Victorian Solar Minimum Feed in Tariff Slash Proposal

CommuterPolluter on 10/01/2025 - 16:33
Last edited 10/01/2025 - 17:48 by 1 other user

The Essential Services Commission has just today proposed a massive cut in the flat rate solar feed in tariff for the 2025-26 year. The current minimum flat rate tariff is 3.3 ¢ per kWh. The proposed minimum flat rate tariff is 0.04 ¢ per kWh.

For those with smaller energy usage this essentially eliminates reduces the profitability/economic justification of household solar (or at least increases the payback period significantly). Clearly they are signally they don’t need more solar coming online for the time being, despite the Vic Government as of December still offering some juicy rebates and interest free loans on household solar.

Home & Garden Feed in Tariff Solar Energy System

Comments

  • CommuterPolluter on 10/01/2025 - 16:35
    +4

    As an exporter of solar energy myself it’s disappointing but I think ultimately reasonable. It was unfair to other households to be forced to subsidise low-value solar exports.

    • Euphemistic on 10/01/2025 - 21:06
      +2

      How is 3.3c/kwh unfair to other households? Electric companies are charging them over 50c/kwh. Its not subsidised like it was in the early days of solar incentives. if anything, youre being ripped off because the power companies are making bank off your panels.

      • freefall101 on 10/01/2025 - 22:11
        +3

        Power generators are being paid negative amounts in the middle of the day and having to restrict their output, but instead of retailers being able to buy exclusively from them, they have to pay home users who are exporting power instead. It pushes up the overall wholesale price of power.

        If anyone is paying 50c/kwh in the middle of the day, they should probably review their plan as well.

        • Euphemistic on 10/01/2025 - 22:57

          These are problems of a half developed renewables grid. Cant turn 'base load' power off, too much solar. But we havent got smart (enough) meters or power plans to cope with free power whole the sun shines.

          • HeWhoKnows on 11/01/2025 - 19:24
            -4

            @Euphemistic: Nothing FREE about solar power at all.
            You've been listening to Blackout Bowen for far too long.

            And havent you noticed your power bills going through the roof as more and more clean energy is built and connected. …
            I wont go into all the details and costs of which you are not aware in relation to your 'free" solar power. and wind energy
            But lets not forget about what will be very high disposal costs of expired solar panels as well as wind turbine and blades every 10 to 15 years. As well as the ongoing renewal costs of these expired clean energy assets

            Other than to point out the costs of setting up solar at home including the backup battery which is now becoming a mantadory part of a home solar power setup. It wont even break even before the solar panels and batteries are expired and need replacing.

            And now you can see some Grid managers charging a feed-in tarrif which is designed to encourage you to install and charge a very, very expensive back-up battery, instead of feeding back into the grid

            If you dont believe me read this:
            https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/two-way-pricing-electric…

            So good luck with Free Solar

            • Euphemistic on 11/01/2025 - 19:28
              +1

              @HeWhoKnows: Havent been any blackouts yet AFAIK.

              • HeWhoKnows on 11/01/2025 - 19:30

                @Euphemistic: No, just in South Australia and Victoria.
                But that wasnt the point I was making

                • Euphemistic on 11/01/2025 - 19:32
                  +2

                  @HeWhoKnows: None of the points you were trying to make were worth responding to.

                  Renewables are the cheapest form of electricity. production

        • SlickMick on 11/01/2025 - 19:57

          So what is the highest cost that providers are paying for power? 3.3c? It seems to me that they're running a terribly inefficient business if they aren't making super profits from the retail price.

          • freefall101 on 11/01/2025 - 21:06
            +1

            @SlickMick: What does the highest cost have to do with anything?

            That said, the highest cost they're paying is $15 per kw/h. Which is why retail power prices are high, when the sun goes down and people are stilling running their aircons flat out, the small number of coal and gas providers can decide to do maintenance to spike the power price (which means all sellers get the highest price). And the retailers need to recapture that cost during low cost hours.

            Having to pay 3.3c/kwh instead of being able to get it for more boosts the costs, simple as that.

            • SlickMick on 11/01/2025 - 22:00

              @freefall101: You seriously don't think that is relevant? If that's true, it seems to me we're heading for a revolution in this industry, coz I don't see that's a sustainable price.

              • freefall101 on 11/01/2025 - 23:46

                @SlickMick: It's not relevant to retailers having to pay people exporting to the grid more than they pay coal/wind/solar wholesalers. They set their prices with the bank they make during the middle of the day in mind, while also accounting for the massive losses they occasionally make when the grid is saturated. It benefits solar owners at the expense of everyone else. For retailers it's why they do EV plans with free charging at specific hours, even if people are paying peak pricing the retailers probably lose money.

                Not sure which bit isn't sustainable, the wholesale price gets up to $15/kwh in small peaks, which encourages more people to put in more wind/batteries to cash in on that. It's why the only hold up to more installs is regulatory and the whinging NIMBYs, there's plenty of people wanting to put in turbines and the government wants to churn out renewable energy zones so we can produce as much cheap energy as people want.

      • HeWhoKnows on 11/01/2025 - 19:12

        More like charging round 35c/Kwh
        But still compared with 3.3c ????

  • Bruceflix on 10/01/2025 - 16:39

    This is very much reality in SA now

    • CommuterPolluter on 10/01/2025 - 16:41

      If you don’t mind my asking, if you have solar, what’s your average feed in tariff?

      • Bruceflix on 10/01/2025 - 16:42
        +2

        I'm currently on 8c FiT but most plans range from 0 - 3c

      • GordonD on 10/01/2025 - 17:05
        +1

        My FiT is 48c. Four more years to go.

      • JIMB0 on 10/01/2025 - 21:14

        12c/kwh

      • mikekiwimike on 11/01/2025 - 08:08

        We are on 8 cents in SA as well, waiting for the change to happen where we will get basically zero.

    • Lastchancetosee on 11/01/2025 - 07:35

      My fit is 5c in SA

  • c64 on 10/01/2025 - 16:55
    +4

    just wait until they start charging you to feed in

    • CommuterPolluter on 10/01/2025 - 17:06

      That would really suck for people whose inverters don’t have export control.

      • DogGunn on 10/01/2025 - 17:14

        You would be able to do it at the meter.

    • BiotBargin on 10/01/2025 - 23:08

      to some extent they do, they charger you $80 to reconfigure you meter to feed in … and they dont even ask.

  • LVlahov on 10/01/2025 - 17:09
    +3

    It really makes me believe one of two things should be happening:

    1. We should be cutting down on the promotion of solar as being able to fill more of our energy needs (because any additional solar simply does not provide energy when we need it).
      or
    2. Much more should be invested now, or really should have been invested over the last 4 years into forms of solar capture and storage, such as pumped hydro.

    If we had input better means of storing energy into the system then there would be no need for minuscule rates on solar export as we'd be desiring more input from solar systems at any time of the day. The low rates speak to a bungled effort.

    • AngoraFish on 10/01/2025 - 17:48
      +4

      We're talking rooftop solar. Any individual should still get significant benefits from not having to buy power when the sun is out. Feed in tariffs have been declining for years. Anyone who bought a system in the last 4-5 years based on feed in tariffs had plenty of warning not to do that.

      Rooftop solar remains one of the best bangs for buck in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and has many other benefits for the network beyond just adding to daytime supply, such as reducing the demand for transmission infrastructure.

      There has indeed been a bungled effort in taking advantage of solar opportunities. We very recently had nearly a decade of COALition government actively undermining renewable power at every possible opportunity, and only a couple of years to turn around that situation. There are, however, multiple solutions currently being rolled out, such as community batteries, however it is not possible to make essential infrastructure appear overnight.

      • Protractor on 10/01/2025 - 17:53
        +1

        If only we could take out a class action for the irreversible damage the LNP has forced on this country via climate change denial and obfuscation. How they can look their kids and grandkids in the eyes with any integrity is really impressive character acting.

        • LVlahov on 10/01/2025 - 20:40
          -1

          There has been no irreversible damage done to the country. You both engage in hyperbole from a position of partisanship. I mean "COALition" really.

          And by the way we've had a Labor government federally for the last 3 plus years, and Labor governments in most states for the last several.
          Seems like - if you think there is a problem - Labor has been a real part of it themselves.

          And there we can include a trade deal with India that flooded Australia with 1 million additional migrants (temporary plus permanent) since they came to power which.. guess what.. all need housing, transport and so on. Where do you think the energy for that comes from hmm? What would Australia's emissions been with 1 million less people hmm?

          Perhaps there is a glaring obvious way to help the environment the left side of politics overlooks hmm? (As do neoliberal politicians of all stripes of course).

          • Protractor on 10/01/2025 - 21:03
            -1

            @LVlahov: "Labor has been a real part of it themselves".

            I agree. I also get your hint that there's too many humans.Absolute core of every problem we have.
            But I've done my bit.

            The rest is just typical denial of what's obvious, in front of you and in every level of empirical and other form of evidence. Time to hide you now, bye bye denioman.

          • AngoraFish on 10/01/2025 - 21:32
            +3

            @LVlahov: The Australian federal government has maximum three year terms. The last federal election was held 21 May 2022, which is 2 years, 7 months and 19 days ago, which by the way is not "3 plus years".

            People require energy to house regardless of where they live. The game is about reducing carbon emissions globally, not just Australia's specifically.

            You roll your eyes about "COALition", as if the federal treasurer at the time and future leader of the COALition didn't bring a lump of coal into parliament in 2017 precisely in order to mock parties demanding action on climate change.

            The glaringly obvious way to help the environment is to not voraciously oppose anything that actually helps the environment as if helping the environment is some kind of woke, leftist plot.

          • try2bhelpful on 11/01/2025 - 01:05
            +3

            @LVlahov: How do you expect them to fix the power issues in three years? Look at who has been in government for the majority of the last 30 years. If we’d had a comprehensive power policy in the last ten years we might be a long way down the storage for renewables by now. I suspect China will go full speed ahead with storage development now they now America is vacating the field. Batteries will get more efficient and the prices will drop. We are in the transition period at the moment. Whatever you think about “partisanship” the LNP has certainly not been providing us with the most cost effective power options. Their current nuclear plan relies on people using a fraction of the power the ALP is talking about. This will cripple future industry and our migration from gas to electric.

            The migrant uptick was always going to happen no matter what party came in because we took almost nobody for the Covid years. At the moment the ALP are looking at schemes to reduce migrants but the LNP refuses to support them. The other issue is we have shortages in certain work areas which is why the unemployment levels aren’t increasing even with the migrants.

            I don’t think the ALP are perfect but they certainly offer the better options. Not partisanship just fact. The LNP is obsessed with identity politics and culture wars. What is the LNP policies on Cost of Living, given the keep saying it is the most important thing? Instead Dutton says he won’t stand in front of flags.

      • LVlahov on 10/01/2025 - 20:39
        +2

        "as reducing the demand for transmission infrastructure"

        It does not do this, in fact quite the reverse. The transition infrastructure has to be upgraded to deal with the power surges from solar (when for instance the sun peaks out from the clouds) while the total capacity required in the system remains the same.. i.e. to deal with peak power usage when the sun isn't shining.

        • GordonD on 11/01/2025 - 08:12

          You beat me to saying this.

      • Hector on 11/01/2025 - 10:00

        Rooftop solar remains one of the best bangs for buck in reducing greenhouse gas emissions if you ignore the production and recycling/disposal cost of panels

        FTFY

        (Best bang for buck is LED lights/home insulation)

        • try2bhelpful on 11/01/2025 - 10:36

          People should look at their homes and see what passive improvements that can make. Insulated curtains, only heating/cooling a small area to live in during extreme temperatures, awnings, opening up at night to ventilate heat in Summer, blankets, warm clothing, etc. Reduce the requirement in power to begin with.

          However, we are now more comfortable in Summer because we are happy to run our air conditioner using the power from our solar panels.

  • myk on 10/01/2025 - 18:14
    +3

    Honestly it does not matter. As soon as the feed in tariff drops beyond a certain point, we will all get batteries. Then the energy resellers will really have something to cry about.

    • Protractor on 10/01/2025 - 21:06
      +1

      And then the last plank is this.You'll have to have a license to produce electricity in a domestic environment with all the safety shit,insurance and annual inspections. If you fall behind your insurer will not cover you for claims. Pencil it in.

    • mikekiwimike on 11/01/2025 - 08:15

      And they would have been too late to do anything about it, bit like the dinosaurs (or Foxtel), I am waiting for that moment where the feed in tariffs become nothing and then I will go offered with my Chinese batteries - fingers crossed no fires lol.

  • JimmyF on 10/01/2025 - 18:53
    +1

    The proposed minimum flat rate tariff is 0.04 ¢ per kWh.

    LOL, so I have to export 25 kwh to get a single cent!?

    Yeah not playing that game at all. They'll be getting nothing! So lucky for me, that my solar system has a zero export option, and I have a EV to soak up the excess solar during the day.

    • Lastchancetosee on 11/01/2025 - 07:39

      I'll look into this. Is it easy to do? I have an EV.

    • The Hawk on 11/01/2025 - 16:31

      Without a battery or EV to dump the power into it kinda makes you want to permanently set export to zero at those rates… or is that the point?

      It would be nice if the infrastructure people invested in community batteries… but clearly it’s not even worth it for them or it would already be being done.

      • try2bhelpful on 11/01/2025 - 17:08

        Our council has been talking to households about it.

      • JimmyF on 11/01/2025 - 17:10

        Without a battery or EV to dump the power into it kinda makes you want to permanently set export to zero at those rates… or is that the point?

        Yes, that is the point for the moment, there is a glut of solar power in the grid during 10am and 3pm. The power price often goes negative if you are on wholesaler pricing as there is too much power in the grid. So, Yes they pay you to use power when this happens!

        That is the short term issue, the longer issue/problem is that in a few years time, when the snowy is up and running, it will suck up all this extra power and more for the pumped hydro setup, so they can create power at night time.

        But they'll shoot themselves in the foot, as they'll piss off everyone with 0.04c per kWh pricing, and those that can (like me), will set the system to zero export or install a home battery, rather than be ripped off. If I export 50 kWh, I'll get 2 cents!? Hardly worth it.

        So in the long run, I see there won't be as much excess power around as today.

  • Ocker on 10/01/2025 - 19:16
    +2

    "They'll be getting nothing" - that's exactly the message they want to get across.

    • JimmyF on 11/01/2025 - 08:22

      There is a big difference between them paying you nothing and you giving them nothing.

      The later means you get nothing and they get nothing compared to you getting nothing and them getting free power to sell.

  • Ocker on 10/01/2025 - 19:18
    +1

    The next step will be to charge consumers to take excess generation at times when the wholesale price goes negative.

  • Iwantthebestprice on 10/01/2025 - 19:54
    +1

    Wait until you see the changes coming in 2025 when you start getting charged for excess solar exported to the grid during peak hours 2pm to 6pm. Then you can truly grab your pitchforks and rise up in anger.

    Already happening elsewhere, look at Europe, so was only a matter of time before Australia adopted this approach to excess solar.

    • Protractor on 10/01/2025 - 21:04

      Don't forget the off (excess) switch on peak times

  • Drakesy on 10/01/2025 - 23:12

    WA is sitting at 2.5c.

    This is a joke imho. Having to buy back that exact energy for 20c/kwh is ridiculous

    i export 10x my consumption and still have to pay a bill.

  • Ocker on 11/01/2025 - 08:36

    Even at zero feed-in benefit it is still not financially viable for us to install a battery to store excess generation.
    In 2024, our 6 kWh system exported 1,386 kWh into the grid, at 20c per kWh that earned $277.
    With a 10 kWh battery costing around $10,000 the payback period would be about 36 years - well beyond the life expectancy of the battery unit.
    If they start to charge for exported electricity then the numbers would change, but still not enough to justify a battery.

    • BigMoth on 11/01/2025 - 14:39

      Maybe Vic gov will redirect subsidies from solar panels to batteries?
      Players like Amber already "pay you" to consume power at off peak times (and charge higher at peak times). In the off peak hours, one could recharge the battery, use the battery during peak hours… and not even need solar panels?

  • Ocker on 11/01/2025 - 19:22

    Have looked at swapping from Tango (20c kWh) to Amber but the number don't stack up in the long(er) term unfortunately.

  • saltypete on 11/01/2025 - 21:33

    Buying rooftop solar for the feed in tariff has always been a flawed strategy. Managing demand then adding solar is worth doing to reduce energy bills, particularly if household loads can be shifted to during the day.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join