The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Friday, May 24, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Swiss Adopt Aggressive Feed Law for Renewable Energy

New law makes Switzerland the first nation with a specific tariff for small wind turbines.

Paul Gipe, Contributing Writer
July 11, 2008  |  27 Comments

In a surprising move, Switzerland has adopted one of the world's most aggressive systems of Advanced Renewable Tariffs.

The Swiss, famed for conservative traditions, stodgy bankers and trains that run on time, have joined a growing list of countries using feed-in tariffs to promote the rapid development of renewable energy.

Not content to start with a timid program incrementally raising the bar year by year, the Swiss federal government this spring launched a full-system of feed-in tariffs differentiated by technology, size and application. There are tariffs, or payments per kilowatt-hour (kWh), for solar photovoltaics, wind, hydro, geothermal and biomass.

The Swiss system, like those in Germany, France and Spain, pays a renewable energy generator for every kWh of electricity generated. The payments are made for periods of 20 to 25 years, depending upon the technology.

The new Swiss tariffs, among the highest in the world, are the first to include a specific tariff for small wind turbines — those under 10 kW — of 0.20 SWF/kWh (US $0.20/kWh) for 20 years.

The states of Michigan, Illinois, Rhode Island and Minnesota have proposed similar tariffs for small wind turbines, US $0.25/kWh, but none of the proposals have yet become law.

Tariffs for large wind turbines use the German system of tariff differentiation by resource intensity. Because of the rugged Swiss terrain, the program's designers needed to provide tariffs for wind energy that would enable profitable operation in deep valleys as well as on windy mountaintops, while at the same time protecting ratepayers from unnecessary costs.

In the Swiss system, every wind turbine is paid the same price for its electricity during the first five years. After that, production is averaged. The average is then compared with a reference site defined in the law. Depending upon the wind resource, the premium payment of 0.20 SWF/kWh is extended beyond the first five years. After the premium period, the tariff falls to 0.17 SWF/kWh (US $0.17/kWh) for the remainder of the 20-year contract. For the reference site, the premium payment of 0.20 SWF/kWh (US $0.20/kWh) is extended for the full 20-year period.

The wind tariffs are among the highest in the world, but less than those requested by Suisse Eole. The trade association calculated that with Swiss terrain, and the high cost of wind turbines, 0.28 SWF/kWh (US $0.28/kWh) would be necessary for the first five years, and 0.20 SWF/kWh for the post-premium period.

The tariffs for solar PV put Switzerland on a par with Germany and France, though the contract period of 25 years is the longest outside Spain. For rooftop systems of less than 10 kW in size, the tariffs are 0.75 SWF/kWh. For building integrated solar PV, the tariffs rival those in neighboring France. For building-integrated systems of less than 10 kW in size, the tariffs are 0.90 SWF/kWh (US $0.88/kWh).

 

Tarriffs for solar PV


Currently there are 29 megawatts (MW) of solar PV in the country; 7 MW were installed in 2007.

The Swiss, ever meticulous, avoided disrupting the solar industry while the new law was under lengthy discussions, by grandfathering solar PV installations installed from 2006 through the law's introduction in April 2008.

Geothermal plants of less than 5 MW in size will receive 0.30 SWF/kWh (US $0.30/kWh) for 20 years.

Funds to pay for the tariffs will come from a systems benefits charge of 0.006 SWF/kWh on all electricity consumption, says Reto Rigassi of Suisse Eole, the Swiss wind energy association. This is equivalent to 320 million SWF, or about US $310 million, at current exchange rates.

While there is no MW cap on the program, there is a cap on the portion contributed by each technology to the total program. Hydro generation is capped at 50% of the fund, and wind at 30%. However, the wind association's Rigassi explains that the entire program is capped at 150% of the funds collected.

Most controversial are the limits placed on solar photovoltaics (PV). Solar PV is capped at 5% of the fund. Swissolar, the Swiss solar trade association, has called on the government to lift the cap, arguing that solar PV could ultimately meet one-third of Swiss electricity supply.

There are currently 1,000 people employed in the Swiss solar industry, and Bank Sarasin suggests that the number could increase if Switzerland developed its home market with more aggressive policies.

The program will be reviewed every five years. The first review may be within three years.

As elsewhere, special provisions are made for data collection from the private generators who participate in the program. The law specifically states that generators must provide data on generation upon the government's request.

Swiss parliamentarians have been debating a modern renewable energy policy for several years. The country's renewable energy advocates have watched in frustration as renewable energy boomed in Germany to the north, France to the west, and Italy to the south. Now, with one of the world's most progressive systems of Advanced Renewable Tariffs, the Swiss are in the game.

Related Links

  • Tables of Feed-In Tariffs Worldwide

27 Comments

Register To Comment
Jon Bohmer
Jon Bohmer
July 25, 2008
Jim Berry wrote: "Solar peaks in production at noon and fades away by 3 pm in a good spot or 1:30 pm in a bad spot. In Contrast, the Demand Cycle begins in the afternoon and goes to 7/8 pm."

Just apply solar trackers and you will add 30-40% more energy in the morning and evening, more closely matching peak loads. Neither nuclear, coal can follow peak loads easily, so solar has a major advantage in following peak. With 2-3 hours storage the peak is covered with solar.

Stephen, get your facts right: The automobile industry in Germany is one of the largest employers in the country, with a strong labour force of over 866,000 (2005) working in the industry. (Wikipedia). I guess a quarter of that is not bad, but it is far from parity.
Stephen Hamilton
Stephen Hamilton
July 20, 2008
We should fire the Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reed "new congress in town" and outsource The function to the Swiss.

Americans already know that the 110th congress is dysfunctional. We give it a 15% approval rating; lower than that we give GW Bush.

At last count there were 200,000 well paying jobs in the German Renewable Industry. That is as many as are presently employed in the German Auto Industry. I think the Swiss get it. The "new congress in town" does not!!

America is exporting those well paying jobs to Germany, Italy, Spain, France, Japan and now to Switzerland!
Greg Damian
Greg Damian
July 18, 2008
My practical experience is showing that grid panel orientation isn't that important. I have 20 east facing panels and 10 south facing panels. From Feb 29 through yesterday my east facing panels have produced 2354 kWhr and my south facing panels 1210 kWhr. That is 3564 kWhr total from a system rated at 6500 kWhr / yr. So the system is performing very well.

The east facing panels have produced a little over 97% ( .973 = (2354/2) / 1210) of the power of the power of the south facing panels (on a per panel basis). I do suspect that east is actually better than west for two reasons. One reason is temperature. It is cooler in the morning (providing better efficiency) when the east facing panels are lit up. The other reason is atmospheric. I believe that more sun is available in the morning than the evening due to afternoon thunderstorms. North facing is, of course, not a good application.
Steven Woodcock
Steven Woodcock
July 18, 2008
What a terrible idea.

Lookit, I'm all for alternative energy. My house runs on 100% solar and wind combined. That's not an issue.

My issue is forced buys by government of this energy. I'm pretty sure that nobody here would approve of minimum price controls for coal or oil. Guaranteed prices for farmers, milk, peanuts--these are all things we rail about when we talk about the high price of government. So why in the world are guaranteed prices for wind okay with some folks?

What a poor idea.
Miles Adam
Miles Adam
July 18, 2008
Steven, you seem to forget that the world is facing an energy crisis. The Swiss are wisely allowing their citizens to quickly do something positive to ease the problem. Electric cars are just about to be made available, so more than ever electrical sources must be expanded. Since Switzerland has large hydro power dams which can act as storage batteries the fluctuations in power production of wind and solar panels can be handled efficiently. Perhaps you are wealthy enough to handle the capital cost of such installations on your own, most are not able. This allows the general population to participate. Nuclear power is fantastically expensive to build and should be given no consideration. Expanding fossil fuel plants is foolish if we are to reduce global warming, so I am in full support of the Swiss action. I wish Canada would do something meaningful instead of doing nothing.
David Cameron
David Cameron
July 17, 2008
Interesting how a list one supposes is made up of pro-renewable energy folks, generates so many anti-renewable and pro-nuclear comments.

The whole function of feed-in tariffs is to overcome inertia and get renewables up-and-running ASAP. And one can only install today's rechnology, and it takes a 20 year pay-back to amortize the capital cost.

As the man said, "the Swiss got it right". The US will continue to strip-mine (rape) its countryside while we Canadians will continue to pretend dirty tar-sand production doesn't generate enormous emissions of co2 and spoil the groundwater for future generations. Sigh.
Alliance for Responsible Energy Policy
Alliance for Responsible Energy Policy
July 17, 2008
Another country leaving the US in their dust when it comes to THE only real way to fast track truly green renewable energy production and use in this country. The people claiming tariffs won't work (even though other countries are proving them wrong) and local generation is not the answer, are the ones who stand to gain from a continued Big Energy monopoly and stranglehold. T Boone Pickens is proving that the folks who brought us oil dependency and high gas prices are the same folks that want us to surrender our open spaces for their highly subsidized (our money) high profit killing fields. Meet the new Big Energy bosses - same as the old Big Energy bosses!
Carl Fern
Carl Fern
July 17, 2008
Kudos for the Swiss!!!
And to responde Steven's comments, I like to said that his brain works backwards and individuals like him deserve no part of the human race.
I wonder where country is he from?
I hope he is teaming up with Mr. Cheney and company.
Muir Matteson
Muir Matteson
July 16, 2008
I bet if you faced your panels west, you could get decent PV generation until late afternoon. Especially at high altitudes, which the Swiss definitely have.
Stefan Melly
Stefan Melly
July 16, 2008
Finally the Swiss government made the bold move too. Like Germany and other European countries they have realized that they can help boost new markets and industires with the right stimulus package. It's too bad that US Congress still does not understand this concept and yet again chokes the domestic RE industry with recent decisions (by not extending the alternative energy tax credit).
Yes, a concept like this does cost money. But it also stimulates innovation, creates jobs, new markets, new companies... all in the end contributing yet again to tax revenues.
heinrich duepmann
heinrich duepmann
July 16, 2008
Keep in mind
Windpower and Solar are unsteady, disturbing grid-stability and tremendously increasing overall-cost of electric power. Over the 10 years of horrible windpower-expansion in Germany cost for consumers have increased for app. 10 EUR-Cent to 20 EUR-Cent /kWh, even if the main producers like nuclear and lignite are still at 2,5 Cent per kWh. Main reasons are:
-the high costs for Solar and Windpower
-transportation-Cost (upgrade of grid)
-managing the grid with shadow-utilities

Now industrie is leaving the country because of the expensivnes of electrity.
Natasha Long
Natasha Long
July 16, 2008
I work for a solar PV company and we have a policy that we will not install on an unsuitable site. You will get cowboys in every industry, and you have to shop around. If you install a system in a shaded/north facing (in the northern hemisphere) or otherwise unsuitable site, you won't earn any real money out of it anyway, FiT or not, you just wont get the generation. If you contact a solar company without doing your homework and understanding the technology you might get ripped off, but other consumers won't be paying for your system because the amount of electricity you generate will be minimal and the FiT payments will therefore be very low. Therefore, if a person motivated purely by greed who would install a sub-optimal system will end up out of pocket.

With regard to nuclear I ask once again, in these comments - how many times should people pay for their energy? First in tax breaks and subsidies during the building, second paying for the electricity you use, third, the tax breaks and subsidies during operational life, and fourth the taxes your great-grandchildren will pay to decommission. Given that NO nuclear power station has been built on time, or on budget. Anywhere in the world. Ever. At least with solar PV, thermal, small/community wind, people own their own power and aren't beholden to those lovely global corporations who care SO much about their customers! Yes, the prices are high, but as it adds a small amount to each persons' bill, no one person is hit. Cheap energy is gone. We need to start looking at the alternatives, and that means a proper mix of sources.
Robert Steinberger-Wilckens
Robert Steinberger-Wilckens
July 16, 2008
@ H. Duepmann
"Keep in mind Windpower and Solar are unsteady, disturbing grid-stability and tremendously increasing overall-cost of electric power."
"main producers like nuclear and lignite are still at 2,5 Cent per kWh."
"Now industrie is leaving the country because of the expensivnes of electrity."

sure ... ever considered that nuclear and lignite power are just as de-stabilising? since they cannot load-follow they require major balancing power plants. Which explains the keen interest of the French for hydrogen rpoduction from excess electricity. They need to stbilise their grid (77% nukes).
Also, due to the size of units, risk backup requirements are high, locking several GW-class capacity in standby. 2.5 cent/kWh only works out once you have written off the investment. A newly-built reactor clocks in at 4 to 5 cent/kWh ... comparable to a good wind site (General Atomics figures, so do not try to shout at me). These figures do not even include the operation's insurance - which does not exist. The governement pays in case of a nuclear accident. Can anyone tell, what sort of a subsidy that means? With wind, insurances are included.

and yesssss ... still waiting for that list of firms leaving the country due to wind electricity prices. Been waiting a loooong time. So? Guess it just does not exist!
By the way: I have a 100% green electricity contract at home. When el.prices went up on Jan.1st, my contract remained unchanged. Today, I pay the same for green electricity as I would for regular grid electricity. The only difference is a 1 Euro flat-rate surcharge per month. Beat that!

Seems we have been hearing a lot of urban legend lore recently.
Gene Schroeder
Gene Schroeder
July 16, 2008
People in Switzerland can obviously afford these high energy costs.

How about the middle-class and lower income population in many other countries.

Remember :
" Your ears will soon be deaf by an operating "windmill" in your neighborhood, but only, if wind blows. South of San Francisco more than 40,000 birds were counted - killed by windmills in a park."
"Solar efficiency" is still questionable, but gamblers are not worried to loose at the end money or ? "

Buy better blankets and warm clothes to survive and do not worry it is getting warmer around the globe anyway.
stop killin our wilderness
stop killin our wilderness
July 16, 2008
This is FANTASTIC! Every single person I know would not only build a system for their own property, but would oversize it generously if we could get numbers like these.

Jim B and others seem to forget the ENORMOUS subsidies that EVERY OTHER electricity provider gets in this country, including poisoning the planet, depleting our groundwater, buyback guarantees, cheap capital, and super-cheap taxpayer-owned land that they destroy. Once you start adding all that up, the prices start making more sense.

Most importantly, is that this system defeats Big Energy Monopolies and encourages EVERY person in the nation to get involved in the renewable energy paradigm. I am MUCH more resentful of opening another vein to build out another big power plant (including Big Solar/Big Wind) so these creeps can hijack me, than I would be if I were getting paid for every watt I produced and/or conserved. FINALLY, people would start to see real rewards for doing the right thing for themselves and the planet.

The only one it hurts is Big Energy Monopolists, because ratepayers are gonna pay for new infrastructure anyhow, it's inevitable. I have not met one person who would rather have their bill go up because they are building a power plant than because we are installing solar panels.

US - GET A CLUE!! This is absolutely the solution to at least the first 50% of our energy needs. Don't kill off our open spaces until this program has been in place for at least 5 years...
william hughes
william hughes
July 16, 2008
There is no mention in the article how the Swiss tax the power produced (Income Tax?) and the power used (Sales Tax?). It makes a big difference
http://mtkass.blogspot.com/2008/04/double-metering-its-insidious.html
Jim Berry
Jim Berry
July 15, 2008
"they will be a net exporter of electricity"

Who is going to pay 2x the market rate for this stuff unless the Gov't makes them?

Also, Solar PV can't be the primary energy source for a country - unlike nuclear/coal/gas/wind.

Solar peaks in production at noon and fades away by 3 pm in a good spot or 1:30 pm in a bad spot.

In Contrast, the Demand Cycle begins in the afternoon and goes to 7/8 pm. No sun. No Solar PV. You still need a power plant to provide the power that people will use.

Solar Can be only a small part of the solution, because it doesn't produce power when we need it.
Robert Reive
Robert Reive
July 13, 2008
Smaller systems may be more inefficient and in most cases are, however there are literally no costs to up grade local distribution and regional transmission lines. It means the grid gains power in a distributed fashion and everyone can be a co-generator, it also drives small business growth in the sector which is always the engine for jobs.., living and working in Switzerland and watching the feed debates in the press and on TV, the Swiss covered all the angles..., they will catch up and be a net exporter of renewable technology before most other countries get progressive feed laws like this in place... the cost of doing this versus building new nuclear reactors to meet growing demand in Switzerland is a no brainer
Also think about plug-in hybrid vehicles in 5 years and the demand it will drive, for distributed production of electricity, at that time a nuclear power plant started today is maybe 1/3 complete...
The Swiss got it right, like they do most times...
Colm O'Gairbhith
Colm O'Gairbhith
July 12, 2008
From the different types of subsidies available to PV systems worldwide, i.e. capital grants and/or feed-in tariffs, it has been proven that the way to get the most efficient installation is to pay solely on the kWh produced. It does result in the highest efficiencies, there is no argument in the industry. Again, in this case PV is capped at 5% of the $310 million dollars, a paltry $15 million/year. These funds are not being taken from hydro/nuclear developement so no conflict to be discussed there. This plan is good news for the renewable energy industry. A different model is being tried, and each time a different model is created the entire world benefits from the knowledge gained concerning its strong/weak points.
Is this model perfect ? Probably not. Is it helping the developement of RE ? Most definitely yes.
Jim Berry
Jim Berry
July 12, 2008
Those consumers paying for these subsidies are getting ripped off.

I just commented on a geothermal article for Utah that was only paying $.08 per kWh seemed way cheap for a renewable which normally overcharge.

Oopps, here the Swiss are charging $.30 under a forced gov't subsidy with 20 year guarantee for what a Utah company is selling on the free market for $.08 .

Renewable energies has nothing to do with energy. Its political corruption using utilities and little understood energy pricing systems.

Off the top of your heads, can anyone tell me how much of a premimum the Swiss will pay over 20 years for a 5 MW geothermal system with 75% up time selling at $.30 per kWh in a $.08 per kWh market place?

No, you can't. I can't, The politicians might not. The guys who paid off the politician can. That's why they did it and got away with it.

Remember its GREEN it can't be BAD, no matter the price.
Steven Mielke
Steven Mielke
July 12, 2008
Colm writes: "it has been proven that the way to get the most efficient installation is to pay solely on the kWh produced"

If, as I believe is still the case, production of PV systems is constrained by silicon wafer shortages, then every unit ends up getting sold and there is little competition among vendors. Clearly in one respect these price schedules don't lead to the most efficient installations because they favor smaller systems with higher rates. A 29 kW system earn more total return than a 30 kW system--that hardly seems reasonable.

I can't see how overpaying for an initial set of installations is conducive to ultimately getting cheap renewable energy.
Steven Mielke
Steven Mielke
July 11, 2008
These are ridiculously high prices to be paying for electricity--especially with 25 year guarantees. These rates makes it profitable for people to implement highly inefficient systems. If the Swiss have spare money they could be spending it on research to develop economical generation systems. In the meantime nuclear power could provide for all their additional energy needs at a small fraction of these charges. These tariff schemes are the kinds of decisions that are made only when the deciders feel like they are spending other people's money.
Marc Weatherill
Marc Weatherill
July 11, 2008
I think that the Swiss set the tariffs so high to try and catch up with their counterparts (as noted in the article) though I am surprised that these high rates are guaranteed for so long, as Steven (above) points out, encouraging people to invest in sub-optimal equipment. Depends what the priorities are though, I suppose. In this case, it seems that the Swiss want in on renewables sooner than later.
John Broughton
John Broughton
July 11, 2008
We here in America think we have energy problems, imagine a small landlocked country like Switzerland and how it must depend on non domestic resources. With the recent advances in small turbines, ecspecially the VAWTs, this sounds reasonable. Definitely aggressive, but reasonable non the less.

www.nrgmanager.com
Alan Beattie
Alan Beattie
July 11, 2008
Hey Steven, if you had the opportunity to make 73 cents/kWh to supply energy from your roof, don't you think you would want to install the most efficient system possible and keep it running properly? And don't you think your neighbors, who are paying for your profits with a few extra dollars tacked onto their monthly bill (average $2.50/month in Germany), don't you think they might rush to put solar on their own roofs?

When the US gets serious about responsible energy, there will be robust FITs. And when there is robust renewable energy generation in this country, there will be no more FITs, and clean energy will be cheaper than fossil.
Adrian Akau
Adrian Akau
July 11, 2008
The Swiss have my vote. In the long run, not only oil but coal, natural gas and all fossil sources will be rising in cost. Cheap electricity may be a thing of the past.

adrianakau2aol.com
Steven Mielke
Steven Mielke
July 11, 2008
Alan: Yes, I would want the most efficient system possible. However, if I could not get one of those I might make a profit at these rates installing virtually anything (possibly my roof is slanted the wrong way and covered in snow much of the year or partly shaded by a big oak tree I didn't want to cut down--I'd never install PV under such conditions if I was funding the installation, but at these rates of return I might).

The Swiss have a very large hydroelectric system and a well developed nuclear energy program--these two production methods account for most of their electricity production and during part of the year they are energy exporters. It would be quite easy for them to add to their nuclear program for capacity additions while funding renewable research so that they install efficient systems when they are ready. Huge FETs will only cause energy prices to jump with very little return.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Paul Gipe

Paul Gipe

Paul Gipe has written extensively about renewable energy for both the popular and trade press. He has also lectured widely on wind energy and how to minimize its impact on the environment and the communities of which it is a part. For his...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • The Future of Solar in Latin America
  • Fighting Blackouts: Japan Residential PV and Energy Storage Market Flourishing
  • The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • Are Run-of-River Hydroelectric Systems Ready to Ride US Currents?
  • Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Most Commented

  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 10
    No Easy Fix for Broken Wind Turbine at US High School
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    Wind Turbine Lubrication and Maintenance: Protecting Investments in Renewable Energy

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • AEG Power Solutions
  • Chaloux Environmental Communications, Inc. (CEC)
  • Stoel Rives LLP
  • Canadian Clean Energy Conferences
  • AltE
  • Rotork plc
  • The Stella Group, Ltd.
  • Eaton
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information