The Netherlands 117
important condition for the latter has been the trust of households in the continuation of the net- metering policy instrument. Uncertainty about precisely
that has recently arisen due to communication by the government about a
planned evaluation of the instrument and possible changes based on that.
Already this news has created a hesitance to invest in rooftop panels.
With respect to the impact on the government’s fiscal budget of subsidising
large- scale, ground- mounted solar parks, a similar modelling exercise was undertaken for the Netherlands, assuming different scenarios for phasing out coalbased electricity and scaling up solar PV. In a scenario of an accelerated
phase- out of coal, the expenditures related to the SDE+ subsidy in support of
solar parks would amount to almost €5 billion per year by 2030; in a business- asusual scenario, based on recent policies in the Netherlands, these expenditures
would amount to around €1 billion per year by 2030.
Impact on employment
Both pathway technology options are expected to generate jobs because a workforce is needed for the design, installation, and maintenance of the panels. Presently, however, there is little to no expertise with the design and construction of
large- scale solar PV projects in the Netherlands, so often foreign experts are contracted to oversee the process. In addition, a stakeholder engaged in developing
large- scale solar parks in the Netherlands indicated that construction of the parks
is often carried out by specialised teams with foreign employees who travel from
project to project in Europe. Local employees are mainly contracted for their knowledge of local rules and regulation (electrical, legal, etc.). After the projects are
operational, however, only a minimal workforce is needed for operation and maintenance as solar parks usually do not require much cleaning and maintenance.
Discussion of risks and uncertainties related to the solar PV
pathway
Part of the case study analysis is to assess how the solar PV low- carbon transition pathway performs in terms of its contribution to meeting the Dutch renewable energy targets and realising other socio- economic benefits. As explained,
both technology options are needed for reaching the Dutch renewable energy
target of 14% in 2020 (and beyond) and the 2030 climate target set by the government coalition, whereby large- scale solar projects particularly contribute to
accelerating renewable energy expansion, mainly because of economies of scale
in planning, financing, and construction. Considering overall cost efficiency of
public spending and fiscal effects, it is still unclear which pathway is most costeffective. With ground- mounted solar parks, potential production is relatively
high but the subsidy- related expenses are also considerably higher than the
reduced tax revenues when supporting rooftop solar PV.
While for the success of the pathway all risk aspects discussed in this chapter
will have to be addressed, from the stakeholder consultation it is clear that
important condition for the latter has been the trust of households in the continuation of the net- metering policy instrument. Uncertainty about precisely
that has recently arisen due to communication by the government about a
planned evaluation of the instrument and possible changes based on that.
Already this news has created a hesitance to invest in rooftop panels.
With respect to the impact on the government’s fiscal budget of subsidising
large- scale, ground- mounted solar parks, a similar modelling exercise was undertaken for the Netherlands, assuming different scenarios for phasing out coalbased electricity and scaling up solar PV. In a scenario of an accelerated
phase- out of coal, the expenditures related to the SDE+ subsidy in support of
solar parks would amount to almost €5 billion per year by 2030; in a business- asusual scenario, based on recent policies in the Netherlands, these expenditures
would amount to around €1 billion per year by 2030.
Impact on employment
Both pathway technology options are expected to generate jobs because a workforce is needed for the design, installation, and maintenance of the panels. Presently, however, there is little to no expertise with the design and construction of
large- scale solar PV projects in the Netherlands, so often foreign experts are contracted to oversee the process. In addition, a stakeholder engaged in developing
large- scale solar parks in the Netherlands indicated that construction of the parks
is often carried out by specialised teams with foreign employees who travel from
project to project in Europe. Local employees are mainly contracted for their knowledge of local rules and regulation (electrical, legal, etc.). After the projects are
operational, however, only a minimal workforce is needed for operation and maintenance as solar parks usually do not require much cleaning and maintenance.
Discussion of risks and uncertainties related to the solar PV
pathway
Part of the case study analysis is to assess how the solar PV low- carbon transition pathway performs in terms of its contribution to meeting the Dutch renewable energy targets and realising other socio- economic benefits. As explained,
both technology options are needed for reaching the Dutch renewable energy
target of 14% in 2020 (and beyond) and the 2030 climate target set by the government coalition, whereby large- scale solar projects particularly contribute to
accelerating renewable energy expansion, mainly because of economies of scale
in planning, financing, and construction. Considering overall cost efficiency of
public spending and fiscal effects, it is still unclear which pathway is most costeffective. With ground- mounted solar parks, potential production is relatively
high but the subsidy- related expenses are also considerably higher than the
reduced tax revenues when supporting rooftop solar PV.
While for the success of the pathway all risk aspects discussed in this chapter
will have to be addressed, from the stakeholder consultation it is clear that