- Powersafe announces renewable energy structure and invests in hybrid projects: https://bit.ly/42iaDoz
“A 100% national manufacturer of batteries and energy systems creates a specific division and details a strategy with 400 specific products to advance the solar and storage market”.
-Amazonian storms challenge power grid operation: https://bit.ly/4artH5K
“Data from NetClima shows that around 15 million lightning bolts are registered annually in Energisa's concession areas in the region.”
- Abraceel and Conacen approve vetoes in the Offshore Wind Energy Bill: https://bit.ly/40DyX2V
“Associations claim that vetoed items were alien to the sector and were harmful to consumers.”
Source: Canal Energia
28. standpoints
Solar Earthworks
As GD solar advances, experts warn that hidden subsidies weigh on the electricity bills of consumers without solar panels, writes Ricardo Brandão:
“I've always been curious about studying space, planets, stars, and other heavenly bodies. As a child, I was fascinated by the space race between the Soviets and the Americans, from Iuri Gagarin's first orbital flight, the first spectacular photos of our blue planet, to the arrival of man on the Moon.
I confess that I was never able to understand those who doubted space conquest. I understood even less those who, despite all the evidence, facts, and data, insisted on affirming that the Earth was flat.
Earthworkers aren't just in the field of astronomy. They stand out at various moments in our daily lives and in the public debate. In common, they have a firm conviction that is absolutely immune to being challenged by easily verifiable facts and data.
“When compensating for distributed generation, consumers without solar panels pay the other 72% of the bill, in a cross-subsidy mechanism.”
This aspect marked the movement to defend distributed solar generation in Brazil. The distributed generation model with compensation regime established by the National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL) in 2012, also called net metering, established that consumers with solar panels on their roof would pay only for “net consumption”, that is, when their energy consumption was greater than their energy production injected into the grid.
If, for example, you consumed 800 kWh/month and produced another 800 kWh/month or more, you would pay nothing, or would actually pay the minimum bill, which is an extremely low amount.
If the only component of the electricity bill were energy generation, this compensation might even make sense. It's not.
The energy generation purchased by the distributor corresponds to about 28% of the energy rate. In addition, there are the costs of transmission (11%), distribution (25%), charges (16%) and taxes (20%).
When compensating for distributed generation, consumers without solar panels pay the other 72% of the bill, in a cross-subsidy mechanism.
This is just a fact, clearly identifiable without much effort, just by looking at the numbers of any tariff process. The ANEEL subsidiometer estimates the weight of the generation distributed in the residential consumer bill at around 3.8%, on average (about R$ 10 billion in 2024).
At some distributors, this impact is already over 15% of the rate. A more attentive observer will notice that, in addition to this cross-subsidy resulting from compensation, there is also the impact of energy overcontracting on the energy bill, the energy contracted by the distributors at auctions, but which is left over due to the unplanned production of solar panels.
And that leftover energy is cheaper most days of the year than GD's subsidy, which has an impact on consumers' bills. That's also just a fact.
It is a hidden subsidy, which does not appear on the energy bill, but which weighs on the consumer's pocket. And precisely because it is a hidden and silent aid, it provides space for verbal juggling and terraplanist solar discourse.
Because if ordinary consumers had a voice and were asked if they agreed to have their rate increased to cover the discount for a small portion of the population that has solar panels, at home or by subscription, the answer would undoubtedly be a resounding NO!
The terraplanist solar discourse appears at various times. First, he simply denied that the cross-subsidy existed or that it increased the energy bills of others.
Then, they didn't use the transmission lines, as if at night the energy that supplied them didn't come from hydroelectric and thermoelectric dams far from their home, using both the transmission and distribution networks.
Related News
Free environment
After record migrations in 2024, Mercado Livre will demand more creativity for new contracts in 2025
Expansion of Generation
Solar generation attracted R$ 54.9 billion in 2024, but the outlook for 2025 is one of decline
When, in 2019, ANEEL opened a public consultation to balance this subsidy, which was nothing more than making the GD user also pay for the sectoral charges and their share of the use of transmission and distribution, they came out with the discourse of “taxing the sun”, which was not even original, given that the expression had already been used before in Spain in 2013, in Portugal in 2016, in Puerto Rico, in the United States, among others. Apparently, solar earthworks are not exclusive to Brazil.
The most curious thing is the argument that distributed generation reduces the energy bills of other consumers. This statement even confronts logic and comparison with any other country. Germany, which has a strong incentive for distributed generation, has the highest residential rate in the world. Fact. In the USA, California and Hawaii, states with the highest amount of distributed solar generation per capita, have residential rates three times higher than the national average. Fact.
If GD really reduced the electricity bill, Brazil would have been an example for the world, because we went from 2 GW of GD in 2019 to the current 35 GW. Not to mention the large investments that distributors make to connect GD, which are part of the investment compensation base and impact all consumers without GD.
Therefore, if any consumer without GD has had their energy bill reduced in recent years, please let me know. Because if GD really reduces energy expenditure, I prefer to receive my share in Pix.
In short, denying that a discount, a subsidy, or any type of tariff benefit for one group increases the rate of the others is like affirming that the Earth is flat: it cannot withstand the most elementary test of reality.
Expansion of Generation
Brazil reaches 52 GW of solar generation capacity
Sector defends tortoises
The most recent example of solar earthworks appeared in the solar segment's demonstrations against the tortoise veto of the offshore wind power bill, in which one of the amendments extends the deadline for implementing distributed generation with the old model of full compensation of all tariff components from 12 to 24 months by 2045.
One of the arguments in the speech is to argue that the extension of the deadline will enable projects that would not be ready in 12 months, and therefore would lose the benefit of full compensation, because of the distributors.
It so happens that art. 26, paragraph 4, of Law 14,300/2022 already establishes that the 12-month period does not apply as long as there is a pending issue on the part of the distributor. The second and most surprising argument is that the deadline extension has no impact on the rate, since it is an existing subsidy.
The renowned consultancy firm PSR accounted for this impact: R$ 54 billion by 2050. And counting is not difficult to reproduce, based on the volume of generation added according to calculations by the GD associations themselves, and considering the difference between the average purchase of energy by the distributors (R$ 263/MWh) and the average Brazilian rate (R$ 739/MWh).
And the conclusion is based on a simple syllogism: if the project does not start operating within 12 months, it loses the generous discount. If it starts operating between 12 and 24 months with the approval of the bill, you will receive this discount until 2045. The difference is precisely the amount that will be included in the rate if the bill is sanctioned without the veto of this article.
Standpoints
Future of the sector in Lula's hands
Price of electricity
CDE will exceed R$ 40 billion in 2025: understand the reasons for the increase
It's just a fact, easily verifiable, just like observing the round Earth from images produced from space.
It is up to us, terrabolists, to do this tedious job of saying and explaining the obvious, with data, facts, and calculations reproducible by anyone interested in truth and research. Renewable energies are an important part of the energy transition, but they are already quite competitive today without subsidies.
Brazil currently produces more than 90% of its electricity from renewable sources, and it is not our challenge, as is the case with developed countries, to clean our matrix, which is already quite clean.
Our challenges today are reliability (subject for a future article) and the reduction of the consumer's energy bill. Only then will we have a just energy transition, which brings benefits to the entire society and not just to a small group benefiting from energy tariff subsidies.”
Ricardo Brandão is the Regulatory Director of the Brazilian Association of Electric Power Distributors (Abradee).
Source: Axes
