This is the MSU Land Policy Institute forums.
You are not logged in.
Feed in Tariffs have been used as one of the most effective policy options for achieving Job Creation, Energy Security and the Rapid Deployment of Renewable Energy. this thread is a place to have a dialogue on this topic.
To my mind this is the best renewable energy policy available to Michigan, and may be the only one that will result in the kind of changes that are needed. Unfortunately, often the best answer can be a challenge to implement. This type of policy would result in:
-long term jobs, not a boom-bust
-systems that performed well over time, less "fly-by-night" operations
- real growth and energy production
-a smaller carbon foot print for MI
-energy independence for MI, less importing
While these goals are espoused by every politician that has stepped up to a microphone in the past 6 years, this is the one policy that would make them come about. Is the leadership out there in Lansing to make something real and significant come about? Leave your fears and apprehensions behind and do what is needed to make this happen.
In general I believe FITs to be the strongest methodology to incent renewable system uptake on a broad scale. However does anyone have critical and constructive feedback from the German model in terms of what may not have gone exactly as planned?
If the numbers I read are correct, the German 2006 generated 2,000 GWh of solar PV electricity costs 1 billion euros in tariffs while the 30,000 GWh of wind generated cost 3 billion euros. This makes solar PV cost five times the tariff money versus wind (500K euros/GWh vs wind at 100K euros/GWh). Granted I believe all renewables are good at this point, but perhaps this shows the art of setting tariff pricing and how certain industries can be aided more than others. This may be the point anyway?
Also these costs are eventually passed back to the consumers. Any push back from them in Germany? Has the cost bearing been acceptable?
Last edited by TJEwing (04-23-2009 4:39 pm)