I'm not sure why solar power always gets people so excited. It's just one way we have developed to produce energy without adding CO2 to the atmosphere.

Before someone get's PV panels installed on their roof, I would hope they've got their house properly insulated. They should also be using some form of solar heating for their hot water.

You can also sign up for green power from your local energy retailer. The economies fo scale these companie gain means their per unit cost is far lower than the avg householders. The same amount of money spent brigns in a lot more "green" powetr. More bang for ya buck :).

A feed in tariff is also a form of picking winners. It means that PV gets a hands up against other forms of carbon free energy production.

Just remmeber, that feed in tariff is paid for by all energy consumers.

JJO:

"I'm not sure why solar power always gets people so excited. ....."

The fact is it does, and very well some vested interests know it.

These observations emphasise the mischievousness of the idea of a German-style feed-in tariff exclusively for domestic roof-mounted photo-voltaic electricity generation. Promotion of this idea, at this time, constitutes a smokescreening of what may be really going on in that arena where transnational mega-corporates contest for the 'inside track' with respect to Australian government plans and policies, at the expense of the Australian community at large.

As poster Jedimaster (OLO article contributor John Barker, see: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8077 , and at the bottom of the page for his qualifications) makes clear, "... rooftop PVs are unlikely to ever be economical." The trans-national mega-corporates AND the Australian government are thus quite at ease with the promotion of, and public excitement about, domestic rooftop PV solar panels. That is also why "The government is canning the means-tested $8,000 rebate mid-year and replacing it with a more complicated system.", to quote the author. Government has already decided domestic rooftop PVs will never be a goer, and reducing a subsidy that only benefits overseas manufacturers of PV panels is politically risk-free here in Australia.

They'll likely keep a reduced subsidy in place, and, by way of 'compensation' to eager PV adopters, legislate a feed-in tariff, because that will provide a superficially believable covering explanation for the price-hikes the 'national' electricity market wants to happen in the near future in any event.

It should be noted that the Australian Government has already committed $500 million of taxpayers money to the Renewable Energy Fund, see: http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=113221 Read it VERY carefully. My post on Ludwig's OLO General Discussion topic 'Rudd’s renewable energy shame' (as usual, containing a typo - an extra 'e' on the end) expounds. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2372#52921

The winning renewable? Already decided. Just not telling.

Forrest Gumpp,

Your constant harping on the "mischievousness" of my post is getting up my nose. Ditto, your adopted position of superior knowledge on the entire topic of renewable energy. Too much hubris, and not a little ego-driven paranoia, methinks.

Firstly, I reject your repeated claims of some sub-agenda lurking beneath the surface of my post. WYSIWYG, suh. Sorry to pee on your conspiracy theory party, but I trust you'll acknowledge that I, as the author, should be aware of my intentions in writing the piece? Or perhaps you really do harbour some delusion of omniscience? Got myself wrong, perhaps, and only you can see THE TRUTH?

From the horse's mouth, then... I was taken aback after discovering that some misleading information was being disseminated – largely unwittingly, I suspect - at some seminars in Perth, during which people were being advised of the savings to be had by installing solar PV panels. One presenter opened with the line "Who's still paying for electricity?"

I sought through my article to share my research, which exposed as apocryphal some of the more extravagant claims circulating out there. Secondly, I believe in renewable energy as the way of the future, and in individuals doing as much as possible to further the cause. Thirdly, since Germany has already set an impressive precedent with solar PV panels, I see no reason for us not to carefully consider following their example.

You and others have brought up some worthy arguments against feed-in tariffs, not all of which I was aware of until now. I acknowledge, then, that the issue is not as black and white as my article might suggest. That is not to concede that my agendas were other than outlined above, or that I have changed my views on feed-in tariffs. Frankly, you detract from your credibility in positioning yourself as some sort of authority privy to knowledge inaccessible to lesser beings, and attributing underhand motives to those with differing views.

Sincere thanks to others who have contributed so many thought-provoking points to the debate, both pro and contra feed-in tariffs.

Well said, Ross!

I continue my plea for INFORMED opinion, not just unsubstantiated opinion. There's a lot of people who really want to know about the topics that OLO presents so that they can make better informed decisions about their lives.

Unfortunately there always seem to be people wanting to coat-tail on the latest matter of public concern- ranging from paranoid ranters who see apocalyptic signs in everything, to hucksters trading on the optimism and technical ignorance of ordinary citizens, to the pathetic types who try to con bushfire victims.

The nub of this issue is whether domestic rooftop PV systems can make a difference. Of course they will make a difference to the owner, but should anyone else pay- yes, if it is to their benefit as well AND more beneficial than alternative uses of their taxes. Nobody (well maybe some of those mentioned above)needs to be convinced that PVs actually work- so subsidising demonstrations is not justified. I've commented before on subsidising remote users. So that leaves creating a large market through subsidies. Rooftop PV could work, but at a much higher cost to all than meso and mega-scale systems.

As I see it, a lot of people think that they are helping others by being energy independent. They're not if the taxes on others are greater than the benefits to others. And the numbers suggest, if not prove, that rooftop PVs aren't the best way to get to a sustainable future.

The URL http://www.feedintariff.com.au/ , to which the author's highlighted text link towards the end of the article delivers you, displays a page upon which are visible two significant features: the first and most obvious being the Coat of Arms of the Commonwealth of Australia; the second being an 'about us/contact' tab at the top of the page, which takes you here: http://www.feedintariff.com.au/about.php

In the opening line on the 'about us' page you read that "FeedInTariff.com.au is a public service provided by Australian renewable energy company, Energy Matters." When you follow the highlighted text link 'Energy Matters' in that opening line, you will be taken here: http://www.energymatters.com.au/ , the home page of Energy Matters. On it you can see what they sell.

I derive from this that Energy Matters, in promoting this petition for a national feed-in tariff, is promoting its own commercial self-interest, and that it is doing so with the blessing of the Federal government. In turn, the author is promoting the petition, and that's all OK so far as I am concerned. (Whether it is with respect to OLO rules, I leave to the hopefully light hand of the Moderator.) It's just that everybody who participates in what should be a most interesting discussion, or reads the thread, should know this in advance.

It is unfortunate that Ross Buncle sees my open discouragement of the signing of the petition, and my repeated description of the promoting of the idea of a German-style feed-in tariff for photovoltaics alone as mischievous, as constituting 'harping'. Especially so, given his gracious admission:

"[Forrest Gumpp] and others have brought up some worthy arguments against feed-in tariffs, not all of which I was aware of until now. I acknowledge, then, that the issue is not as black and white as my article might suggest."

Ross also says:

"I believe in renewable energy as the way of the future, and in individuals doing as much as possible to further the cause."

Agreed.

Sleazy stuff, ForrestG. Far from acknowledging you got it wrong with your charges of "mischievousness", you resort to more of the same. Perhaps it's time for YOU to demonstrate a little graciousness.

For the record, before publishing my article I challenged Green Matters along similar lines to those you outline and was satisfied with their response. In any case, since I seek to alert people that installing PV panels is NOT presently economically sensible, implications that corporate promotion is part of my agenda are illogical.

Further, I suggested an email alternative to the petition.

I do not appreciate your slights. A fair-minded person might see fit to apologise for erroneously accusing me of hidden agendas. Alas, righteousness and ego are obstructions to fairness and quality debate. Transcending this sort of petty-mindedness enhances one's credibility - worth making the effort, I'd suggest.