On 25/08/2009 evanbb wrote:
>>wind farms are highly subsidised by the MRET scheme,
>This is quite wrong. There were no direct subsidies under MRET for a start.
>The whole scheme set a nationwide benchmark for energy sourced from renewables,
>which it is the retailers responsibility to purchase. This was set in GWh,
>and aimed to max out at 9500GWh. Since demand continues to grow, this percentage
>of overall renewables has slipped from 12% to 8%.
>
>Now, wind makes up a very small part of this; ~2.5%. So, if you count
>2.5% of an 8% encouragement to purchase wind power as 'highly subsidised',
>your definition of subsidised and mine differ greatly.
That's a bit cheeky Ev - sure there's no direct subsidy but do you reckon we'd see so many wind farms being built if there wasn't a market for RECs, that is, would they be economically viable without MRET and the cost to retailers (as passed through to customers) of purchasing RECs? |