FIT deadlines

DECC won't learn

Its a tedious read, you can probably find it if you Google DECC Supreme court and the name of a distressed AC loan. Gist is that court ruled that changes to FIT under coalition were unfair where contracts had been signed & compensation should be paid.

So a rep of the WT industry complains about political interference when a subsidy is removed which is itself political interference in the energy market. Irony!

Judicial review maybe, but if theyve leant from previous they wont remove it on existing contracts (seems to be the case). Devolve powers to the Scots on WT subsidies, then they can finance the FIT fromthe Barnett bonus & their existing tax raising powers should they choose.

I might well be wrong, but I was under the impression that as reported here onshore wind farms will be excluded but individual turbines on a farmers land will still be allowed, and it is the latter that we deal with predominately. Can anyone confirm or deny this ?


The announcement today relates to wind funded by the RO (Renewables Obligation) scheme, not the FIT (which is the scheme used by smaller / single turbine deals), your recollection is correct mrclondon.

That doesn't mean smaller WT deals are out of the woods yet though. The government's reforms are part of a wider package to control spending on renewables, & a reform of the FIT scheme is also expected. How this will affect FIT rates for small wind is an unknown at this point. It could be that a tighter rein on RO spending will enable more room for deployment of small wind on the FIT scheme, on the other hand the pressure on the Levy Control Framework (which is the total pot for all green energy schemes), together with misguided political objectives (onshore wind is also popular amongst Tory voters, something the government still hasn't seem to have grasped..) & the protection of large energy operators' interests, could mean everything is cut.

As background, there is also a separate CfD (Contracts for Difference) scheme now for large renewables which also needs to be funded by the LCF. The government is pushing CfD's strongly (it will basically replace the RO), whilst part of this is understandable in that it obliges renewables to compete for funding a large amount of CfD funding has been conveniently reserved for offshore wind & other much more expensive renewables. What has happened is that with onshore wind & solar proving so cost competitive & deploying very quickly, the very large offshore wind operators (who have had little success to date reducing costs) have successfully lobbied the UK government to reserve a large amount of capacity for them, & put the brakes on onshore & solar, to enable them to deploy meaningful volumes of offshore by 2020. Critics would argue this makes a mockery of the government's stated aim to support decarbonisation at the lowest possible cost.

Another aspect worth watching is planning. The government have said they want local communities to have the final say on onshore wind in their area & there will be changes made to the planning process. This could be good news for small wind, if local support for say single turbine deals is easier to obtain than for larger wind farms. Imo much will depend on the FIT rates however, if these aren't viable even local support won't be enough to get them off the ground.

Last angle, worth watching what happens in Scotland (where a large amount of onshore wind has been deployed & is still in the pipeline). The SNP are against the government's blocks on onshore wind, this could have an impact on things.

I note in todays "Statement on Wind Turbine Lending - Update on the Feed in Tariff (“FITs”)" the statement

I'm not certain 'appetite' and 'Anaerobic Digester' should be in the same sentence when you consider what goes in .......