Like Tree12Likes

A feed-in tariff would hurt LKS and Kadoorie - So No Chance!

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    2,260

    Couldn't Hong Kongers who can generate electricity themselves (whether solar or by exercise bike) just store that in a personal battery or generator at home. They can then use that personally during the day and save the electricity charges from CLP. During summer, i would save a thousand each month - not to be sniffed at especially if i need to do some exercise anyway.


  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    12,323
    Quote Originally Posted by UK/HKboy:
    Couldn't Hong Kongers who can generate electricity themselves (whether solar or by exercise bike) just store that in a personal battery or generator at home. They can then use that personally during the day and save the electricity charges from CLP. During summer, i would save a thousand each month - not to be sniffed at especially if i need to do some exercise anyway.
    Yes, anyone can do this. We already have the batteries and are installing the panels later this year. However, most people in HK do not have access to their roofs - only those in village houses and like us on boats - and most village house roofs are used as terraces or have illegal structures on them.

    From a utility perspective the main problem with this is that you do not just bypass the generation component with your solar panels, you also bypass the network component (yet use the network, which is a fixed cost) for the rest of the day. So the network must exist but the recover of it's cost falls. Typically, you get more solar in richer areas (because they can afford the capital outlay) and the overall network costs are fixed - so tariffs get adjusted so that the money is recovered elsewhere (i.e. from poorer consumers). Meaning that badly designed tariffs with no fixed component result in effectively regressive taxation.

    Feed in tariffs are common around the world; but that does NOT mean they are a good idea. Typically they encourage over-sizing of rooftop solar and then use of the distribution network to send that power out into the rest of the grid. Most distribution networks were not designed for the backward flows and when lots of solar occurs in the same area it can overload the grid - not good.

    Also much feed in tariff design around the world has been based on retail tariffs, rather than the more correct generation cost component of such tariffs. The public thinks they should get the higher number and it has proved hard to change once implemented.

    ON balance, as noted by others, CLP has a monopoly and a contractual right to recover its costs. HK is not great for renewables. So the overall benefit of a FIT here is somewhat marginal.

    A final correction - they would NOT hurt CLP because as I stated above, the Scheme of Control guarantees CLP's return. They would just recover more elsewhere.
    UK/HKboy likes this.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by HK_Katherine:
    Also much feed in tariff design around the world has been based on retail tariffs, rather than the more correct generation cost component of such tariffs. The public thinks they should get the higher number and it has proved hard to change once implemented.

    ON balance, as noted by others, CLP has a monopoly and a contractual right to recover its costs. HK is not great for renewables. So the overall benefit of a FIT here is somewhat marginal.

    A final correction - they would NOT hurt CLP because as I stated above, the Scheme of Control guarantees CLP's return. They would just recover more elsewhere.
    It looks like Feed-In tariffs may be starting soon in HK.

    They really should only offer feed-in tariffs at above market rate during the peak periods.


    Bad chart but the concept of using stored energy (your Tesla) to pump back into the grid when really needed.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    6,714
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    the concept of using stored energy (your Tesla) to pump back into the grid when really needed.]
    You mean battery storage (like a Tesla Powerwall), not an EV.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by emx:
    You mean battery storage (like a Tesla Powerwall), not an EV.
    EV's

    shri likes this.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    12,323

    people have been talking about vehicle integration like, forever. the reality is that EV's are not built that way. currently.

    emx and East_coast like this.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Original Post Deleted
    Yes and charge them of cheaper rate electricity.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    3,988

    Renewable energy feed-in tariff has been announced, but bizarrely it is subject to annual review

    Power firms to pay up to HK$5 for clean energy - RTHK


  9. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    12,323

    Given that solar costs have fallen significantly every year, why would it be bizarre to review it annually?


  10. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    3,988
    Quote Originally Posted by HK_Katherine:
    Given that solar costs have fallen significantly every year, why would it be bizarre to review it annually?
    because changing rate after the system is operating changes the financial viability. if you built it expecting 10-year payback period then the rate is lowered the payback period increases.