It now takes 20 years for solar panels to pay for themselves: Homeowners’ assoc
The time that it takes to earn your money back after purchasing solar panels has increased to 20 years due to the abolition of the netting scheme. The Dutch homeowners' association (VEH) reported this based on new calculations of research agency Berenschot.
At the end of last year, the Senate voted in favor of abolishing the netting scheme in 2027. This scheme ensures that people are currently able to offset the electricity generated by their solar panels against their energy usage. With the new plans, consumers who supply electricity will receive compensation from their supplier over two years.
The time it takes to earn your money back is also dependent on the electricity prices, the costs related to supplying electricity back to the grid, and the resupply compensation.
According to the research, the supply costs are expected to be as high as compensation given for supplying electricity, which would mean that homes with a solar panel would receive hardly anything for their electricity generated from the solar panels.
"The payback period is even longer than previously thought," said Judith Scholte of the VEH. "Consumers are in danger of completely dropping out of buying solar panels."
VEH did add that the new calculations apply to people who have yet to buy a solar panel. The payback period is shorter for people who already own a solar panel.
According to VEH, solar panel owners are best using the solar energy themselves to shorten the payback period. Currently, the homes use an average of 30 percent for themself, but VEH stated that if the homes were to use 60 percent themselves then the payback period drops to 12 years.
The homeowners association wants the Cabinet to take additional measures to make solar panels more attractive. “The government said that they want to reach climate goals. Solar panels on roofs are a huge necessity for this,” said Scholte. 
Reporting by ANP
================================================================================================
===============================================================================================
Billion-euro hydrogen plant in Rotterdam may never open as industry stalls
This setback reportedly reflects broader stagnation in the hydrogen sector within the Port of Rotterdam. Other major hydrogen plant projects announced in the past three years face an uncertain future, with investment decisions delayed or abandoned altogether.
The vision for Rotterdam as Europe’s hydrogen hub took shape five years ago. At the time, hydrogen was widely seen as the fuel of the future, and Shell was among the first to commit. The energy giant unveiled plans in 2020 to build a 200-megawatt hydrogen plant—ten times larger than any existing facility. Shell executives framed it as a bold step in the energy transition. "The energy transition requires courage, daring, and action," said then-Shell Netherlands CEO Marjan van Loon.
The Port of Rotterdam also allocated 24 hectares on the Tweede Maasvlakte for hydrogen plants, branding it a “conversion park.” Officials anticipated the area would host multiple large-scale hydrogen plants by 2030, making Rotterdam a global leader.
Following Shell’s lead, other energy companies unveiled their own hydrogen plans. Uniper aimed to build a 100-megawatt facility by 2026, while BP proposed a much larger 250-megawatt plant. French firm Air Liquide planned a facility of similar scale to Shell’s. Eneco set its sights on an even bigger project—an 800-megawatt plant, covering an area equivalent to 20 football fields.
However, in 2024, the Dutch government introduced a so-called "corrective factor," effectively reducing financial incentives for using hydrogen in the fossil fuel industry. The measure was designed to push hydrogen toward the transport sector but severely undercut Shell’s economic model for Holland Hydrogen I. “It’s essentially a penalty,” Lydia Boktor, a key figure behind the Shell project, told AD. “It slashes revenue and directly impacts our business case.”
Port of Rotterdam CEO Boudewijn Siemons echoed those concerns. “This corrective factor needs to be scrapped,” he said. “Companies in other countries don’t face this barrier. If we want the industry to invest, hydrogen use in the industrial sector must be just as attractive as in transportation.”
Industry shifts away from hydrogen
The struggles in Rotterdam reportedly align with a broader global trend. BP, once a strong advocate for hydrogen, has pivoted back toward oil and gas. The company, which in 2020 pledged to cut fossil fuel production by 40 percent within a decade, is now reversing course under shareholder pressure. Investments in renewable energy have been significantly reduced.
This shift has major consequences for Rotterdam. BP’s H2-Fifty project, once planned to be even larger than Shell’s, has reportedly been abandoned. “We simply can’t make it work under current conditions,” admitted BP Netherlands CEO Corné Boot. “The Netherlands has strong potential, but the economic framework isn’t right.”
Even if companies wanted to move forward, practical challenges would reportedly remain. The Netherlands has some of the highest electricity costs in Europe, making hydrogen production more expensive. These costs are passed directly to industrial consumers, further eroding profitability.
Additionally, Rotterdam lacks sufficient infrastructure to distribute hydrogen. The Delta Rhine Corridor pipeline, a crucial route to transport hydrogen from Rotterdam to Germany, has been delayed by several years. Originally scheduled for completion in 2028, the pipeline is now unlikely to be operational before the early 2030s.
“If you can’t move the hydrogen, there’s no point in producing it,” said Iris Olivier of Uniper. She stood atop Uniper’s 120-meter-high coal plant, overlooking the empty conversion park where hydrogen plants were supposed to be operating by now, AD reported. The site where Uniper’s facility should have been built remains vacant. The company has even returned a European subsidy due to its inability to use the funds in time.
“We’re ready to start,” Olivier said. “We have the blueprints, and in theory, construction could begin tomorrow. The only thing stopping us is a lack of government support. It’s incredibly frustrating.”
Experts warn that delays and shifting policies are pushing hydrogen investment elsewhere. “Other European countries are making faster progress,” Martien Visser, an energy transition professor at Hanze University of Applied Sciences, told AD. “The Netherlands has become an unreliable partner for investors. The government changed the rules mid-project, making it impossible for Shell to turn a profit. On top of that, electricity costs are far higher here than in neighboring countries.”
A shift to blue hydrogen?
With green hydrogen struggling, some suggest Rotterdam should pivot to blue hydrogen—a less clean alternative produced from natural gas with carbon capture.
Port alderman Robert Simons sees this as a necessary compromise. “Blue hydrogen is much cheaper. It’s not perfect, but it’s a step in the right direction,” Simons said. “I think we’ve been too focused on the ideal scenario and not realistic enough about what companies can actually deliver.”
I think you can say that about most 'climate change' projects.
The idea is reportedly controversial. H-Vision, a blue hydrogen project backed by BP, is also stalled. Critics like Rotterdam city councilor Mina Morkoç argue that delaying green hydrogen investments will only slow the energy transition further. “These corporations always say they want to go green, but only if it’s profitable,” she told AD. “This delay costs us valuable time. What do they care more about: their profits or a livable planet?”
EU policymakers, including European Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, are considering policies to stimulate green energy demand, such as requiring companies to use green steel. A reduction in Dutch energy taxes is also under discussion, though no decision has been made.
