Solar farms receive more cash from green subsidies than selling the energy they produce
By Paul Homewood
h/t Dave Ward
The Mail lifts the lid on obscene solar subsidies:
Britain’s biggest solar farms receive more cash from green subsidies than from selling the electricity they produce, figures reveal.
Energy producers were encouraged to start solar farms with generous handouts funded by a ‘green levy’ on taxpayers’ bills.
But many of them now make the majority of their cash from the subsidy – instead of the electricity they produce.
The total subsidy provided to all generators of solar electricity last year is estimated to be about £1.2billion.
This was part of the £5.6billion subsidy paid to green energy producers, which critics say inflates household energy bills.
Figures from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) following a Freedom of Information request show ten of the biggest solar farms in the country pocketed more than £2.5million each in eco-subsidy last year.
The payouts were offered to help increase the amount of ‘green’ energy produced in the UK.
The solar subsidy is responsible for around £15 a year on a household power bill.
However the system – which guarantees the handouts for 15 or 20 years – has been overly generous.
Treasury officials have stopped new deals being made with solar farms in a bid to stop haemorrhaging huge amounts of cash.
But farms with existing deals are guaranteed generous handouts until the end of their contracts.
The 200-acre site generated just over 54,000 MWh of electricity, worth around £2.5million, but was given a handout of £3.8million.
The farm is owned by Cubico Sustainable Investments, which has seven other smaller solar farms in England.
The nation’s largest installation, Shotwick Solar Park, in Deeside, North Wales, was handed a £3.5million subsidy, which was pocketed by owner Foresight Solar Fund.
It also generated electricity worth around £2.5million.
Dr Lee Moroney, of the Renewable Energy Foundation charity, said: ‘The moratorium on new subsidies to renewables was the right thing to do, but it is a classic case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
‘The legacy subsidies are themselves so high … that Government must consider retrospective cuts to reduce what is an unreasonable burden on the consumer and the wider economy.’
The Solar Trade Association said: ‘Like all new technologies solar needed support in the early days to get off the ground … Today solar doesn’t need any significant subsidy at all.’
A spokesman for BEIS said: ‘The UK is leading the world in cutting emissions … Government support has kick-started the UK’s solar industry enabling the costs of solar to reduce dramatically, so that solar can eventually stand on its own, subsidy free.’
It is the usual BS from the BEIS and Solar Trade Association.
New technologies don’t usually need “support”, they are funded by private capital.
And for the BEIS to claim that their subsidies have “enabled costs to reduce dramatically”, is utter bilge. Costs have fallen because production costs have tumbled in China.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Good picture of the “bird-fryers.”
No! – it can’t be true … it’s lies I tell you.
Why, only last September Claire Perry opened the first subsidy free solar farm.
Ms Perry also made some statements that went beyond what the operator of the site claimed – such was her enthusiasm for the project.
While its good news that a mainstream paper has dared to defy the green mafia and publish some truthful criticism, Its depressing for all of us here, who have been pointing out the evil of these ludicrous schemes for years. Why has it taken so long for our useless media to listen? And will the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 cover this scandal? I think we know the answer!.
More Perry-isms from the annals or Energy Storage News about how subsidy free solar actually works:
It’s magic – really
‘the advent of subsidy free solar in the UK meant the technology had reached a point where it could stand on its own.’
Solar at 51°N? In the fair British Isles?
Can I become a farmer? A solar farmer, of course.
You mean a subsidy farmer?
Is there any other kind?
“The UK is leading the world in cutting emissions …”
I would like the UK to follow the “lead” of a one-time Bishop of Norwich who was asked how he managed to lead such a stubborn group as the people of Norfolk.
“It’s simple,” he replied. “You find out which way they are going and walk in front of them.”
That sort of “leading” we could do with a bit more of!
http://www.foresightgroup.eu/retail-investors/foresight-solar-fund-limited/
http://www.foresightgroup.eu/
“Foresight Group is a leading independent infrastructure and private equity investment manager
with £2.8 billion of assets under management, raised from institutional investors, family offices, private and high net-worth individuals.
Foresight’s broad and growing fund management activities now encompass investing in the private equity and infrastructure sectors in the UK, US, Southern Europe and Australia through specialist teams.
Foresight has offices in the UK, USA, Italy and Australia.”
There’s a reason why nobody comes to Britain for sunshine holidays.
I see no reason why the Government should continue these insane handouts.
After all they were granted on the basis of knowing fraud and misrepresentation by “green” energy scamsters.
I would be interested to know what the market price is for intermittent energy. The biggest subsidy is by paying more for it than a private buyer would pay. The worth of anything is not what you pay for an item but what someone will pay you on ebay. Is it 50%, or 10%, or 1%.
It depends on the time of day and the total demand at that time, among other things. Prices can go negative if there’s excessive supply, but renewables can still make a profit unless or until the negative price exceeds their subsidy level.
To answer my own question. The value of an intermittent electricity source will be the savings made in fuel costs by the alternative non intermittent source.
Thus it will be about 30 % of the electricity price of gas generation?
Excellent point, wilpretty.
The variable cost is saved, but the fixed cost continues. The loss of profit on the lost sale means the sale of other electricity by the utility will have to be at a higher price, to cover fixed cost and company profit. So significantly less than the variable cost is saved.
In the picture, won’t the front panels shade the ones behind, except when the sun is really high? Or are they actually further apart than they appear?
Some years back, when the government decided that the gas companies were making too much profit from extracting North Sea gas and selling it to the plebs, they hit them with a one-off ‘windfall tax’. The government may not be able to renegotiate the contracts with the energy suppliers but that doesn’t mean they can’t recoup some of the handouts.
“Solar farms receive more cash from green subsidies than selling the energy they produce”
to wit, and berger the inflation figures, I mean who cares!!
Hmm, where’s the money going to be sourced?
yeah – I know, we all know.
“British Gas will increase electricity prices by 12.5% from 15 September, its owner Centrica has said, in a move that will affect 3.1 million customers.
Gas prices are unchanged, but the average annual dual-fuel bill for a typical household on a standard tariff will rise by £76 to £1,120, up by 7.3%.”
remember that? – I bet that you do
BUT WE NEED MORE AND MORE, LITTLE PEOPLE, IT’S JUST NOT ENOUGH!!
Therefore…………swallow this ye rustici, you churls.
“British Gas is to increase energy prices for those on standard tariffs by an average of 5.5% – or £60 a year.
The rise, which applies to both gas and electricity, will see the average annual dual-fuel bill for these British Gas customers go up to £1,161.
The company, the UK’s largest energy supplier, said that 4.1 million of its customers would be affected.
The increase will take effect from 29 May and follows its 12.5% rise in electricity prices last September.”
BBC LINK
3.1 million customers to 4.1? (beeboids can’t count) Some accounting discrepancy there – but hey it’s all telephone numbers – for some innit claire baby?!! and the green agenda will not be deflected, even if it means stiffing the consumer – coz, it’s all about saving the poley bears and filling the chancellor’s coffers, methinks.
However, the main story is about numbers and tariffs and the rises will just keep coming but BG are really taking the piss – here, aren’t they and yes I know, the others will follow all too quickly enough, it ain’t just BG.
and all that money being paid out and added in ‘government policy’ (no, it’s not funny) to beget an energy supply horlicks where even Saddam Hussein and comical ali seeking engineering advice from ant and dec – could do better.
And they tell us, “we want to grow the economy” – not with expensive electricity and gas you won’t, haven’t these bods heard of competitive pricing and world markets – or, are real market conditions – now regarded as ‘hate speech;’ by Claire Perry and Mother May et al??
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.