Good news for photo-voltaic electricity producer in CY

[cyprusmax47]

Finally Parliament approved bill for electricity storage yesterday to TSO (transmission system operator) which is most important for our grid stability to avoid problems we have recently to get more "green" PV-electricity installed.

Here the most important part of the article in CM:

" It will also boost energy stability and independence, especially during peak demand or when solar and wind energy are wasted during low demand periods."

It took them long enough to find out how other countries are dealing with grid problems they had with the ever growing market of photovoltaic installations and wind parks.

source:
https://cyprus-mail.com/2025/04/11/parl ... gy-storage

Max

[Anarita John]

Our home in the UK has battery storage, plus PV panels. During the winter months, we draw off the grid between 2am and 5am to fully charge the battery, at around 13pence per Kwh. Then, at peak times, when the grid is under strain, we export back to the grid at 28pence per Kwh. When the clocks changed at the end of March, we started to rely on mainly solar energy to charge the battery to 100% and then export at the peak rate. In the summer, when there is an excess of wind and solar power, we have periods of free electricity, and in winter, special saving sessions when you are rewarded by turning everything off for an hour. This is just one small way electric companies are trying to manage the grid. However, this system will only work with a smart meter.

[mark4007]

Our home in the UK has battery storage, plus PV panels. During the winter months, we draw off the grid between 2am and 5am to fully charge the battery, at around 13pence per Kwh. Then, at peak times, when the grid is under strain, we export back to the grid at 28pence per Kwh. When the clocks changed at the end of March, we started to rely on mainly solar energy to charge the battery to 100% and then export at the peak rate. In the summer, when there is an excess of wind and solar power, we have periods of free electricity, and in winter, special saving sessions when you are rewarded by turning everything off for an hour. This is just one small way electric companies are trying to manage the grid. However, this system will only work with a smart meter.

and... dynamic pricing / feed in tarrifs etc.. There is still no suggestion that cyprus will adopt such a radical change

[mark4007]

Anyone figured out, how as per this article, buying expensive battery storage, to presumably mainly cut down curtailments for domestic PV producers, will reduce the price of electricty for everyone?

I am all for battery storage but without dynamic pricing of electrity and getting rid of the net metering arrangemnts all that is being introduced into the system is more cost.. so electric prices will increase particularly for those with no PV pannels on ther roofs...

[Dominic]

Well, it would reduce the need for the EAC to generate electricity from fossil fuels. That after all, is where the main cost is incurred, isn't it?

[cyprusmax47]

Well, it would reduce the need for the EAC to generate electricity from fossil fuels. That after all, is where the main cost is incurred, isn't it?

Exactly Dominic,

and by the way: the net-metering system is the best idea they had at the Gov. and the reason for many people is to install PV not for a "greener" Cyprus, but for excellent and safe return of their investment in a short time.

Max

[mark4007]

Well, it would reduce the need for the EAC to generate electricity from fossil fuels. That after all, is where the main cost is incurred, isn't it?

Nope it doesnt. under the net metering arrangement the export credit does reduce the fossil fuel at the time the surplus PV it is exported. But when it is inported it is laregly done from burning fossil fuels. Overall there is a reduction in fossil fuel being burned. But the cost per unit for consumers who do not have PV is at best the same.

example

lets say the whole of cyprus generates and consumes 1000 units over a year. all through fossil fuels.
lets say that fossil fuel cost 3 per unit. So the cost is 3,000 divided by the 1,000 units so everyone pays 3 per unit consumed.


lets say a new domestic PV produces 40 units, self consumes 20 units exports 20 units and imports 19 units over a year. so a net surplus of 1.

So for cyrus as a whole the number needed to be generated reduces by 40 to 960
fossil fuel cost 3 per unit. so toal cost 2,880. the EAC can bill for 960 a unit so everone except for the new domestic PV household pays 3 per unit consumed.

In fact the cost will be higher... transmission losses probably mean that for every 10 units expoted the EAC can use perhaps 9 of those units to others and the EAC has to generate say 11 to allow users to import 10 units. In addition the cost of electricty will also have an element of fixed cost for the generators etc.. these costs get included in the fuel cost and thus shared amongst the non PV consumers. so in the above example these costs would have been divided by 1,000 initially and then by 960.

[mark4007]

Well, it would reduce the need for the EAC to generate electricity from fossil fuels. That after all, is where the main cost is incurred, isn't it?

Exactly Dominic,

and by the way: the net-metering system is the best idea they had at the Gov. and the reason for many people is to install PV not for a "greener" Cyprus, but for excellent and safe return of their investment in a short time.

Max

I agree the 15 year Net metering arrangements works very well for those that have the PV installed.

For those that dont have PV installed its a really bad deal.. and it will get much worse.. the more and more people who are allowed to enterinto these 15 year ageements

[mark4007]

under the old net metering arrangement the EAC used to make a profit as every year any surplus was cancelled in feb/march.

Arguably it makes a profit at the moment as most domestic PV ysers run a surplus which grows every year.

as soon as domestic PV users start reducing their accumulated surplus or even just stop it growing the EAC will start making losses on these agreements.

This is a growing hidden problem for the EAC and by extension a future cost for those without PV

[Dominic]

Sorry but your example doesn't make sense.

[jeba]

Well, it would reduce the need for the EAC to generate electricity from fossil fuels. That after all, is where the main cost is incurred, isn't it?

Nope it doesnt. under the net metering arrangement the export credit does reduce the fossil fuel at the time the surplus PV it is exported. But when it is inported it is laregly done from burning fossil fuels. Overall there is a reduction in fossil fuel being burned. But the cost per unit for consumers who do not have PV is at best the same.

example

lets say the whole of cyprus generates and consumes 1000 units over a year. all through fossil fuels.
lets say that fossil fuel cost 3 per unit. So the cost is 3,000 divided by the 1,000 units so everyone pays 3 per unit consumed.


lets say a new domestic PV produces 40 units, self consumes 20 units exports 20 units and imports 19 units over a year. so a net surplus of 1.

So for cyrus as a whole the number needed to be generated reduces by 40 to 960
fossil fuel cost 3 per unit. so toal cost 2,880. the EAC can bill for 960 a unit so everone except for the new domestic PV household pays 3 per unit consumed.

In fact the cost will be higher... transmission losses probably mean that for every 10 units expoted the EAC can use perhaps 9 of those units to others and the EAC has to generate say 11 to allow users to import 10 units. In addition the cost of electricty will also have an element of fixed cost for the generators etc.. these costs get included in the fuel cost and thus shared amongst the non PV consumers. so in the above example these costs would have been divided by 1,000 initially and then by 960.

Aren't there penalties to be paid to the EU (carbon tax or whatever it's called) for burning fossil fuel, which need to factor in as well?

[mark4007]

Sorry but your example doesn't make sense.

probably me not explaing very well

Which bit is causing confusion?

[mark4007]

Aren't there penalties to be paid to the EU (carbon tax or whatever it's called) for burning fossil fuel, which need to factor in as well?

Yes

There are carbon fines (or rather payments for carbon allowances). These are large (300 million plus a year) amounts of money

But the installation of small amounts of battery (small by compariosn to the overall amount of fossil fuels burned in electric generation), will not lead to a significant reduction of these fines per year.

Any reduction in these "fines" will be good but batteries dont really have much impact untill the renewable energy being stored is significant.

What does have an impact on the fines is the amount of solar (and other renewables) being generated and consumed at the time of generation. So for example in the middle of summer when the sun is shining and the air cons are running full blast.

[mark4007]

Batteries do make economic sense if there is a difference beween what they pay for electricty when it is being storred and the amount they receive for that stored energy is a big enough difference to pay for the capital and running cost of the battery.

But if the energy they are storing is that generated under the net metering arrangement there is no difference between the cost of the energy they store and the amount they receive when they are discharged. both figures are zero under a net metering arrangement.