CREA welcomes ‘long overdue’ increased solar rate

| 29/10/2024 | 22 Comments

(CNS): James Whittaker, the president of the Cayman Renewable Energy Association (CREA), has welcomed the recent changes made to CUC’s Consumer Owned Renewable Energy (CORE) programme after OfReg announced the rate paid by CUC to domestic renewable energy producers would increase. He said the long overdue improvement had been eagerly anticipated but disputed CUC’s claims that it could increase bills for non-CORE customers.

The industry expert, who has been campaigning for a rise in rates and an overhaul of the system given Cayman’s slow adaptation to greener energy, said in a short statement, “It is evident that the current leadership at OfReg is committed to advancing solar energy in a way that prioritizes the interests of consumers.

“With the additional provision for self-consumption outlined in the National Energy Policy, these changes to the CORE program are poised to significantly benefit the solar energy landscape in the Cayman Islands as we move into 2025 and beyond. Nonetheless, CREA recognizes that there is still a considerable amount of work ahead and changes to be made. We are eager to further collaborate with OfReg to accelerate the development and adoption of renewable energy across the Cayman Islands.”

Since OfReg announced the new rate last week, CUC has said it is comparatively high and warned that the increase in the rate it will now pay to CORE customers could fuel an overall increase in the rate other customers will have to pay. CUC has consistently argued that the only way to get more green energy on the grid at a lower cost is through utility-scale renewable energy.

“CUC supports the development of renewable energy programs that benefit all electric consumers on Grand Cayman,” CUC said in a release on Friday. “Based on our initial review… the rates appear to be higher than current fuel costs and will therefore potentially increase costs to consumers as CORE energy will now be higher than the cost of fuel that it displaces. In all of our proposals to OfReg, CUC has always strived to lower the cost of energy.”

However, Whittaker and CREA have insisted that rooftop solar should not increase consumers’ costs. In a comment posted on CNS, he accused the power provider of “intentionally [trying] to fool the public” as the power company attempts to extend its monopoly control over energy generation.

“The unspoken truth about rooftop solar vs utility scale solar is that both can be done at an average cost less than the cost of fuel which means all consumers save money it does not increase rates,” Whittaker posted. “The problem is that CUC is the one blocking ‘large’ rooftop solar systems which will have much lower rates and thus reducing the costs to consumers. Why? Because CUC doesn’t want you producing a large amount of your own power as a homeowner or business, they want to provide you with power to keep their monopoly control in tact.”

Whittaker said that CREA and now OfReg, among others, are fighting against this and pushing for consumers to be able to produce and consume more of their own energy and rely less on CUC.

“Monopolies do not give up their monopolies willingly, you have to take it from them,” he said, adding that CUC has no legal monopoly over energy generation but has a legal monopoly of the grid. “CUC’s business model whose profits are based upon your ever increasing electric bills is fundamentally antithetical to the goals and best interests of consumers who want to see those bills cut drastically,” he said, adding the business model is flawed and needs to change.


Share your vote!


How do you feel after reading this?
  • Fascinated
  • Happy
  • Sad
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Afraid

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Category: Business, Energy, Science & Nature, utilities

Comments (22)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    James Whittaker shouldn’t be allowed on these boards with profiting companies, this is good for his business.

    Same as AL T being on the CPA board.

    We all know how this works, yet so many people in gov and public sector are doing this.

    CNS: The CPA is a government authority with actual power and its members, while drawn from the private sector, are appointed by Cabinet. CREA is a private organisation. The government has no say over any private organisation’s membership or executive committee, not has anyone outside that organisation. These two things, the CREA and the CPA, are not the same.

    Many organisations in the Cayman Islands have been formed by business people to lobby for their sectors. The largest and broadest is the Chamber of Commerce.

  2. James Whittaker says:

    It never ceases to amaze the misinformation that certain companies staff and advocates put out to spin the reality to that which benefits their monopoly, but of course they always do so “anonymously”.

    I will continue to speak the truth and facts and put my name to it, criticism or not, comes with the territory. Here are the facts to understand that paint the true picture to many of the comments above.

    1. CREA advocates for lower consumer rates not higher rates.

    The important context to understand to understand here is that a decade ago when rates were at 38c KWh they have decreased several times at an average of 2.9c KWh for almost a decade. (All of those rates with significant subsidies and fully 100% advocated for by CUC at the time and for many years – 2009 up until 2020; go back and read all their press release statements. Now today they vilify us for advocating exactly what they advocated for despite even much less subsidy risk).

    Prior to this previous low rate of 15c KWh having been set (thanks DIRECTLY to the lobbying of CUC) the previous average CORE rate was 26c KWh (28/24c at the time) Again those were rates that CUC called ‘fair’ at the time!

    CREA argued at the time (as it always has) to DECREASE those CORE rates from the 26c average to 22c KWH. That was a 4c KWh DECREASE from the existing rates at the time which was well above the historical average rate decrease of the CORE program.

    Again CREA had lobbied to DECREASE the rates not increase them. CREA proposed the decrease in the rate to a) reduce the subsidy risk and b) to index rat decreases against the falling cost of installing solar energy over time (as it has alway advocated for and to which IRONICALLY CUC and the regulator did for the entire history of the CORE program up to that point). This is all documented in the OfReg meeting minutes on their website for anyone to publicly verify.

    The rate increase seen today is to ‘set right’ the unwise decision by the OfReg management at the time (who are no longer there) to allow CUC to drop the historical average rate to an unprecedented level which had the affect of disincentivizing consumer from adopting, which is the exact effect that CUC wanted.

    The current OfReg management has now set the average rate to approx. 19c (21c /. 17.5) for the CORE program. Given CREA 3+ years ago lobbied to reduce it from 26c to 22c in 2024 19c is an appropriate rate for small consumers and when looking at the CUC fuel rate over the last year and estimating the escalation rate of fossil fuels over the long term, there is very little if any risk of subsidy outside short term volatility inherent to oil prices/fuel costs.

    CREA will continue to advocate in the coming years continually to lower the CORE rates “as the cost of installed solar energy continues to fall”. This current rate increase was to correct the damage done by allowing CUC’s lobbying to distort the historical rate decreases under the old OfReg leadership, nothing more.

    2. CREA’s press releases vetted by its Board, most of whom do not work in the solar industry and their names and whose names are public info and can be seen on CREA’s website http://www.renewablecayman.com.

    All major decisions are made by the CREA board, including input from members, not any one person. Furthermore out of the almost 50 registered members CREA currently has 5 companies that provide renewable energy services; which means 90% of the membership are not in the solar industry.

    I know of 2 renewable energy companies who chose not to be involved with CREA for their own reasons (which I won’t get into) and that of course is their prerogative. Most of the companies that provide renewable energy services in Cayman are members of CREA and as noted, it’s free for any person to join and there are four general members meetings per annum.

    3. CREA has lobbied and continues to lobby for the size of solar systems (currently capped at 15KWs) to increase to 250KWs so that the rates can be decreased down to 14c KWh (and again lowering even further over time).

    This would mean larger homes and commercial customers are able to produce a significant portions of their own energy via solar AND the rate paid to them is much lower than the fuel rate which means this further DECREASES the average costs of solar energy and reduces the CUC bills for ALL consumers, increases the amount of solar energy on rooftops and parking lots and makes us was a country more sustainable. CUC is the only entity blocking this from happening; because it would further destroy their claims that consumer solar is “increasing rates” and is “too expensive”. Thus the very people making those ‘high cost’ claims are the very people standing in the way of making the systems bigger and the energy cheaper for EVERYONE. Period.

    Why? In simple terms, CUC wants to make money from generating solar energy and selling it to you, the more consumers generate their own energy the less energy generation there is for CUC to own/monopolize and the less energy consumers will need from CUC (which reduces their bills and CUC’s profits under the current monopoly business model).

    4. Cayman is REQUIRED to use North American standard products which also have to meet building codes similar to Miami Dade hurricane standards.

    If you want an apples to apples comparison on solar costs compare the installed costs of solar energy in North America to the costs here in Cayman. Noting as well the cost of living/doing business in Cayman being much higher. You will be the costs of solar in Cayman are very comparable to North America (A market of 300+M people).

    Comparing solar here to countries like Australia or some places in Europe is apples and oranges. The good news is that data is easily and readably available to everyone as NREL (US Dept of Energy) puts out quarterly data each year on solar costs in the USA.

    Link: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/88780.pdf

    5. Yes Im in the renewable energy sector and yes I advocate for more renewable energy for the country. This makes me an easy target for the conflicts of interest accusations and that is fine, I accept the criticism but I do it because who else has stepped up to do so?

    It’s a running joke inside CREA that I’ve been trying to give up the Presidency for years but nobody wants the job because they do not want the scrutiny of having to go up against wealthy, powerful and influential vested interests that do not want to see solar energy which they do not own/control proliferate.

    In the end myself and CREA focus on consumer choice and competition, the more the local solar sector grows the more competition and consumer choice there will be.

    The scare tactics pushed by CUC and some of the painfully obvious “anonymous” posters in here are based on the premise of reducing consumer choice and competition under the guise of “least cost” which is simply utility code for enslaving you all to their monopoly forever when renewable energy generation is able to be used and embraced by all.

    5. Everyone in Cayman can have solar. Period. There are methods for innovative financing such as rooftop solar leasing as well as fully financed community solar that means anyone who wants solar could afford to have it even those who rent and/or dont have a roof to put it on. $0 down fixed interest no collateral long term financing is possible to do right now.

    All that can be done at average rates BELOW the cost of fuel and those results in a DECREASE in costs to all consumers not an increase.

    CUC is the ONLY entity standing in the way of making that ‘financing for all’ happen because doing so would mean solar for everyone and their dream of monopolizing renewable energy generation for all future generations will die. As it should.

    6. Solar panels are duty free, it’s part of what helps with making the overall installed costs comparable to North America. The only way the Cayman government is ‘winning’ in this is by creating an environment where consumers can adopt renewable energy themselves and we do so in a manner that is democratised and not monopolised for current and future generations.

    7. CUC does not want net metering (with grid fee – to cover infrastructure costs) as it does not have the ‘control’ they desire to manipulate rates and terms like a feed in tariff (CORE) does.

    The current problem now is that that certain folks dont have an OfReg anymore they can just manipulate, push around and bend to their whims; so that control has become problematic in recent times and CREA continues to be the primary roadblock between CUC and a future defacto monopoly over solar generation in Cayman. Which is why they want to discredit myself and the organisation.

    Everything noted here is factual and can be proven beyond doubt and as noted I dont need to speak ‘anonymously’; which in itself should tell you a lot given the fact that the ‘other guys’ are posting here but hiding who they are publicly.

    Im not hard to find if CUC wants to publicly debate and dispute these issues, but we know from past experience they have no desire to do so and avoid engaging with myself or CREA on talk shows and in public because they do not want to ACTUALLY have to defend their ‘true’ position. Instead they lobby politicians behind closed doors and have company advocates who post half truths and misinformation online.

    Im always here if you guys change your minds, you know where to find me.

    Regards, James Whittaker
    President – CREA
    jwhittaker@greentech.ky
    P. 916-7246

  3. Anonymous says:

    Solar in Cayman seems to benefit a privileged few: (1) The vendors, (2) those with CUC connections who get first dibs on the allocations, and (3) CUC, which gets to greenwash itself while dragging out the pretense of renewable adoption.

    Another example of CIG working for the benefit of a protected business monopoly and against the people of the Cayman Islands.

  4. anon345 says:

    Allow installations of any size.
    Allow net metering (you use what you make the rest goes to/comes from the grid)
    Allow restriction free battery installations
    CUC buys solar for a price equivalent to the variable diesel cost less 1 or 2c.

    That way it’s more cost efficient for people with solar, cheaper for everyone who doesn’t have solar as CUC are buying the energy for less than the diesel equivalent so the island installs more solar and the environment wins too! Only one loser in all this… and hence why this will never change.

    I’m going to the beach to clear my head, oh yes, the beach has gone now too.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Wait until you have to replace and maintain the panels. Just as expensive as CUC. Until government subsidizes the costs or provide some form of concession,, I will never subscribe to solar. It’s high way roberry what they charge to install.

    6
    5
  6. Anonymous says:

    My sister is living in Brisbane Australia and she has just had solar installed on her house. She told me she paid just under AUD8,000 for a 7kW system, which appears to be a standard size installed there on peoples houses. She also said that they get 2.1 cents for generating during the day and 8.4 cents for generating in the evening (both in AUD). She didn’t put in the battery option since that was very expensive – and she didn’t like the thought of it sitting in her garage.

    So if I have my maths right that is 60 cents (KYD) per Watt installed and a generation rate of between 1.1 cents and 4.6 cents (KYD).

    Why are the local firms charging $3 (KYD) per Watt for an installation and the generation rate is moving to a whopping 21 cents per unit?

    Perhaps my sister has sent me the wrong info – or my maths is wrong…. or the local solar company is making a rather handsome margin?

    16
    • Anonymous says:

      I don’t think your numbers are wrong – you can find the solar prices easily from a web search. They certainly get a good deal in Australia.

      A friend paid a deposit for solar on his house here and then had to wait a year to get it installed. Perhaps the Cayman suppliers buy their parts from the Australians, ship them over on the slow boat, and then charge a 300% to 400% markup…. and that is based on the retail price for solar overseas. I wonder what it would be based on the wholesale price of parts.

      I am not calling anyone out – just making the point that there would be more people installing systems if the local companies matched the Australian price and then the generation rate would be less (certainly less than the price of diesel it is replacing) and it would not cause my bill to go up to fund the people who can afford expensive solar systems.

  7. RB and RA says:

    CIG is the biggest winner in this entire scenario. After all, it collects (approximately) 25% on every dollar in material, shipping, and foreign sales taxes SOLAR companies charge for panels, supplies, and, in some cases, the ever-so-expensive batteries.

    Way to go, CIG! In the future, there will be even more SOLAR sales, and the dollars will flood in with no cost or investment by the government.

    2
    10
    • Anonymous says:

      I believe solar panels are duty free..?

      11
      1
    • Anonymous says:

      Hi,

      I have a serious question….apologies in advance if this comes off as daft.

      If I have solar panels installed and a battery…do I need to be connected to Cuc to use anything in my house assuming I’m generating enough energy?

      if I don’t need them and I don’t pay my bill…what happens? they disconnect me and I can still use my solar or no?

  8. Anonymous says:

    CREA is not a credible organization, not with James Whittaker at the helm. They put themselves forward as representatives of industry and renewable energy interests but really only represent GreenTech, the Chairman’s company, and aspects of renewable energy that GreenTech serves. All other industry members have left CREA or distanced themselves from it. However the chairman continues to use the organization as a platform to promote his company’s interests.

    Of course CREA welcomes this rate increase! It lines their chairman’s pockets at my and every other electricity users expense! I don’t know who is worse in this CREA, CUC or OfReg, but at least CUC gives me very reliable service, hires mainly Caymanians and I can see their audited financials to back up the exorbitant amount of money I pay them each month. How much money is GreenTech making? Has OfReg looked at this? How do I know that this new CORE rate is the best price for me? CUC says they can do solar for $0.10, other Caribbean countries are getting renewable energy for even less, why do I have to buy it from some rooftop solar owner for $0.21? Rubbish! When I put gas in my truck, I don’t buy it from the most expensive station, why should I have to buy my electricity that way.

    27
    7
    • Anonymous says:

      It would be good to know the companies that are a part of CREA. Do they support all utterances made from their organisation? Why are such public releases not from the board if there is one?

      7
      1
  9. Anonymous says:

    Man who owns solar installation company happy that rates for solar panels increased.

    In other news

    31
    4
    • Anonymous says:

      This is very conveniently missed out of all of the speeches that come out that this man owns a large solar panel installation firm.

      I will be putting solar panels on the house that I’m building. But I will definitely not buy them from his company.

      17
      3
  10. Anonymous says:

    This whole thing is smoke and mirrors and BS.

    We should have NET METERING with ZERO subsidy.

    When my solar panels are producing for my home, I should not be charged for energy and I should not be charged for fuel.

    The fuel charge is the biggest part of the bill and solar producers are still paying it.

    When my home produces what it consumes, my bill should be $0 for that time frame.

    When my home produces more than it consumes I should $0 fuel charge and sell power back to the grid with NO SUBSIDY. Whatever the rate is, that’s what I should get.

    When my home produces less than it consumes I should get a bill for the power and the fuel just like everyone else.

    The current system is the most ass-backwards way of doing it for everyone except CUC.

    Currently I my panel output matches the house’s consumption (ie I shouldn’t pay a dime): I have to pay the fuel cost and then get paid for the power at the subsidized rate. Which means I’m still paying for fuel when I’m self-producing and someone else is subsidizing the feed in rate!?

    It’s absolutely the dumbest friggin thing ever.

    43
    6
    • Anonymous says:

      Who do you thinks should pay for the infrastructure and distribution of electricity? CUC themselves?

      7
      4
      • Anonymous says:

        Ok then charge a transmission fee.

        The fact remains that when I’m consuming my own power I shouldn’t be paying fuel charges.

        When I supply the grid take a little bit of a transmission fee.

        When I draw from the grid charge the same rate as anyone else.

        In the above scenario I still make out much much better than with the subsidized core system.

        9
        2
        • Anonymous says:

          What you signed up for is a feed in tariff rate. CUC buys everything you produce from you at the CORE rate for 20 years so that you are like a mini independent power producer selling to the grid. You then buy the electricity you use from the grid as every other customer with fuel and renewable energy costs mixed. There are other rate structures where you could offset the fuel and renewable energy from the grid with your own production and then pay for the grid in the base rate which would be fair. This was available in the early days but no one signed up for it because diesel energy was a lot cheaper than the cost of roof top solar so the higher CORE rate was introduced to cover the cost of the solar panels to start the industry.

          2
          1
          • Anonymous says:

            I know how the structure with CORE works. My point is that it’s a crap structure because I still pay the fuel.

            I’m capable of doing the math and have done it numerous times.

            Net metering and zero subsidy, even with a transmission and distribution fee (as long as it’s not insane) is much much better than the free in tariff structure.

            The current structure screws the solar owners. It screws non solar owners who subsidize the solar. It only works for CUC. They created the damn structure.

            So of course they want this and not net metering.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Man… it sure is fun to have three wolfs arguing about what we, the sheep, should be having for dinner.

    CUC wants to protect their monopoly, CREA wants to subsidize their private sales to high income clients (the average Caymanian can afford the installation or upkeep cost of rooftop panels lmao) and we are all stuck here in the middle getting blead dry while OffReg XXXX.

    40
    • Anonymous says:

      This is not about CUC’s monopoly as the monopoly on generation of electricity has been over since 2008. Furthermore, this does not financially impact CUC as the rooftop production costs are passed on to all consumers. This is about CREA getting to name their price to generate electricity for the grid that all consumers have to pay for, whereas CUC and everyone else has to compete for that right to generate onto the grid. CUC itself ran a competitive process and proposed the Bodden Town Solar farm that is independently owned and is today generating the lowest cost energy on the grid with all consumers enjoying that benefit. Four years ago CUC also proposed a larger solar project to OFREG at 10 cents/ kWh which they decided they wanted to take it out to competitive bid and which has not yet happened. Yet CREA can name their price at 21 cents/ kWh and get approval from a regulator that does not even regulate them? CREA is serving a select portion of the consumers tied to grid with a premium product that all other consumers have to pay for.

      5
      6

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.