on behalf of the REA Leonie Greene stated,

“From the industry’s perspective the scheme is well designed, but the proposed tariff levels are set too low and applied inconsistently across technologies.”

Where feed-in tariffs have been introduced elsewhere, they have proved to be extremely effective mechanisms for generating huge interest in green energy. However, successes have been based upon generous, yet well balanced schemes and this will be a key factor in either the success or failure of the UK renewable industry.

Dave Timms, campaigner for Friends of the Earth expressed his own concerns,

“The Clean Energy Cash Back scheme has huge potential, but it will fail to make an impact unless the government dramatically improves the amount that will be paid to businesses, households and communities that generate renewable electricity.”

China has reinforced its commitment to moving forward to a more progressive, green economy by agreeing with First Solar the construction of a 2GW solar facility in Ordos, Inner Mongolia. The construction of the large solar facility will begin in June 2010 and is expected to be completed by 2014 in a multi-phase operation expected act as a demonstration of the Chinese governments resolve to make giant leaps towards a renewable energy economy.

 With the solar feed in tariff legislation making the headlines in the UK under the guise of the Clean Energy Cash Back Scheme, the Chinese project will be taking advantage of a similar tariff system with the price of electricity guaranteed at a premium rate over a period of years. Tariff systems such as this have generally proved to be extremely effective means of generating investment in new solar sectors.

 Mike Ahearn, CEO of First Solar commented that,

 “The Chinese feed-in tariff will be critical to this project. This type of forward-looking government policy is necessary to create a strong solar market and facilitate the construction of a project of this size, which in turn continues to drive the cost of solar electricity closer to ‘grid parity’ where it is competitive with traditional energy sources.”

Certainly, it is expected that with the Chinese feed-in tariff policy in place, there will be a number of other large investments in the Chinese photovoltaic (PV) market over the coming months and years. China is also the largest manufacturer of PV product needed for solar projects around the world and is therefore attracting much interest from those wishing to provide turn-key products from manufacturing, construction and installation.

“This major commitment to solar power is a direct result of the progressive energy policies being adopted in China to create a sustainable, long-term market for solar and a low carbon future for China. We’re proud to be announcing this precedent-setting project today. It represents an encouraging step forward toward the mass-scale deployment of solar power worldwide to help mitigate climate change concerns,” announced Mike Ahearn.

With China and in particular the capital, Beijing under the spotlight in recent years with concerns over pollution and carbon emissions, China is now making a very powerful statement to the world that they are about to be at the forefront of the solar revolution.

In a bid to increase profitability among its offshore wind farms, China has introduced a feed-in tariff system designed to make the generation of electricity via wind farms economically viable. China has recently been a leading advocate of the tariff system as the Beijing government seeks to diversify both the economy and the means of energy generation. With the New York Times last week announcing that green power is taking root in China, the move to encourage the take up of wind power generation comes as no surprise as the Asian government is supporting all kinds of renewable energy, especially solar and wind.

The Chinese wind feed-in tariff system will inevitably attract investments in the offshore wind generation industry there with the hope that it will enable the clean, wind energy to compete with that generated via coal fired plants. The guaranteed premium rate which will be offered to wind generators will be met by the existing grid operators with the additional cost being spread over all electricity consumers. The idea is that bigger, more profitable wind plants will receive a more generous tariff rate in order to help them catch up with the bigger wind farms.

The tariff payments are set at around 0.51 Yuan the equivalent of £0.05 per unit of electricity fed in to the grid, depending on the size of the wind farm. Compared with the rate paid for coal fired electricity (0.34 Yuan) the wind farms will e set to receive a generous payment. The announcement by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) stated that the scheme will,

“change current inconsistent pricing, foster clear expectations and facilitate investments in the sector”.

The previous system which operated regarding wind power electricity purchasing involved public bidding using low-rate tariffs which did not enable most wind farms to gain grid connectivity, a hindrance which meant that at least 20 per cent of China’s wind power producers were unprofitable. With the feed-in tariff system generally regarded as by far the most effective means of generating capital in green energy, China will be set to succeed in its bid to diversify its economy and become a major player in the world of green energy production.

The New York Time’s headline, ‘Green power takes root in China’ is representative of a dramatic move towards renewable energy which is taking place in China. The giant Asian power has traditionally been known for its use of fossil fuels with a strong media emphasis being given to pollution problems in China’s major cities resulting from coal burning and extensive carbon emissions from vehicles.

Certainly, with the Beijing Olympics of last year, the worlds eyes were focused sharply on the Chinese capital and the seemingly permanent smog covering which acted as a testament to Chinese heavy industry and the proliferation of vehicles in modern China.

However, it is a marked change in Chinese legislation which prompted the New York newspaper to run with the ‘Green power takes root’ line. The change has come in the form of a national renewable energy level stating that utilities must generate 8 percent of their energy by renewable means by 2020. The fact that this 8 percent figure does not include hydroelectric power adds to the importance which the Chinese are now placing on green energy.

The growing awareness of the lack of long-term sustainability in traditional coal energy sources has prompted the Chinese government to take action to maintain China has a major industrial power well in to the future. There has also been somewhat of a frenzy among private companies seeing the opportunities that will undoubtedly present themselves in the Chinese renewable industry, with a growing activity particularly in sectors such as wind and photovoltaic technology which will inevitably boom in China in the near future.

The New York Times was keen to use this Chinese government action to make comparisons with the comparatively weak efforts being made in Washington to spur the renewable sector in the United States. Indeed, in the United Kingdom, with the recent feed-in tariff legislation, members of the green energy industry will be hopeful that government action in the UK will have the same effect it has had on the Chinese market.

The New York Times asserted its almost neurotic view of Chinese renewable growth compared to that of the US by warning,

“You won’t just be buying your toys from China, you’ll be buying your energy future from China.”

China has a target in place to produce 8000 megawatts of energy by wind energy by 2010 which they are set to smash. If China continues apace to move towards green energy, they will surely shame efforts currently being made in the West to develop their own sustainable renewable industries

Jim Mellon, the financier who predicted the current world financial crisis two years before it happened has given his weighty support to solar energy as both a means of replacing fossil fuels and of creating healthy yields for investors. In a recent rich list compiled by The Times newspaper, they made special mention of entrepreneurs who have branched out in to renewable investment. Among these, Jim Mellon features highly because of his reputation as a man with a track record of forecasting market trends twinned with a portfolio of shrewd investments.

Mellon, based in the Isle of Man and with a net worth of around £500m is established as one of the largest employers on the island and although some of his assets have come under pressure from the international financial crisis, he continues to look towards renewables as the future.

Jim Mellon was quoted in The Times as saying,

“Solar is genuinely clean, it ticks all sorts of zeitgeist boxes. Within five years, solar power will be as cheap as oil and gas without the subsidy,” adding that, “It will be bigger than the internet in five years”

Mellon backed up his words last summer by investing in a mining company called Emerging Metals which focuses on metals used in the manufacture of the latest photovoltaic technology. It is believed that in 2010, with the introduction of the feed-in tariff in the UK, there will be a boom in solar investment as the government will guarantee premium rates for megawatts generated by small solar and other renewable producers. Leading entrepreneurs on the rich list have already made this connection and are starting to back renewables before they boom.