14 April 2012

Ontario Power Authority 2 Year Review of Feed In Tariff Programme, Minister's Directive of 5 April 2012.

The Ontario Power Authority released the scheduled 2 year review of the FIT programme on 22 March. Yesterday they held a webinar to provide information to the public about the changes to the microFIT programme being proposed. There is a comment period and readers may see these details on the OPA website. The points below are the proposed changes to the programme, contract, and rules, take verbatim from the OPA website (I've put my comments in brackets):

Key changes to the FIT and microFIT Programmes include:

  • As a first step, the FIT and microFIT program rules will provide for the awarding of 50 MW of microFIT and 200 MW of small FIT contracts as soon as possible. (applications in the queue will be processed and released soon)
  • FIT applications will now be accepted only during an application window, rather than on an ongoing basis. (a more planned application approach -likely to help the OPA assess applications based on grid capacity and their ability to process the applications)
  • Small project FIT applicants will now need to submit application security if they wish to apply or re-apply under the new program rules. (likely to reduce the number of speculative applications)
  • Applications will be prioritized with points awarded based on applicant type, municipal support, Aboriginal support, project readiness and electricity system benefit. (allowing for greater community involvement in the development process)
  • Solar rooftop projects must reach commercial operation within 18 months of receiving a contract, compared with three years previously. (if you get an application you need to build - this way the price you have to pay for the system reflects the price you'll receive for the electricity sales. Also, if you have grid capacity allocated to you then build now or give the capacity to someone else)
  • Ground-mounted solar projects need to be located on lands that are not used for residential purposes and also cannot be adjacent to lands that are used for residential purposes. (proximity and land use decisions)
  • Ground-mounted solar projects are permitted on commercial and industrial lands as long as it is the secondary use of the property. However, if the project is the only use of the property, it will be ineligible. (ground-mounted solar is the the main use of the land but ancillary. This will encourage more solar to be put on roof tops)
  • In addition, ground-mounted solar projects can be located only on property that does not contain any Class 1, 2 or 3 soils, organic or specialty crop soils, regardless of zoning, or any mixed soils that contain Class 1, 2 or 3 soils. (protection of highly valuable lands)
  • For projects other than rooftop solar that receive prioritization points related to the type of applicant, there are new restrictions on changes that would reduce the equity held by a community, Aboriginal group or health or education entity below the level that enabled the project to qualify for such prioritization points during the entire term. For rooftop solar projects that receive prioritization points related to the type of applicant, such restrictions apply from the contract date until five years after the commercial operation date. (ensuring significant community investment {and community benefit} and reducing the risk that "token" community investment will be used for the project only to be transferred to the main developer after project approval)
These points above are derived from the Minister's Directive released on 4 April 2012. This directive has many very important details and people should read this directive very carefully.

March 2012 Power Yield and How RETScreen is Doing

I've downloaded the data up to 13 April and I've put it in my spreadsheet to calculate the power yield for March 2012 (table below). It was marginally better than 2011. I am looking forward to the rest of April because so far the bright, cool days have been good energy producers. March 2012 was just 9 kWhr over last year. However, RETScreen calculations show that my system should have yielded 584 kW, so, two years in a row RETScreen is overestimating the system. Two years of data is not enough to say RETScreen is not accurate, but the overall trend with my system is underestimation. RETScreen calculated that my system should have produced 9128 kWhr to the end of March whereas my system did 8256 kWhr (10.6% under estimation). Most of the deviation came from the winter of 2010-2011 where snow substantially reduced the panel output. So, with this limited dataset, it points to people being conservative when estimating their payback expectations.

Sum - Daily kWhr Years


Date 2010 2011 2012 Total Result
Jan
169.7 255.8 425.5
Feb
275.0 322.5 597.5
Mar
560.8 569.3 1130.1
Apr
492.9 313.5 806.4
May
534.3
534.3
Jun
707.2
707.2
Jul
769.0
769.0
Aug 164.0 658.5
822.5
Sep 438.0 528.0
966.0
Oct 450.0 391.1
841.1
Nov 355.4 316.3
671.7
Dec 78.2 219.8
298.1
Total Result 1485.62 5622.72 1461.16 8569.52