43.3p Solar PV FIT looks increasingly likely for a brief manic “use it or lose it” 5 week window.

Barrister Edmund Robb is confident that the Supreme Court will refuse the DECC’s second appeal and has said so publicly. This would mean the full 43.3p solar PV FIT until 3 March. Here’s his quote.

The Micropower Council, of which we are members, says: “Today’s news does not therefore remove all uncertainty, but in our view it significantly increases the probability that a 43p/kWh tariff will apply to [domestic solar PV] systems installed up to and including 2nd March. Here is the MPC article.

On 25 January 2012, the UK government lost, for the second time, their case to retrospectively cut solar PV subsidy tariffs from 43.3p to 21p. Consequently, UK’s nationwide solar PV sales pitch is now:

“Wake up! Order solar PV in the next fortnight, for installing by 3 March, to have any chance of upping your 21p tariff to 43p.”

Unanimity. All three High Court judges were unanimous that government was acting unlawfully.

So, what does this mean for the domestic solar PV customer? If (and only if) the Court of Appeal finding eventually stands, then:

• Solar installations registered between 12 December 2011 – 3 March 2012 will attract the 43.3p/kWh rate (index-linked) for 25 years
• Installations registered on or after 3 March will only briefly attract 43.3p/kWh, and only until 1 April at which point they will receive 21 p/kWh (index linked) for the remainder of the 25 years.
• Installations from 1 April until the next reduction date will attract 21 p/kWh (index linked) for 25 years. But these may have further conditions attached, such as costly home energy efficiency upgrades to EPC level C.

But nothing is 100% certain in the UK solar world, because even though it has lost twice, and has already spent a six figure sum on doing so, our government says it WILL appeal once again, this time to the Supreme Court. The Government have been awarded permission to appeal, on the grounds that today’s Judgement was slightly different to the earlier judgment, that of the High Court. So government have asked the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal.

How long will this next court action take? Opinion is divided on the answer. One early media report said we might know whether they receive this permission “in the next few days”. However this sounds like optimism because the the Supreme Court has today warned that if Government decides to launch a feed-in tariff appeal, it could take up to a year to be heard. Checking up on procedures with the Supreme Court this afternoon a researcher for Solar Power Portal established that if DECC’s case is taken on, and it may never be taken on, if so, it is likely to take several months to even start.

“We will first have to decide whether the case fits the Supreme Court’s criteria – a process which can take several weeks. If the case is viewed as appropriate to be heard, then it can then take several months to reach the courtrooms due to the availability of barristers coupled with the availability of the court.” they clarified to Solar Power Portal.

So DECC’s next appeal may take a year! Its result will be merely academic from the point of view of the solar industry, but probably not for a few legal bods.

In summary, unless Government obtains and wins this appeal, 21p is certain while 43.4p looks like a possible rate for installations installed by 3 March.

So hurry! UK again appears to, perhaps, have the most generous solar PV tariff in the world.

In response to the 43.3p / 21p uncertainty, Solartwin are now offering to risk-share for January solar PV orders only: if you want to buy solar PV now, we will share some of the the risk of a 21p rate happening with you because we will allow you to withhold 10% of your invoice if you end up getting 21p or less.

Quotes of interest;

Some interesting links on this breaking story:

DECC’s Q&A for the press pdf download (some interesting spin)

Solar Power Portal (on a possible 1 year delay)

Reuters (global perspectives).

BBC News.

The Independent.

The Telegraph.

The Guardian.

Press Association.

Text of court’s full judgment.

Renewable Energy Association (brief statement)

Micropower Council (on significant increase in 43.3p probability)

Moneysavingexpert (is too gung-ho about 43.3p certainty)

Solar Century.

FoE Press Release.

PV Magazine (DECC’s delaying strategy and low chance of winning).

ClickGreen article (pointless 8 months plus to hear next appeal).

Channel 4 news video (6 mins) grills both DECC and STA.

“For solar PV, the next 5 weeks is not a “win or lose” situation for consumers, but more like “win or double-win”. People are assured 21p and may also get more than double. Plus prices are keener than ever. That is why our phones are so busy right now. Seizing the moment is the general picture right now.” observed Barry Johnston.

On Wednesday January 25, Some time after 10 am, UK’s Court of Appeal will reveal its decision on whether to allow the Government’s legal bid to overturn a ruling that its cuts to the Feed-in Tariff was unlawful.

Their ruling will come a week after the Department of Energy and Climate Change give a contingency date of March 3 for the retrospective introduction of the revised 21p tariff rate as a Plan B, should its appeal fail.

Friends of the Earth told one of UK’s leading environmental news sites ClickGreen: “Our solicitors were informed late on Friday evening that a decision would be delivered next Wednesday, we have been told no further hearing will be held.”

The timing is awful for several reasons.

First of all, the day before, (Tuesday) the Cabinet Minister responsible for FITs, Chris Huhne will have an awful day in court because knows that the Crown Prosecution Service is expecting to receive evidence on allegations he escaped a driving license “points-ban” by transferring speeding “penalty-points” to the driving licence of his wife Vicky Pryce, from whom he is now estranged.

So Chris Huhne might have to resign, leaving DECC and the UK solar industry in a serious headless chicken situation. Not a sunny outlook for UK renewables. If he, er, taxis off into the sunset, then business Minister Edward Davey is currently the top candidate to, er, take the wheel, at DECC. New faces tend to mean new delays.

Second, what happens the next day, Wednesday? Even if Chris Huhne is still in his job,there are several FIT cuts legalities scenarios.

First of all, there is the question of whether DECC actually gets permission to appeal at all. The point is that the judges are deciding on two things at the same time – whether the Government has the right to bring the appeal, and if they are allowed to do so, and only if they are allowed to do so, whether the appeal is upheld.

DECC’s right of appeal.

If DECC does NOT get a right of appeal, the it can NOT go to a higher court, the Supreme Court, and so FoE’s win stands, their battles, and their war is won and the solar industry reverts to 43.3p chaos for 5.5 weeks.

 DECC’s appeal.

If DECC does get a right of appeal, then there there are two outcomes, A and B below.

Outcome A is that the Government wins. This could mean instant reversion to the original solar PV cuts timetable. Maybe not too awful an outcome, apart from giving FoE a bloody nose, but in terms of commonsense, this outcome seems unlikely to happen, in my view. But ye lawe of ye lande moves in mysterious ways…

But it might not mean certainty at all, because, of course FoE might appeal to the Supreme Court! More time and money…

Outcome B is that FoE win and DECC lose the appeal. Then whichever loser is the DECC minister has to decide whether to fight on, ie to the Supreme Court. If preservation of dignity and the FITs funding pot are a priority, DECC  are likely to adopt this “grinding through the courts” strategy, and will seek to do so as slowly as possible. Winning would be secondary to the need to grind on and to close the potential 5.5 week 43.3p gap which closes on 3 March. DECC’s supposed position of principle (ha!) in having another appeal would be that of “generically clarifying the government’s right to impose retrospective dates in consultations, in all departments, not just DECC”. Of course the real issue would be stopping the funding pot from being raided by 43.4p solar subsidy enthusiasts, who will make loadasmoney. A third vanity-type factor would be to clear the name of DECC and its minister from acting unlawfully.

A DECC appeal to the Supreme Court would obviously delay time before we all  finally find out whether the time period of 12/12/2011 – 31/3/2012 was funded at 21p or 43p – because the Plan B cut to 21p could go ahead on 3rd March anyway.

Outcome B now has an official Government contingency Plan B in place, because since last week there has been a new March 3 “contingency date” in an attempt to provide clarity and certainty for the solar industry They have done this by tabling regulations in Parliament that will lead to a reduction to 21p on 3rd March.  They have also pointed out that this is a Plan B which will is designed to fix the date of the rate reductions should the Appeal Court find against them.

After 1 April, what then? There is still no guarantee that the 21p tariff will not be cut further in April or shortly afterwards.

Proposals for the longer term way in which FITs operates (presumably aiming to prevent future bubbles and to spread the finds out more evenly) are expected to be released soon after the court judgement. On the cards are more regular and smaller tariff revisions and perhaps a “volume digression trigger” as is used in Germany.

Meanwhile at least we know that the solar PV FIT subsidy rate for installations registered between 12/12/2011 and 31/3/2012 will be at least 21p per kWh.
Dazzled by jargon? Well, more about Plan B is here. The Businessgreen article on the solar PV FIT court case is here.

More Solar Subsidy Clarity for UK Solar Photovoltaic Panels Consumers! Phew…

Legal summary: DECC has announced that it will be laying before Parliament some draft licence modifications which, subject to the Parliamentary process set out in the Energy Act 2008, make provision for a the new rates to go through from April 1, 2012 with an eligibility date on or after 3 March. The move by DECC was welcome by the industry as it assure that 21p/kWh rate will be maintained after the 1st of April 2012.

The 2 main short term consequences of the Appeal Court are:

If DECC loses the appeal, the old tariff (eg 43.3p) will be paid to installations with an eligibility date between the 12th of December 2011 and the 3rd of March 2012 for the 25 years of the installation. But installations installed on the 3 March 2012 and after will be entitled to the reduced tariff 21p from 1st April 2011.

If DECC wins the appeal, they reserve the right to enforce the 12th of December 2011 reference date as stated in the Consultation. DECC will announce the outcome of the consultation by 9th February 2012. This announcement will be accompanied by a proposal for a second FiT review consultation.
This statement by Gaynor Hartnell of UK’s Renewable Energy Association says it all.

“We should know the outcome of DECC’s appeal of last month’s Judicial Review by 9th February. If DECC loses, then the higher rates will apply until 3rd March. If DECC wins, it can follow through with its consultation, and implement the decisions it arrives at, having regard to the 2,000+ responses it received. Gaynor Hartnell concludes:

“This removes some of the short-term uncertainty and it is a welcome move. There will have to be a second order covering tariffs for other technologies, clearing up: the rates applicable between 12th December and 3rd March; any energy efficiency requirements it may implement; and a means of adjusting tariffs in line with prices in an orderly manner in future.”

Collation of articles:

·         Chris Huhne’s ministerial statement

·         FITs update on DECC website

·         Solar Power Portal coverage of the solar story.

·         Greenwise coverage of the news.

·         BusinessGreen coverage of PV FIT story.

·         The Guardian coverage.

Regards, Barry.

Following December’s ASA decision to ban us from saying “Zero Carbon Solar”, Solar Twin Ltd have requested an Independent Review, following up on some earlier expressions of concern, they have today published a summary of their concerns here.

1/ Complaint Identity. Having only been supplied with an assurance based on “self-declaration”, we have been compelled to ask the Independent Reviewer to examine the robustness of ASA’s establishment of the “non-competitive” nature of the complainant in the context of the ruthless exclusionary competition background facing our company, one to which even OFT appear to have alluded.

2/ Declarations of interest and transparency. Having not been supplied with evidence, despite us asking for it, we have been compelled to ask the Independent Reviewer for confirmation about the robustness of the control mechanisms within ASA, also in relation to outside opinion, regarding possible conflicts of interest, considered in the context of the competition background of this case, this context including multiple masonic-style blackballings from UK bodies associated with solar regulation.

3/ Technical Competence. Having not been supplied with evidence, despite us asking for it, we have been compelled to ask the Independent Reviewer to look at the adequacy of ASA’s level of competence and training on the environmental accounting topic of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and on its subtopic, Carbon Budgeting, and, within this, the significance of Scoping Boundaries in LCA, in today’s context of the energy which is displaced by solar generally being of relatively high carbon consequence, which means that virtually all solar technologies demonstrably go far beyond zero carbon when installed in a home, also that no renewable energy interests at all representing the “beyond zero carbon” concept appear to have participated in ASA’s last industry consultation session on energy labelling.

4/ Zero Carbon Manufacture Impossibility. Having again not been supplied with adequate supporting evidence, we do not think that people would really be so dozy as to buy solar panels even though, according to ASA, they seem to think that we have conned consumers into inventing some amazing zero carbon manufacture process. So we have been compelled to ask the Independent Reviewer to look at the correctness of the ASA assumption (one which we think is incorrect) that consumers would actually conclude that no carbon was used / emitted during the manufacture process, and even if this were a correct assumption (and we think it is not), as to the extent of any consequences, would any actual detriment to consumers be significant, and whether the assessment of the significance of that supposed detriment was correctly carried out (if it were assessed at all). The virtually nonsensical impossibility of zero carbon manufacture is an important context, one which ASA seems to have set aside.

5/ Position-Holding and Precedent. We also have concerns that ASA may not have put their collective brains fully into gear and instead that they appear to have conceptually conflated an irrelevant decision against a past advert for “zero carbon” gas to conclude, incorrectly, that our “zero carbon” claim also cannot be substantiated. ASA stated; “In light of that precedent, we consider it likely that the ASA Council would uphold this complaint if we were to proceed with a formal investigation into that issue.” It would be useful to review the apparent role of sloppy thinking such as “it’s all energy so let’s treat fossil-energy and energy-collecting products as the same” and imported precedent from other areas which ignores the fact that fossil fuels get burnt, while solar stops them from being burnt! The key issue here is the applicability of ASA’s application of the British Gas “zero carbon gas” precedent which was specifically referred to in correspondence, and the possibility that it was inappropriately and over-enthusiastically applied by ASA.

6/ Strength of Evidence. We also have further concerns that ASA may not have put their collective brains fully into gear, given ASA’s almost faith-based use of weak evidence and their selective reliance on flimsy consumer research statistics based on small samples on irrelevant topics, in particular ASA’s reliance on a DEFRA consumer research paper, even though it was published before the Zero Carbon Hub / DCLG Zero Carbon Homes definition was finalised, even though the report states that Zero Carbon is an emerging term, and even though this term was only assessed by consumers in two non-energy contexts, these being of washing machines and holidays, neither of which could be expected to reach, let alone go beyond zero carbon, and the clear fact that the study did not look at the term Zero Carbon at all in the context of renewable energy, a particular context where going far beyond zero carbon is not only the norm, but a design objective, and even though the report itself says “caution is needed in relation to these results due to small sample sizes in some cases, as well as the limitations relating to quota sampling”, thus warning readers against drawing conclusions on the basis of flimsy statistics a warning which ASA seems to have set aside.

7/  UK’s Zero Carbon Homes Context. We also have further concerns that ASA may not have made a decision in the proper context, given the obvious impossibility of ever having zero carbon homes without zero carbon products (or, indeed, better than zero carbon products), solar being technologies which are installed in and on homes, and therefore the importance of the context of the government’s definition and long standing ambitions for “zero carbon homes” being totally impossible to deliver unless at least some energy and carbon-related technologies within them operate to at least zero carbon performance and at best 6-20 better than zero carbon technologies, in our case, in terms of repaying their embodied carbon of manufacture, an important context, which ASA seems to have set aside.

Some of the above points have been raised and expanded upon with the ASA’s Independent Reviewer to whom we also explained:

“…while most “green” consumer products just squeeze ever closer to zero carbon, there is, in fact, a small a range of renewable energy generators which race toward and then overshoot this point rapidly during their lives, thereby becoming carbon positive, specifically because they displace the burning of fossil fuels. That this starting point to overshoot ratio is in the order of 6-20 times. That the epithet of “better than zero carbon” really is applicable to such renewable energy technologies.

We also pointed out that saying “zero carbon solar” for example, is in fact a modest understatement for our technologies and that:

“ASA seem to have deviated from their own published approach to LCA. On the full life cycle of our solar products, which is the ASA default position in their own code, solar was demonstrably far better than zero carbon, not just zero carbon.”

We also quoted a customer who wrote to us saying:

“ASA looks rational… saying British Gas is NOT zero carbon… I don’t see how that could apply to renewable solar hot water panels powered with renewable PV.”

Plus a comment which came from a solar installer via Twitter:

“…it looks like some tosser has grassed you up to ASA. findings r bizzare!”

Yes, this is a naked pitch for solar PV panel business. What, if anything you wear while reading this is up to you…
1/ Guaranteed 21p minimum feed in tariff. In response to industry, the government have just clarified that there is a PV subsidy floor tariff in order to boost confidence. Now have the 21p minimum confirmed until 31 March. Consumers now have 1 weeks of certainty about a minimum 21p solar PV Feed in Tariff.  (UK government have now said: “The tariff rate for PV installations less than or equal to 4kW will not fall below 21p for installations with an eligibility date between 12th December 2011 and 31st March 2012.”)

2/ In practice, there is only about 10 weeks of “21p minimum” opportunity left. The installation deadline is 31 March, but to allow for time to get kit and installers and scaffolding arranged and to allow for the possibility of bad weather causing disruption, there are several “pipeline weeks” less.

3/ These low prices may not even last until 31 March. Right now, solar prices are the lowest that they have ever been, because PV kit suppliers are discounting heavily in order to shift stock. I am 100% certain that will not be able maintain our current low pricing if another gold rush starts, because the price of kits will soar, just as they did last November and December. So it makes sense to order solar PV in the next few days.

4/ After 1 April the effective cost of solar PV installations may actually be forced to rise, typically by several thousand pounds, according to the Government’s disputed cuts consultation. You may then have to invest thousands into your home as a precondition of getting a higher subsidy than 9p after that date. The proposed Home Energy Performance Certificate “level C requirement” may then come into force. Why expose yourself to that risk when you don’t have to?

5/ Funds are running out. They may even have run out already. But to officially make cuts they need to operate a consultation. The government has even been thinking about a very basic 9p subsidy if they can’t afford more. Today’s 21p looks great compared to that.

6/ Seize the moment. The point is that under the feed in tariff, whatever tariff you start at, AND RIGHT NOW 21P IS GUARANTEED, the starting tariff is the tariff that you then continue with, index linked with inflation, tax free for 25 years. So it makes sense to get on board right now, while 21p is confirmed, while prices are low and well before 31 March and well before and possible gold rush, at which point we know that the speculators will make everyone’s costs rocket.

I hope this has been useful. For more updates please take a look at this link… It takes the wrappers off the UK government’s court case on solar PV and looks, light heartedly, at the consequences. Solar has never been better value (well… er this year anyway…)

Solar PV FIT needs review. Who is fighting in the ring and why?

Solar PV battle: state of play. Key quotes from fighters in the ring. Plus from a few gore-splattered spectators

UK solar PV FIT fiasco. Background.

Even when UK’s solar electric PV FIT subsidy was first introduced in 2010 the levels were already much more generous than any subsidy for solar heating panels. By the end of September 2011 solar PV costs-benefits were at least 30% better still and meanwhile the solar heating market had collapsed by 80%.

Stupidly (there is no other word) Government had failed to inch the subsidy down gradually month by month. Now the reaction was nuclear and comedic: fast-breeding solar lemmings all dashing, faster and faster, towards ever-rising, ever-closer, dead-drop cliffs.

Because of this generous rate, about 100,000 homes had solar PV installed by the end of 2011, (there are about 25M homes in UK) thereby demolishing the scheme’s budget. Predictably, the government of the day blamed the previous Labour Government.

An enormous solar PV gold rush in the last 2 months of 2011 was triggered by an announcement about impending cuts. As a result about half of these systems were installed in just 6 weeks at the end of the year. Free market chaos was unleashed: capitalism with no clothes on.

Prices inevitably rocketed briefly as speculators snapped up containers of panels to resell at 50% to 100% profit and installers named their price. Today,  prices have fallen again and many solar PV panel installers have suspiciously clean fingernails.

Legally there was an obvious timing anomaly with the cuts. Last October Government said it was “consulting” on proposals to halve the subsidy people could get unless their panels were installed before 12 December 2011. Not only was this time much sooner than expected, it was also 11 days before the end of the consultation, which obviously made it a into blatant sham-consultation.

Clever city lawyers spotted a spectacular money-earning and green-PR opportunity and quickly hooked some angry green clients. The momentum got unstoppable. Even we offered cash, but nobody took it up. It was already tainted. Of course, soon everything also turned red.

Today the Government and Friends of the Earth and some solar industry heavies are splatteringly locked in court over the legality of the solar PV FIT cuts. While the first round has been won by FoE, who, to drunken cheers and whoops, gave the Government’s Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) a bloody nose ,in December, the delays introduced by the subsequent rounds of this contest of pride vs principle, both at any cost, now threaten to eviscerate the whole UK solar industry, not just those in the ring, but those watching as well.

Some possible scenarios following the Solar PV FIT court fight round 1 are:

• If Government is not granted leave to appeal (ie it loses round 2), theConsultation would be declared unlawful and the cuts would be nullified. Sources in the Court indicate that this is unlikely.
• If Government wins on appeal, we return, a month or so late, to where we were before legal action began, ie the Government will consider all responses to its consultation proposals, including the proposal that a domestic system (up to 4 kWh) can expect to earn 21p from 1st April 2012.
• If Government does not win on appeal, then the 43p tariff could remain in place for all registered installations until the Parliamentary process has concluded (expected to be 1st April 2012, possibly earlier).
• Other gory scenarios, which involve further appeals.

A Court of Appeal spokesperson said today’s hearing “looked likely to go until next week” – further adding to the uncertainty facing the solar industry over the FiT cuts. In fact, due to the time constraints, things are proceeding in parallel. The Department of Energy and Climate Change’s appeal against the High Court ruling is being heard by the Court of Appeal, even though “leave to appeal” hasn’t yet been formerly granted. And the “roll-up hearing” now looks set to go on into next week, possibly without a final judgement being made for several days, according to a Court of Appeal spokesperson.

Will UK’s old solar crummy old MCS regulations be changed soon?

UK solar consumers need to know that influential members of the “traditionally-built” old solar-heating lunch-club have put the brakes on the UK solar thermal market for over a decade, to the detriment:

• of consumers themselves, (eg in areas of both safety and information, such as legionella safety, and telling people about solar installation performance, maintenance, operation costs, and money savings).
• of innovators (not only ourselves but other solar innovators).
• of free speech (I have been ordered by solar industry top brass to shut op or face “action”, which has turned out to be nasty).

One wonders, will a new multilayered revenge attack on the viability of several innovative solar thermal products (including Solartwin’s) soon be launched in a coordinated way by the established solar heating industry? Will they choose the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) as the arena for the usual reasons, ie that:

• MCS is where eligibility to the RHI is decided. Hundreds of millions of pounds of subsidy may soon be approved for or denied from UK-made innovations like ours.
• MCS contains a rump solar thermal committee where old solar interests have numerical majority control.
• MCS governance is weak, despite MCS being a standards-setting body. For example, the solar thermal committee has not even got a number for a quorum (one person could attend and legitimately decide the fate of over £100million of state spending – it’s that BAD!) and MCS even refuses to adhere to BSI’s more rigorous standard-making procedures. Even where written governance exists, it is often ignored, for example by giving members (ie those who are not in the same circle as the Chair) only 2 working days notice to read documents which could decide the fate of an industry. What a crummy regulator!

In summary, I fear that the following could happen. But it does not have to happen. I think readers need to know that old solar’s latest approaches again could include numerous wrecking tactics, any one of which could ruin us, such as seeking to:

• Block us by seeking one MCS-favoured plumbing approach which excludes us by reopening the old “dedicated solar volume in time” issue which was accepted by MCS 3 years ago. The market needs inclusion, not exclusion of innovation.
• Block us by banning freeze-tolerant collectors by giving reference to a poorly written external training document which says you must stop freezing (rather than tolerate it). Again UK needs inclusion, not exclusion of innovation.
• Block a huge market segment from us by excluding installers from needing to be trained about our technology, thus closing off the potentially huge installer-reseller market to us again by giving reference to this external training document.

There are many other issues as well: this is just an example of what might happen. We fear a rapid resumption of the old solar industry’s usual revenge attacks / market grabs, now that the OFT have diverted their gaze away from the solar industry again.

Of course, Government knows full well what needs to be done: [but they sit on their hands] full declarations of interest, proper consumer representation, academic representation, an independent Chair, a neutral rep to the SMG, not one who threatens dissidents, members’ requirement to be more inclusive, members being given proper notice to read documents, MCS getting a proper BSI type constitution and proper conduct. But much of this is just not happening because it simply suits UK’s powerful market benders to stodge up UK’s regulators. Is MCS fixable?

My suggestions for improvement in UK’s solar water heating standard (called MCS MIC 3001) include:

1. Solar Legionella safety. Firstly, alignment of its wording to mention HSE Approved Code of Practice and Guidance on Legionellosis document ACOP L8 (as the MCS heatpump standard did last year). Perhaps secondly, accurate reference to Dr Tom Makin’s once covered up solar and Legionella report, now a neglected four year old, which, with reference to twin coil solar cylinders, says damningly: “In twin coil storage cylinders a solar coil positioned at the base of the cylinder is used to pre-heat the water, and a boiler coil is fitted above the solar coil to raise the temperature of the water at the top of the vessel to 60OC. This arrangement may permit temperature stratification that supports the growth of legionella bacteria at the base of the vessel. If the solar coil does not generate temperatures that bring about thermal inactivation of legionella bacteria, and if the residence time for water in contact with the boiler coil at 60OC is less than that required to effect thermal inactivation, then it would be necessary to provide a further level of control e.g. consideration should be given to programming the boiler coil to heat the entire contents of the solar hot water cylinder once daily, preferably during a period when there is little demand for hot water. Where legionella control is not achieved through raised or lowered temperatures, alternative measures such as the use of appropriate biocides, should be considered.” and “…it has been clearly demonstrated in HCWS and in many other varied water systems that Legionellosis and Lochgoilhead Fever) can arise from any water system that supports the proliferation of legionella, and which discharges the bacterium in the form of aerosols proximal to individuals who may be predisposed to such infection. It is therefore highly likely that those solar pre-heating water systems which support the growth of legionella bacteria and do not achieve thermal inactivation or control of legionella bacteria in some other equally effective way, are creating a health risk with regards to legionella infection. UK, manufacturers, suppliers, installers, and owners of such water systems as solar pre-heating systems, have a statutory obligation to assess such risks and implement measures that will effectively control those risks.” How on earth MCS can allow David Matthews (the ex-Solar Trade Association Chief Executive who has even ordered me and threatened me to shut up on the Legionella issue to represent the Wider interests of the UK Solar Thermal Industry at the MCS’s Top Level Standards Management Group is an interesting question.
   
2. Allowing MCS installers to validate third party domestic solar heating installations. A hands-off approach already happens for trade only and so today’s rules are blocking MCS accreditation of simple installations which are being done by other competent people. If your solar heating installation “does what it says on the tin” then it deserves an MCS certificate – and a subsidy.
3. Temporarily deleting a market limiting reference to EST’s flawed CE 131 solar water heating guidance document, until it is updated (EST have acknowledged that it is flawed. See our notes on its annotated version in the link below.
4. Making sure that solar panel installer training requirements are actually relevant to particular solar water heating technologies (ie not all have mains leccy, antifreeze, high pressure, etc) This will ultimately save the solar thermal consumer money by not requiring irrelevant installer qualifications. Right now solar installers are trained mainly on old solar and not on innovations sch as ours. This means that plumbers and the like will not promote innovations and there is an old solar technology lock-in to the solar market. National training and skills organisations like Smmitskills really will have their work cut out getting the skills scope widened.
5. Getting rid of solar red tape which takes the form of a burdensome formal quality management system, for solar installation micro-businesses of 4 people or less.
6. Perhaps in return for this red tape cut, improving and extending consumer information about solar panel microgeneration vastly, including:

• By ending the mains pump power concealment in the solar thermal system energy performance estimate (where the “SAP 75kWh pump figure” was, er, omitted). This change will reduce fraudulent performance claims and save the taxpayer money from paying out money for non-existent energy benefit under DECC’s RHI domestic solar panel subsidy scheme phase 2. This issue also applies to heat pumps.
• By introducing relevant geographic variations in the energy performance estimate of solar panels, as Which? magazine has asked. This means that in Cornwall your solar performance estimations will be higher.
• By MCS installers telling consumers plenty of real useful information about maintenance, running costs, and environmental performance in several new areas including “life cycle analysis” and “years to breakeven” for “embodied energy and carbon” for solar panel installations which make hot water.

Last year, I formally offered these suggestions, in a more wordy technical format, to the Microgeneration Certification Scheme. This is an industry-led, self-regulating organisation which may or may not choose to adopt some or all of them. Or it might kick them into the long grass.

What will happened?

Because of MCS secrecy rules, members of the public, many of whom who support the principle of open government, will not be able to find out if any of them are accepted until the next version, if any, of MCS’s MIS 3001 solar water heating installation specification is eventually published.

Happy waiting!

I hope that this is interesting. Incidentally, outside the above MCS solar heating installer envelope, I have also asked, for at least the sixth time, for MCS to be categoric about convergence with BSI‘s far better procedures and approaches to innovation, which has not been taken on board, also about disclosure related to freemasonry, which has, predictably, been fudged to mean: not unless they want to.

Incidentally, I am the founding and sole member of regarding the Praiseworthy International Society of Secrecy. Whoops! Now I must expel myself for disclosure.

(News last updated 11 December 2011)

Here’s our take on the solar PV panel FIT subsidy cuts: DECC waved a bothersome red flag. Britain’s leading solar bulls left the pack, impaling us all on DECC’s waiting sword.

Q1 Has the original solar PV FIT funding pot run out? Yes. There is supposed to be no money left in the budget.

Q2 What happens now? Presumably government raids another green energy pot. My guess is the RHI or somewhere else. They have to keep paying until the review is done.

Solar news UPDATES 10 Jan 2012: Well, there you go! It has just been revealed that nearly £200M of more money has secretly been found by raiding another pot, thus increasing their original budget by about 75%. Further update of 11 Jan 2011. Confusion reigns because DECC now say this is a technical adjustment and NOT new money. What is going on?

Q3 Is the Government still stuck in the courts? Yes, we know this much anyway. Government has very deliberately chosen to do this.

Q4 Why? Choose your answer:

• The Environmental Taliban [The Minister's words!] dragged them there.
• To save our Dear Minister’s oh-so-pretty face.
• To buy time. [At what price? For what purpose?]
• To carefully explore all the interesting new legal ramifications. [Apparently the issues affect, more generally, the way that government runs its various consultations.]
• Because it’s all started so we will just ram on and on and on.
• To teach a stupid whingeing industry who’s boss.
• In order to become a new Twitter Trend.
• Courts are fun. Courts are centrally heated. They do fancy dress. We love fun!
• None of these. All of these. Something else. Don’t be cheeky. I just don’t care aaarghhh.

Q5 Have FoE action given the Government a bloody nose? Well,  yes, I suppose so, but only tricklingly. And at a price. All this legal headbanging is causing life-threatening haemorrhaging blood-torrents from the solar industry’s noses. Pass the clean bandage, luv.

Q6 Is this a spectator sport? Ooooh yeeees! Whooooopeeee! The fossilbods and nuclearites are smirking, jeering and grinning with unrestrained glee. Lawyers are coining it. As for the mere taxpayer, er… Shuttup.

[Wallet warning. Naked solar sales pitch follows. Stand back. Be sceptical.]

Q7 Is this a good time to buy solar? And which kind of solar? Probably yes, for both kinds, in the same kind of way that the January sales are a great time to buy Xmas cards.

1/ For solar PV we now have 21p confirmed by government and the legally adjudicated possibility of much more until 31 March. By these figures , on the basis of past law, we are talking about a tariff that your installation attaches to and which then stays with it, index-linked for 25 years. If the court case is won in favour of 43p (ie finds against Government) then PV installation prices will certainly soar immediately, because the speculators will all dive in again. What do we mean by speculators? Just that. During part of the 6 week bubble from 1 Nov to 12 Dec 0211 we ended up paying 50% to 100% more than our normal prices for some supplies such as PV modules. At one point we even paid 2.5 times the normal prices for a while because someone had bought up the lion’s share of UK’s solar roof mounting kits. We actually installed at a loss for a time, and then we had no choice but to put our prices up. This time we know that we will have to hike them so immediately if 43.3p is announced. In addition, there is another reason to act now, from 1 April it looks as if many people have to invest in £5k or so in of “Energy Performance Certificate – Level C’ home energy performance upgrades, as a condition of getting state funding. According to Government 85% of homes currently do not reach this standard. But again, this is part of the cuts consultation, the legality of which is under dispute. The point is that PV prices are low right now and they are likely to rise.

2/ For solar thermal water heating, again, it seems like a good time to buy because if you wait until after 1 April you will lose your £300 RHIP subsidy, because this end at that date.

[End of sales pitch, back to the general warbling, burbling and wailing...]

And finally (except that this is all far from final). Repeat after me: “Our Dear Minister is not, repeat not, a lawbreaker. The Great British Department of Energy and Climate Change is strategic, competent and oh-so wise. Our Hallowed Department of Business Innovation and Skills knows all there is to know about sustainable business. Repeat this enough times, eat a few nutmegs and you will trulytrulytruly believe it. Look into my eyes…

Now for the solar PV FIT cut facts.

Thanks to REA and MPC for much of this info, which was originally provided in a much more measured and understated format. Below is an edited paste-in of some of their recent analyses, with ye wondrous highlights in bold! [And our snide / sarky comments in square brackets just for fun].

Certainty over 21p tariff. DECC now says this should help to reduce the uncertainty: The PV tariff rate (<4kW domestic installations) will not fall below 21p for installations if the eligibility date is 12th Dec 2011 to 31st March 2012. [That's the only joy got promptly out of the way, now for the detailed fog-analysis.]

DECC officials have shed some light [haha solar gedditt] on the FITs Judicial Review appeal process and the potential impact on the industry.

Judicial Review. DECC lodged their appeal on 4th January.  DECC expect to get an appeal hearing with 3 Judges. The permission hearing will be next Friday, the 13th [haha!] and will be followed by the full hearing, if permitted, the same day.  The findings won’t be announced until the following week, REA say by Friday 20th January at the latest. So DECC [and we] hope that by 30 January all will be clear [as mud], but there are no guarantees of the timing as the process could result in a further appeal to the Supreme Court [or beyond] by whichever side loses.

Once the result of the Appeal is known and if DECC win they intend to publish their response to the consultation on or around the 30th Jan (they can’t do it before) along with the Phase 2 FIT Comprehensive review.  However, DECC made clear that the proposals in the Phase 2 consultation depend on what the result of the Judicial Review is and the amount of PV that has been installed since 12th December.  Unfortunately REA are unable to get reassurance that other technologies will definitely not be affected.

If DECC lose they may appeal to the Supreme Court, a process for which it is difficult to forecast a timescale.  REA’s understanding is this is something of a test case around the consultation process on secondary legislation which has far wider implications across the whole of Government and which therefore means there will be much wider considerations for Government in choosing to pursue this beyond the solar issue. This could mean that even if DECC wanted to drop the case, concern over the rulings impact on other Government policy may prevent them from doing so. [the quagmire thickens]

Letter to Chris Huhne. REA Chief Executive Gaynor Hartnell has written to Secretary of State Chris Huhne requesting an urgent meeting and seeking reassurances that the legal dispute will not be allowed to affect the future of the FIT scheme, for all technologies.  REA have press released this today.  The REA letter to the Sec of State makes clear REA are not in any way involved in the legal actions. [Unlike several of its members. Some other members were angry about the JR action.]
However if DECC’s Appeal is lost it will be vital to secure wide political support for an increased budget.  REA have made clear to Friends of the Earth and a wide range of other stakeholders that their actions have raised the stakes, creating opportunities but also risks and threats, so it now essential to have more support and resources to safeguard the FIT industries.
Market bias. REA are well aware of the needs of other FIT technologies, as well as implications for the RO budget and have publicly criticised DECC for failing to prevent pot-depletion by one favoured technology.  [We asked the very same question much earlier: about 18 months ago. We even asked Europe's competition people to look at the matter of one technology pointlessly smashing up the renewables market. We showed them that the UK solar thermal market had collapsed to about 20% because of the FITS orgy. Nothing happened. Dozy idiots.] REA has suggested pulling FITs into general taxation to help resolve these concerns, where Treasury revenues appear to exceed scheme costs. [And they now do, for the avoidance of doubt.]

The Judicial Review has raised the stakes, [repetition] since a return to 43p kWh tariff could see another rapid rise in deployment [ie bubble and period of speculation where people buy up containers of PVs and kits and at every European port sell them on at 2.5 times normal prices. We got well screwed by some these guys between 1 Nov and 12 Dec, but that's just the joy of capitalism.] DECC is not ruling out any follow-on legal options, should it lose the appeal.

Empty pot for the future too. Whilst Minister Greg Barker is keen to see the scheme continue for solar, in an interview with Business Green yesterday he confirmed REA’s internal analysis that the budget had been exceeded for 2011/12 and REA believe this will also be the case for 2012/13. Therefore reducing the tariff for all PV systems installed post 1st April 2012 to 9p kWh (equivalent to 2ROCs) remains a possibility. [Catastrophic.] DECC Officials were keen to stress that 9p is not their preferred outcome, [naturally, who  wouldn't apart from a fossilbod or nuclearite] and that all options remain under consideration.  However, REA are worried, as they understand DECC came very close to setting 9p 2 months ago, but this was fought off by the Minister.

Is the cliff now is closer and higher? Looks like it. The unfolding legal process may have implications as to whether this 9p outcome might be avoided or become inevitable. Are we lemmings?

21p is OK. So far the majority of solar companies believe setting a reference date before the end of the consultation was deplorable, but that 21p works OK.  Key concerns are to focus on the long term future of the industry and on balance.

So, the sequence of events up until now has been as follows:

Ø  12th December 2011: eligibility date after which consultation proposes new installations should revert to 21p tariff on 1st April 2012
Ø  21st December 2011: Friends of the Earth, HomeSun and Solarcentury win their case against the Government’s proposed changes to the solar FITs
Ø  22nd December 2011: Joint EAC/ECC Select Committee Report into FITs is published, criticising management of the scheme and the recent consultation process
Ø  23rd December 2011: Deadline for responses to consultation on Phase 1 of the Comprehensive FITs Review
Ø  4th January 2012: DECC announces that they have lodged grounds of appeal with the Court of Appeal
Ø  6th January 2012: Date for DECC’s application for permission to appeal announced.

The ruling: Mr Justice Mitting ruled that the 12th December reference date for the proposed cuts to the FIT, occurring two weeks before the consultation officially ended on 23rd December, would be illegal.

DECC’s response: DECC has sought permission to appeal the decision. The request for permission to appeal focuses on the underlying principle of the ruling that the proposed approach to implementing new tariffs for solar PV is inconsistent with the FIT scheme’s statutory purpose of encouraging small-scale low-carbon electricity generation and accuses the Judge of ignoring the needs of other FIT-eligible technology groups.

What will happen now? DECC must now wait to hear whether they have been granted permission for an appeal. It has been announced today that the application for permission and, if permission is granted, the appeal itself will both take place on Friday 13th January. In the meantime, the industry is left in limbo as a result of the delay to a decision, unsure which tariffs will become effective when. There are a number of possible outcomes from this point onwards:

• If DECC is refused permission to appeal: 43p tariff remains in place for all registered installations until the Parliamentary process has concluded  (expected to be 1st April, but could be earlier)
• If DECC is granted permission to appeal but subsequently loses. A hearing takes place (up until which a final decision is still pending) after which 43p tariff is confirmed for all registered installations until the Parliamentary process has concluded (see above)
• If DECC is granted permission to appeal and wins. A hearing takes place and we return to the existing situation where a consultation process is ongoing and Government is considering responses.

[There are many other scenarios as well as these three.]

To recap, a few likely diary dates:

Ø  13th January 2012: DECC appeal permission hearing, which will be followed by the full hearing, if permitted, the same day.  The findings won’t be announced until the following week.

Ø  31st January 2012 (approx): If DECC wins its case, it intends to publish its response to the consultation on or around the January 31 – which is the earliest date it can do so – along with the Phase 2 [ie domestic] Comprehensive review.  However, the proposals in the Phase 2 consultation are likely to depend on what the result of the Judicial Review is and the amount of PV that has been installed since December 12 [because this amount affects what is left in the funding pot or more realistically how overspent it may become]. In the event that DECC loses its appeal it may turn to the Supreme Court.  It is unclear at present what the implications of this might be.

Ø  1st April 2012. 1/ Solar PV FIT might fall well below 21p, to as low as 9p, if so, then constraining the solar PV market to well heeled, deep green, ethical customers only. The originally Proposed Home Energy Performance conditions of EPC level C may add a further £5000 or so to the typical investment per home, thus reducing takeup even further, but of course this requirement will also improve household savings for those who can afford it. 2/ And the solar thermal RHPP £300 grant ends on this date. This is why people are buying solar now: some choosing both solar thermal and solar PV. Time is running out…

Wider implications. Following the October 31st announcement, the number of solar PV installations grew by up to 50% per week, reaching nearly 30,000 installations in the last week leading up to the 12th December deadline. If the Government does not win an appeal, a renewed period of tariffs at 43.3.p/kWh is inevitable. The exact length of this window will depend on DECC’s legal advice following conclusion of the court case. However, even with a relatively short window, a renewed bubble of demand would appear possible. This could impact on the fixed budget (saving which DECC has stated is the basis for its intervention), with further implications for the FiT scheme as a whole beyond 1st April 2012. This is speculative however, and we must await the decision of the Court on DECC’s request for permission to appeal following the Court’s return on Friday 13th January.

More on the numbers of PV installations fitted during the 2011 solar PV “Gold Rush” (dates are week ending dates).

• 30 October: 5,296
• 06 November: 6,884
• 13 November: 9,577
• 20 November: 13,266
• 27 November: 16,978
• 04 December: 25,564
• 11 December: 29,880

[Silent message.] Whatever the outcome from this point onwards, the Government will have been sent a clear message regarding the management of the scheme and the approach to this recent consultation in particular. [What message? That they have cocked up? That our Dear Leaders are wilfully misunderstood sweetypies?]  The industry as a whole hopes that policy makers will think carefully before adopting a similar approach to policy intervention in the future. [Full marks for diplomacy and expert tactical application of the reverse understatement / intensity rule that only a true GritBrit can really understand. Luvvitt]

Hoping this analysis was fun. Sunny fog-free regards, Barry.

Govt strategy is to appeal.

Real strategy is to buy time.

The Guardian reports that UK’s government is preparing to appeal against last month’s high court decision which described its plans for hasty cuts to solar feed in tariffs (FITs) as “legally flawed”, leaving the solar industry in chaos over the current level of incentives for new solar installations.

On Wednesday the Government’s Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) will file a last-ditch appeal against last month’s ruling by Mr Justice Mitting, who said it would be illegal for the government’s proposed cuts to have an “effective date” of 12 December, two weeks before the consultation officially ended on 23 December.

Mr Justice Mitting gave DECC had until 4 January to seek an appeal, but he also warned that any appeal would have limited chances of success.

In a surprise move, one which shows the power of social media, the UK’s Climate Minister Greg Barker today confirmed on Twitter that DECC would meet the appeal deadline, and restared that  Government remains committed to halving the subsidy available for solar installations to ensure the scheme does not exceed its budget.

“Budget means 4 every 1 new taker @ 43p, 2 homes won’t get it at 21p,” he wrote.

Our view at Solartwin, is that this seems like a cunning tactic to stall for time and to stifle the market whilst issuing a new consultation anyway. Government probably suspect they will lose but it it a budget saving exercise. They clearly hope to shorten the next solar PV gold rush from over 8 weeks to 8 weeks minus appeal length. In other words, they will deliberately string out any appeal process for as long as possible in order to heighten the uncertainty.

Cunning, if it is legal.

FoE UK v DECC

In case you want to know about the Solar PV FIT Judicial Review by Friends of The Earth, here is our reaction.

One the one hand, the fact that it has shown DECC that it needs to follow due process is welcome, because too often they have been cavalier. I’d actually like to see a Judicial Review into their new policies of “far more electrification” and “electricity grid decarbonisation = nuclearisation”.

On the other hand, the Judicial Review uncertainty has put a freeze on PV customers ordering at present. How will we survive? Unless the government win, the PV speculators will soon be raking it in as before (we paid them 99p -125p per watt for PVs instead of the usual 65p for much of the gold rush 6w), and, of course the fixed funding pot of £280M will empty far sooner than planned, making the jobs cliff edge for the industry happen much sooner, and from a greater, ie more lethal, height.

Are we all lemmings? Have FoE vainly won a battle, at the price of winning the war? What is virtually certain is that the taxpayer will now get far fewer green watts for their money.

I hope this is useful. Happy holidays to everyone!

Further solar PV FITS CUTS JR Background

The implications of the recent Judicial Review decision mean that the pre 12th December tariffs (43.3p per kWh of solar electricity generated for small domestic installations) cannot be changed to the proposed figure of 21p until after the full parliamentary process – i.e. an 8 week consultation, followed by a review of the responses and then a 40 day period before the legislation takes effect.  But this is unless the Government wins an appeal.

Government was not given leave to appeal, but if it wants to make a case it must put that forward by 4th January 2012.  Effectively the situation for systems going in now is one of two things.

1/ If Government is able to appeal, and also if it wins, we then revert to the original situation.  I.e. there is a valid consultation ongoing, and a domestic system can expect to earn 21p (or whatever government concludes after the consultation) from 1st April.

2/ If government is not able to appeal, or if it loses on appeal, then the 43p tariff remains in place until the new Parliamentary process has concluded (which is expected to be 1st April 2012).

We are deeply concerned about the implications of this Judicial Review and the budgetary implications of a return to 43p, because it means that the funds may run out too soon.

Additional news is the publication of two select committee reports which criticise Government’s handling of the tariff changes. Here are some news links:

• Listen again to Tim Yeo on Radio 4.
• The Guardian 1.
• The Guardian 2.
• Solar Power Portal.

We will keep you posted when we have any further significant information.