"Projects awarded CfDs are paid a fixed price for electricity and when the wholesale price exceeds this ‘strike price’ they pay back the difference."
This seems to me very much like a 100% tax on excess profits.
E.g.
You said you would sell it for a pound
The market price goes up to £1.50
You pay the entire extra 50p to the government.
That's what I was on about. Reminder - £37.35 per megawatt hour is 3.735 pence per kWh.
Even the nuke strike rate is only a third of the (subsidised) energy cap price we're paying.
So most of what we're paying to heat our houses and cook, goes to the exchequer.
Any fault in that logic, please?
When the CfD contract ends, the plant is foreign owned so we pay market rate - which is based on the most expensive price out there. The exchequer does not make, out of that.
Even the strike rates don't reflect what it costs to produce.
If you look at proposals for turbines around the USA the figures aren't bound up in all the Cfd shenanegins.
You pay X for your windmill, Y a year to maintan it and its capacity is theoretically XX MW, and you can run at YY% . Simple sums, to get what your energy is actually costing per unit, and a payback period figure, which is
not long.
All of which says WE should own the installations so what the energy costs is the bulding costs, spread out over the period of operation, (or repayments on the loan for building it if you like) , plus the the plant maintenance costs.
That model is the one which local people think of when someone suggests putting onshore turbines in their nice location, while they hope to benefit ftom the "free" energy. Their aspirations couldn't be further from the truth. It'll be some foreigner making money out of their nice environments, at no benefit to them.
DIdn't Truss /Kwarteng propose a de-linking of energy prices somehow? Can't remember what they called it so I can't find it.