I wish to question whether Government Feed In Tariff schemes, although well intentioned, is poor economic policy in its current form, and whether it should be changed (or expanded) as described below.

It costs about $20,000 for a household to install solar panels to offset their household energy usage, and it costs more than $1,000 per year for electricity consumers to ‘subsidise’ each household receiving the generous ‘feed-in’ tariff, not to mention the cost of any installation rebate subsidy.

It is smarter if a household is able to invest in a 1/1000 share of a 2.5 mw Government large wind turbine (estimated cost $5,000 per household), which would generate the same amount of renewable energy.

Households cannot do this themselves, and need Government to implement and manage the scheme.

Potentially, it would

(1) tap a very large funding source for renewable energy (which the Government cannot fund by itself),

(2) enabling many more households who cannot afford $20,000 for solar energy to offset their energy consumption with renewables,

(3) not require $1,000 per year subsidy per household for ‘feed-in’ premium.

(4) not require installation rebate

(5) run at no nett cost to the Government or other electricity consumers.

I wish to question whether Government Feed In Tariff schemes, although well intentioned, is poor economic policy in its current form, and whether it should be changed (or expanded) as described below.

It costs about $20,000 for a household to install solar panels to offset their household energy usage, and it costs more than $1,000 per year for electricity consumers to ‘subsidise’ each household receiving the generous ‘feed-in’ tariff, not to mention the cost of any installation rebate subsidy.

It is smarter if a household is able to invest in a 1/1000 share of a 2.5 mw Government large wind turbine (estimated cost $5,000 per household), which would generate the same amount of renewable energy.

Households cannot do this themselves, and need Government to implement and manage the scheme.

Potentially, it would

(1) tap a very large funding source for renewable energy (which the Government cannot fund by itself),

(2) enabling many more households who cannot afford $20,000 for solar energy to offset their energy consumption with renewables,

(3) not require $1,000 per year subsidy per household for ‘feed-in’ premium.

(4) not require installation rebate

(5) run at no nett cost to the Government or other electricity consumers.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gigadafud/2513807256/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gigadafud/2513807256/