Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

European Delegation Touts Feed-in Tariffs in Florida

By Stephen Lacey, Staff Writer
February 2, 2009   |   13 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"The momentum [for FITs] is definitely picking up."

-- Mike Antheil, Executive Director, Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy
13 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 13
February 3, 2009
America's utilities, their pocket politicians and even renewable and environmental groups are keeping feed in tariffs at bay by making this more complicated than it needs to be and diluting efforts all over scattered areas. Where the heck is Obama on feed in tariffs?
Comment
2 of 13
this is great. i love that CA keeps boasting about how "green" we are yet we totally FAIL at legitimate programs like loans for solar and feed in tariffs because Schwarzenegger is owned and operated by Big Energy.

i can't wait till he gets kicked to the curb and we finally get someone who cares about the middle class, ratepayers, taxpayers, the planet, our open spaces, our property values and all the other things he is crushing, while greenwashing his scary monopolistic desert slaughter...

Feed In Tariffs on a local, state and national level, along with ratepayer-generator loans, should be the centerpiece of the economic stimulus, not the Orwellian SuperGrid, which will just spew GHGs and trample our beautiful open spaces, while it enables Big Energy to manipulate prices and supplies for our electricity. it is pathetic, since this is the first time in 100 years we could all be self-sufficient and defeat the generation monopolies that are crippling us. why can't utilities be load balancing and storage and distribution services and leave the generation to us?

call your senators and insist that they put a moratorium on killing our public lands for private profits, and move the "grid" money to ratepayer loans and feed in tariff implementation. they are debating it right now...
Comment
3 of 13
Unfortunately Mike is so correct that environmental groups are also in the way of effective FIT legislation. We are battling them tooth and nail for Germany style policy here in the U.S. (EEG), while instead they have focused all their efforts on failed RPS mandates and expansion of the 19th century centralized energy model. Sierra Club and NRDC staff have done more harm to moving towards these types of FIT policies than Big Energy lobby itself!

Big Enviros are now in bed with Big energy, and the goals are not to produce as much clean, green renewable energy as possible. The goals are to continue ownership for price and supply manipulation, which leads to less truly green renewables like rooftop and building integrated PV.
Comment
4 of 13
February 4, 2009
Is there an inherent conflict between feed-in trariffs and RPS mandates? Please explain. It would seem that in principle RPS would be neutral with respect to how electricity from a renewable energy source was acquired
Comment
5 of 13
February 4, 2009
Jan, RPS generally allow utility monopolies to decide how electricity from renewable energy sources is acquired. In Britian and the US, RPS has resulted in renewable energy produced mostly by the utility, their affilaites and friends. In Germany, feed-in trariffs are generally offered to everyone on an equal basis, which is how it should be.
Comment
6 of 13
Also, FIT programs are proven to be far better at encouraging conservation than RPS and renewable energy surcharges. When home and business owners are paid for their electron contributions to the grid, they are more likely to engage in practices that reduce consumption.

Germany (pop 80 million) is installing way more PV capacity than here in the U.S (pop 300 million), with 58% of the avg solar resources. This is a complete embarrassment, but that's just fine with U.S. Big Energy and the utilities, who see consumer participation in point of use generation as a threat to their century long stranglehold.
Comment
7 of 13
February 4, 2009
Can someone really explain the difference between a FIT and net energy billing where you can get paid for the electricity you don't use? We have two ways of net energy billing in Maine 1) banking the energy on a rolling 1 year time frame at the retail value and 2) getting paid wholesale for the energy we produce. You cannot mix and match. Its one or the other.

What the US REALLY needs is real time pricing. If you use electricity off peak you pay less than on peak. So people can choose to run their electrical equipment off peak. This way we do not need to increase generation and we can minimize the amount of transmission upgrades we need. Ask your regulators to allow smart grids and real time metering so you only pay the cost for the time period you use the electicity instead of a flat price. Its kind of like the old phone service. If you used the phone between 9 pm and 6 am you paid maybe 1/3 of the rate that you do between 8 am and 6 pm. There was also a middle tier - after 6 and before 9 where you paid slightly less than daytime rates but not as much as night. Using real time pricing will probably stop the building of 200 or so coal fired plants in the next 20 years. It will also minimize the the amount of transmisson we have to build in the next 20 years.
Comment
8 of 13
February 4, 2009
AREP, you have to be careful when talking about feed-in tariffs: is it a gross or net FIT? You say that people are more careful about conservation when they are getting paid for the electricity they produce. But this is only the case for a net FIT, where only the electricity that you produce that you don't use is paid for (i.e. if you are at home during the day, this could be minimal). Germany has a gross FIT, so it doesn't matter how much they use themselves, they get paid for it all.

Having said that, the benefits to conservation are obvious for any number of reasons, and if one is truly concerned with reducing the environmental impact of their home (or business), decreasing the electricity demand through efficiency or conservation (the so-called negawatt a la Amory Lovins) should be the first step, even if it doesn't have the sexiness of a PV panel on the roof.
Comment
9 of 13
February 5, 2009
Jeff, rate structures aside, people are more careful about conservation when they get down to sizing renewable systems for their home. The initial cost of the system depends upon how much power or heat it needs to generate.

The benefit of investment in conservation comes into stark relief along side the cost of an unnecessarily large power or heat system to produce those additional kW or Btu we use due to laziness about conservation.
Comment
10 of 13
February 6, 2009
What did it here in Gainesville was sending a local representative of our utility company to Germany, using a grant, to see the EEG system for himself. All the words in the world can't compare with a proven, working reality. He went there an energy professional who worked with coal all his life and came back a solar advocate - big time! So get that plane ticket people and show the powers that be how good it really can be!
Comment
11 of 13
February 7, 2009
Could someone suggest an organization that now exists to help push for Federal F.I.T. legislation. I have been desperate to help get involved ,ever since ,Rep (D) Inslee's Legislation was proposed back in June 2008. Big Energy owns this country. I have begged NPR to do a story on this for months, so maybe they are owned too. Those Boone Pickens adds have made me ill. We the people, must work from the grass roots or we will never have this for ourselves or our children's future.
Comment
12 of 13
February 7, 2009
Donald, check out http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/, & http://www.allianceforrenewableenergy.org/ for a national organization promoting Renewable Energy Payments. WFC helped create both the national Alliance and Florida Alliance groups last year.
Comment
13 of 13
February 10, 2009
Ann, I agree that people will think more about conservation if they are hoping to use their renewable energy system to produce power for themselves (i.e. in a RAPS system) or if they have a net FIT. But my point to AREP was that if there is a gross FIT, that the (financial) incentive to conserve energy is removed in the context of that renewable energy system. Now I am certainly not advocating against gross FITs, since I see them as the best way to stimulate the industry; with a gross FIT, however, there would need to be more financial incentives dedicated to energy conservation to get people who aren't in it to be "green" to adopt the measures.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Intertek Planet Solar Inc Renewables Academy AG (RENAC) Free Hot Water ONTILITY Solar Training Dow Solar Standard Solar Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine 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 India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters