Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
There is an additional argument in favour of feed-in tariffs which is that they're usually considered as net cost for governments whereas they're not. Feed-in tariffs contracts are just a position which a government is taking on the cost of acquisition of energy in the long run. if markets goes up then you might end-up with contract at a lower cost rather than the price on markets and thus a net benefit. This is what French CSPE (the government fund which is paying for the fee-in tariff) experienced in 2007. The total "cost" of the micro hydro contracts was a fact a net benefit. More globally for those who believe in bullish energy markets, feed-in tariffs contract is a way for government to take a low risk long term position on the energy markets and could end up quite quickly in a significant profit generator (very true in my views for what's about buying wind energy at 80€/MWh).
by canopea (canopea@free.fr) on Mon May 4th, 2009 at 10:48:26 AM EST
... and feed-in tariff regulations.

The way that feed-in tariff regulations reduce cost is by encouraging the installation of capacity that displaces higher cost electricity when it is producing.

Of course, the level of feed-in tariff where that cost reduction occurs will depend in part on how many of the costs are counted.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon May 4th, 2009 at 11:05:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Occasional Series