The amendment concerning the reduction of electricity costs for them and for the energy-intensive industry was tabled yesterday (14.3.2024) in Parliament by the Minister for Environment and Energy, Mr.Thodoros Skylakakis. Describing it as absolutely necessary for the country’s production capacity over the next few years, he described in detail the benefits that farmers joining the regulation, which will enter into force on 1.4.2024. The most important of these include ensuring lower current prices, in the medium to long term, for farmers and regulating their overdue debts. Here are the key points from Mr.Skylakis’s protology and sociology, in plenary session: Protology: “In the regulation of reducing electricity costs for farmers and for energy-intensive industry, we actually use two tools: electricity space and cuts, to ensure lower electricity prices in the medium to long term, for farmers and for energy-intensive industries. Why do we have to do this? In the case of farmers there is too much pressure in the primary sector in terms of costs. At the same time, high debts are a serious problem, which raise farmers’ electricity prices. Where there are large outstanding debts, providers operating on the private ‘default’ market charge higher prices as they do not collect those debts. That is why part of the amendment is to regulate these outstanding debts. Which I believe has not happened since I have been monitoring electricity issues. The arrangement is very long and has a zero interest rate. It is an extremely favourable arrangement – and allows providers and primarily PPC that has most of these benefits – to be able to make a good offer. The 9.3 minutes per kilowatt hour, at the moment, do not exist as a monthly offer, even though we have a very favourable period for electricity at this time. In relation to the comment that the electrical space is shared. He’s not exactly shared. It has a serious cost to create it. So it’s not something we can use and it’s shared. It’s too expensive. And this priorisation is necessary to keep our production base in both the primary sector and energy-intensive industries, which have this very serious difficulty: there have been major subsidies made by the United States and European countries in their energy-intensive industry over the last year. And we need to maintain competitiveness, giving the power space tool priority to energy-intensive industries. This priority allows and it is very important that there are good offers from providers. So far the existing, those who had the capacity and had an electric space at their disposal, have not made favourable bilateral contracts to industry. On the contrary, the industry complains that there is no willingness by producers to offer these bilateral contracts, so we take this initiative. In particular, for industry we took the following priority: First of all, existing bilateral agreements are ahead (which have a reflection on existing RES projects), because it would be absurd to make a measure for industry and industries which are already being served to deal with more negatively than the others. And then we give the whole category A and B, with the “reasonable” of who will first conclude such a bilateral contract. However, if we have too many contracts, then we will put electricity time as a dominant criterion. The sooner you electrify, the sooner the contracts start and the sooner there will be competitiveness. This is the basic philosophy of regulation, which is absolutely necessary for our production capacity in the coming years.” “The farmers are the ones who will benefit from the regulation, they are nobody else. Because what we provide to farmers we do not provide to anyone, and the electricity space is absolutely priority, without cuts. Now, because I heard this beautiful theory for the 5.5 minutes (p. You claim that the price of 9.3 is in the interests of farmers when the electricity generation from RES is 5.5 minutes. This 5.5-minute difference with 9.3 goes to what benefit?). Do you know exactly when farmers water and when they use the power? I can answer that, they don’t use it exclusively while a photovoltaic works. They use it at various hours of day and night. What happens when the man who undertakes this obligation to give farmers electricity, he should send them power while the photovoltaic or wind power he has used as a base is not working? He’s buying power from the network. How much does he buy it? Multiples, because nighttime prices can reach 18 minutes in wholesale, 15, 20 minutes per kilowatt hour. Therefore, anyone counting on the price of the photovoltaic, apparently, has not done the bill correctly. Something that when you do it to the opposition is relatively easy, because you do not have to give an account for the account, but if you do it to the Government, that is not the option. That is why what you say about the 5.5 minutes is completely impossible. Moreover, these refer to wholesale prices. You know what the difference between wholesale and retail prices is? It has many differences, profit margins, etc. The main thing, though, is they have to pay you. Because the price is reflection and the degree of payment. So if someone gives a retail price – because those who sell the electricity are paid in wholesale – they will put in the rate of non-payment, because that is part of the cost (the non-payment). Now as to whether it is expensive or not expensive. The answer is that to give a ten-year contract you will go to buy the risk compensation cost. If a dictator causes a major disturbance with an invasion, if climatic events come and cause major disturbance in the market, etc. All these risks in a ten-year contract make prices completely unrelated to the prices of a month. And when you compare the prices of a month to a ten-year contract, you simply demonstrate, to those attending, that you are not interested in the essence of the problem, but to score a point in opposition activity. “This is also a stand. He feels”, the poet says, but when we have to deal with the real problems of farmers and we tell them we will give you a ten-year contract, from which, in fact, we enable them to come out, if prices fall too much, at too little cost. As we’ve announced with 70 euros, you can get out of this contract. This means that we give them an extremely favourable long-term contract which those who want will get, those who do not want to do so will not make use of. We also provide them with the regulation of the dues. This is to be practical and realistic in our proposals for farmers. Because it is very easy to tell them that I can give you low prices when we are in opposition, but in the Government we are obliged to implement what we say. Because, I note that, we have the “bad habit” of implementing what we said as an opposition.
Skylakis: We secure lower current prices
—