The Australia schemes were administered by the individual State Governments and some did indeed reduce tariffs after contracts were signed , but some such as the ACT did not (for my last 3 months in Australia, I was paid € 250 net for my electricity)
As in all things you need to fully understand your contract details, if in doubt pay for professional guidance, it's good insurance.
The issues are:
1. The industry is not being regulated correctly - Solyndra a perfect example. They were endorsed by governments as the next big thing in the Solar Energy field. Billions of US tax dollars given as grants and big businesses persuaded to install. The system did not work correctly and the company went under (did not help that they were using cheap Chinese modules - so much for providing jobs in their own country). This left thousands with very expensive photovoltaic panels that have no use other than roof insulation. There are many other manufacturers/suppliers who have gone the same way. Good business practice and quality control are not the prime concern of the cowboys who have jumped onto the carbon reduction programme.
2. Solar panels, by their very nature, produce electricity at the wrong time of day. In the UK big businesses are being paid to use more power when consumer demand is low (works out cheaper than powering down power stations), this is why buy back schemes are being phased out. It is not economic to purchase electricity from households with solar panels when demand is poor. The most likely (and very expensive) fail point of a photovoltaic system is the storage batteries. Storing the power is still something that has not been addressed fully and many of the systems being fitted into residential properties are grid connected with no storage facilities. This is missing the point of saving energy and reducing carbon emission.
3. There is much debate about the payback on panels. At present it appears to be a close run thing as to whether there is any carbon benefit in countries that are not mainly driven by fossil fuel power stations (such as France). The carbon cost of the manufacturing processes and the transport of components is something that requires full investigation. However a number of companies are no starting to install their own PV systems to run the factories so in future the carbon cost reduction should make PV a viable option. There is also the problem of PV waste, at present governments are looking at the recycling options. There is already a mountain of defunct equipment that needs to be dealt with. So much for the 25-30 year life cycle so often quoted by the industry. By recycling the carbon footprint should be reduced and will also contribute to lessening the ecological impact (will not start on the subject of mining here) that this industry has.
In summary I feel that there needs to be more regulation of the industry, there are too many cases of people being sold this type of equipment without a proper understanding of what the system will mean to them. The companies selling this technology are gaining in every way, massive profit margins and kick backs from our taxes. They remind me of the stone cladding salesmen of the 70's. There is lots of hype about solar panels being greener than conventional power supplies and offers of buy back cash that are not necessarily true. There are many good reasons to install PV - if you own a commercial/industrial premises that has a huge demand or live off grid and wish to generate your own power but there is also an element of buyer beware. The payback on the panels you buy may well be a lot longer than the working life of the system. There is no easy answer, it troubles me greatly that nuclear appears to be the greenest of the current options (just do not build in an earthquake zone or where the local tipple is aviation fuel). All we can do is continue to research and pray that somebody finds a solution to storing energy, without storage facilities energy production will never be truly efficient.
In Australia, problems arose with people who entered into similar contracts, and then the government shifted policy and in many places stopped the subsidies, and also stopped the option of selling back to the grid (they had an oversupply of electricity in places), which left both the solar panel companies and the customers in the dwang.
If you are going to enter into this, make sure you have iron-clad paragraphs in the contract which reduce your obligation to a manageable amount in the event that government policies change (since government parties regularly do), or the company goes out of business, or whatever.
Also, I assume that solar energy will become more and more common over time, greater demand and hence cheaper, so the loan repayments in 10 or 20 years time may seem high. Just a thought.
I wouldn't enter into any agreement for 20 years without spending for an hour or two of a lawyer's time to check that I was well protected. Worth it for a big outlay.
We did this 3 years ago; the figures were more favourable then, payback was just 4-5years. So far the figures are as forecasted.
The price 40K you are being asked seems very high to me. Get competitive quotes.
EDF did do some outrageous buggering about at the start, I wrote at the time it was more reminiscent of some dodgy car dealer. However ever since then it's been straightforward. The Spanish goverment welshed on the guaranteed price when they were mid crise. Can one trust the French government not to do the same?
Our supplier has stopped trading more or less, the guy told me it was because EDF just gave everyone the run around, it became impossible to get people connected without many months delay. The onduleur (DC AC converter) went wrong, and was replaced under guarantee. The guarantee (panels and onduleur) supposedly goes back to the manufacturer, so I think for once having a brand neme you've heard of might be a good thing.
There are people in the UK who rent roof space and pay the householder something like your £50 a month, which sounds much more comfortable than your paying 400 and receiving 450.
In summary, there might be a decent deal to be had, but it's not the one you are being offered.
Do you know for a fact that insurance csosts incresae?
I wouldn`t touch it with a barge pole!
The cost of solar heating, and aerothermic & geothermic systems in France are exorbitant because the companies know you can claim a rebate on your income tax. The cost in other countries is much less for the same specification.
Also didn`t we have a post on the site about someone entering into this kind of contract but due to faulty workmanship the power was not suitable for EDF and so there were no funds available to pay off the loan?
I am not familiar with French House insurance, but neither UK nor Australian Insurance Companies charge extra for PV panels. None of my panels have ever suffered any form of storm damage.
Have you considered the extra costs on your house insurance as the company covering will now be covering a large investment on your roof? What about loss of revenue if the panels get damaged ? A massive hail storm could put your panels out of action for a while.
I think there were a number of small companies that sprang into existence to take advantage of the tax credit and the high tarrifs. However they were interested in the quick profit from installation, and not too much about the longer term. Maybe it's the hard sell and the attractiveness at first glance? Already in the UK this business has taken a nose dive with the reduction of the feed in tarrifs, but I don't remember if that had happened here.
Personally I'd love to see better technologies taking hold, like the excellent idea of the solar tracker from SOITEC in Bernin. I can see their factory from my window. :-) They make units that are like large solar panels mounted on poles with tracking technology to follow the sun as it moves across the sky. It's clever because it attempts to keep the unit perpendicular to the sun at all times. But it's cleverer than that, because they don't use normal panels. They use an array of flat lenses, 5cm diameter or so, that each focus their light on a small piece of silicon. The advantages are that it's less prone to being affected by dirt on the surface, it uses way less silicon to produce, and they also make their mini-panels (so to speak) with several layers to catch different wavelengths. So here's an example of a potentially excellent and far less wasteful way to generate solar. The units are fairly large and so not really suitable for people's gardens, though they do make a portable version. I really hope they will succeed with this, and it would be great to be able to have a solar tree in the garden which would do the business without damaging the roof.
Update: Just found a web page saying that they had in mind about 5k euros for a pair of the mini trackers with battery system included.
Panels have improved their efficiency over the past 10 years and are getting cheaper, but €1200 each is not value in today's market, even though the return is good.
Best to get other quotes for both contract and outright purchase and as previously stated there are more affordable finance methods.
But I can assure you that the technology works and running costs are reduced considerably, it is all about getting the best deal financially to set up the system.
I only see negative comments in this discussion so far; yet vast numbers of houses [especially here in Midi-Pyrenees] are festooned wiht panels; they are building solar barns everywhere and even "solar farms" covering acres. So, the technology must work and there must be reliable, decent quality panels to be had. Bernadette, you claim to be an expert - what is your reasoning against, and what would you propose instead?
I was looking into this as well. What really bothered me: who actually helps when something goes wrong? The waterproofing and the fact that even after a few years you find yourself with old technology on your roof...
Also, even though they were very pushy (the company that came around), they never even called again when I sent them away as I "had to talk to my husband"...
Not sure about these deals anymore. New technology is on ots way, with panels that are only a fraction of the thickness as these current panels. Better and easier to install and to take down, not such a burden on your roof... etc. I think waiting a bit is probably a good strategy. :-)
The last point you make is a good one. I think I heard a colleague mentioning that while EDF are supposed to pay you the high feed-in rate, they don't like it. They are forced to by the government, for reasons of EU quotas and so on, but I guess if it was EDF's choice they'd tell you to get lost.
Yes, I'd like to know more about this too. We considered it seriously in 2010 but couldn't get French tax residency in time. Now, we've had a garage built with a deliberately designed, long, south-facing roof slope. Can you only sell your electricity to EDF or are there other companies who can offer the Govt-backed scheme? What about costs and the best makes of panel?
The reason for the high purchase tarriffs is to encourage people to do just this because EDF or France will be fined for not having enough energy from renewable sources. However I'm not at all sure that the price EDF pays is guaranteed, and as people say the yield on these panels is far from certain.
we have had so many calls about this - and we wondered why - because it's economically viable for the selling company to make a profit. So even though we can't afford to do this, one guy was so insistent, so we said 'come here then'.
He gave us a shoddy printed powerpoint presentation, which had numbers crossed out and written over in ink (so unprofessional given they are making heaps on it). So if you sign 'today', installation can begin in 4 or 5 months time, and then one year after installation you start recouping some benefit from your installation. The 'seller' gains all the first year's profits. In reality it means you are paying out this monthly charge without seeing anything in return until well after the first year of installation.
I hate to harp on about New Zealand (but I often do) - but there if you install solar panels, you are hooked straight into the power grid and you start your savings or gains immediately. No hidden costs and it's plain and simple. People who did this early on had to replace the panels after 15 years or earlier (high UV in NZ) but due to the savings they had in power it was cost effective. I believe solar power technology has improved significantly since then.
We decided it was not an option for us (besides the fact we were told we couldn't afford it anyway) was that we don't know where we will be in 20 years time - it's a long term investment and, providing it does everything for you they say it will, to see the results of it and reap the benefits you really need to be in the same place for that length of time.
Our friends in the village decided to go with solar panels - they have many gripes - one is that the installation company damaged their roof and it took over 2 years to get it fixed, another is that they had to go in and make a right old fuss to get their first claim for power recuperation. Now it's sorted, but they had not anticipated having to do this as they assumed (or were told) it was automatic.
Wholly agree, and there is no guarantee that EDF will purchase the excess power generated and as we pay EDF 6.65 cents per kwatt why would they pay you 28?.
You also need to look at the source of the panels - there is a huge issue with quality control and if they are shipped halfway across the world would have a far higher carbon footprint than traditional sources. The new generation panels are still going through the testing process, there is no guarantee that they will last 10 years, let alone 20 and there have been issues with the suppliers going bust - which then leads to huge problems further down the line when parts need replacing (which they will).
My background is in energy savings and I would not touch photovoltaic, too many issues to be ironed out. Tread very carefully with this contract, it sounds like an out and out ay to lose money to me.
Rule of thumb; when it sounds too good to be true it usually is.
No, the catch is not the 20-year EDF-contract. Any company that guarantees a return on investment with solar-panels can't be taken too serious. Just tell them that you won't sign a contract that doesn't have a guarantee for 453 Euro's per month and stating that they will pay you the sum missing each month. They won't do that.
As for the loan you will pay a total of 96000 meaning an interest rate between 9 and 10% That sounds very steep to me considering your bank can get you a loan at 3-4% Who's providing the loan? The famous "credit d'impots" is limited to once-off 11% for the material for 2013 so I don't know what other goodies they promised to pay it off in a little under 7 years. You need to be very careful as there are too many scams going on. And above all ask more companies for a "devis"